Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Peak Ali vs Peak Vitali Klitschko

  • 11-02-2012 4:15pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 759 ✭✭✭


    peak vitali against peak ali from the 1960's.....who do you feel wins?

    Peak Ali vs Peak Vitali Klitschko.............who wins? 67 votes

    Ali
    0% 0 votes
    Klitschko
    100% 67 votes


«1345

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,787 ✭✭✭Jayob10


    this thread is going to be a shut out I feel :cool:


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,730 ✭✭✭sxt


    Vital Klitschko all the way. A 250 ilbs athletic man like Vitali Klitschko, who is significantly heavier , significantly harder hitting with significantly better boxing skills than anyone Ali ever fought, who has benefited from 50 years of sporting progress. He is a fighter that Ali would/could never have imagined encountering( nor should he have) as a fighter and could not have beaten in my opinion .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 956 ✭✭✭RiseToTheTop


    Earnie Shavers and Foreman both hit harder than Vitali. Ali took their shots and came back.

    On the other hand Vitali never faced anyone who could move like Ali. We all know how Ali fares against men who can punch, meanwhile Vitali never fought anyone who even resembled Ali. Not even one shade.

    I can see Ali dancing and comfortably outpointing Vitali Klitschko. (12 rounder or 15 rounder whichever way you wanna have it.)

    (BTW, when was the last time Vitali weighed in at 250lbs??? He was 242 against Adamek.)


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,748 ✭✭✭corny


    Earnie Shavers and Foreman both hit harder than Vitali. Ali took their shots and came back.

    On the other hand Vitali never faced anyone who could move like Ali. We all know how Ali fares against men who can punch, meanwhile Vitali never fought anyone who even resembled Ali. Not even one shade.

    I can see Ali dancing and comfortably outpointing Vitali Klitschko. (12 rounder or 15 rounder whichever way you wanna have it.)

    (BTW, when was the last time Vitali weighed in at 250lbs??? He was 242 against Adamek.)

    Not that i disagree on who would win but you miss the fact Vitali never relies on his power. His style is unbelievably awkward to contend with not his power. He wouldn't be comfortably outpointed by anybody.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 759 ✭✭✭tryingmybestt


    Ali's speed of foot, hand and reflexes will be too much for vitali

    if ali's chin wasn't so good I'd give vitali a better chance because he's bound to land a few blows during the fight.....but ali has a granite chin and I agree that shavers and foremans punches were better than vitali's and ali took them no problem

    i just can't see vitali landing often enough to trouble ali......add to the mix that vitali rarely goes to the body and it makes it harder for him.......ali's head is almost impossible to catch (peak 60's version) but his body is somewhat easier but vitali was definitely not a dedicated body puncher...

    another major reason ali would win is speed of foot.....vitali is too slow to really pressure a 60's Ali.....a 60's ali was had such fast feet, constantly changing direction, feinting, in and out, landing and out again....

    vitali's size and strength would definitely make it an interesting fight but I would go for Ali to win comfortably on points

    i'd see ali stopping the younger klitschko fairly easily


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 759 ✭✭✭tryingmybestt


    corny wrote: »
    Not that i disagree on who would win but you miss the fact Vitali never relies on his power.



    i wouldn't agree vitali never relies on his power.....most of wins are by stoppage so i think it's fair to say his power is an important element of his gameplan

    vitali is also awkward due to his style, size and reach

    it hink the fact that vitali has awesome power influences how his opponents fight him....if he didnt hit as ahrd his opponents would attack him much more than they do

    i feel vitali relies heavily on his strength and power as well as his style, chin, size etc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,986 ✭✭✭Spazdarn


    Despite Vitali being a man mountain, I'd see Ali winning on points. His footwork, speed and mobility is something Vitali has never come close to facing and I could see Ali fighting his type of fight.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    On the other hand Vitali never faced anyone who could move like Ali. We all know how Ali fares against men who can punch, meanwhile Vitali never fought anyone who even resembled Ali. Not even one )

    Ali never faced anyone like Vitali-6,8" with a great jab and lead hook and extremely hard to get close to without getting hit, he fought big men but not like Vitali. Ali's fast but getting close to Vitali is dangerous.

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 759 ✭✭✭tryingmybestt


    vitali has never fought anyone with with ali's combination of speed and reach

    ali would be in and out before vitali could blink

    ali and vitali had the same reach so i don't think it would be too hard for ali to land his excellent jab and step in with quick rights and hooks


  • Registered Users Posts: 54,495 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    cowzerp wrote: »
    Ali never faced anyone like Vitali-6,8" with a great jab and lead hook and extremely hard to get close to without getting hit, he fought big men but not like Vitali. Ali's fast but getting close to Vitali is dangerous.

    That height and reach combined make Vit a real tricky customer. Plus, he was tough as hell, heavy handed, clever and very durable.

    I know Vit never made my fantasy tournament.

    But here it goes:

    Clay/Ali vs. Vit: 6-4 Ali
    Tyson vs. Vit: 8-2 Tyson
    Foreman vs. Vit: 7-3 Foreman; with many fights nip and tuck.
    Bowe vs. Vit: Bowe 6-4
    Liston vs. Vit: 6-4 Liston
    Marciano-Vit: Really, too much size here. 8-2 Vit
    Holmes vs. Vit: 6-4 Holmes
    Louis vs. Vit: 7-3 Vit
    Lewis vs. Vit: 7-3 Lewis
    Holyfiled vs. Vit: 7-3 Holyfield.

    If one looks, I give an edge to the more aggressive and attacking fighters vs. Vit. The boxer, like Holmes and Ali, may find it a wee bit trickier.

    Of them all I think a peak Tyson is the most dangerous to Vitali. Wicked hitter, fit as hell, solid beard and defense and aggressive all the time.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 759 ✭✭✭tryingmybestt


    ali fought foreman.....foreman had an 82 inch reach....vitali's reach was 80

    Vitali v Ali

    Speed - huge advantage Ali
    Power - advantage Vitali
    Feet - huge advantage Ali
    chin - equal
    boxing ability - advantage ali
    accuracy - advantage ali
    punch output - advantage ali
    more exciting to watch - huge advantage ali

    in a 12 round fight I'd have Ali winning 8 rounds to 4


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,317 ✭✭✭Daroxtar


    ali fought foreman.....foreman had an 82 inch reach....vitali's reach was 80

    Vitali v Ali

    Speed - huge advantage Ali
    Power - advantage Vitali
    Feet - huge advantage Ali
    chin - equal
    boxing ability - advantage ali
    accuracy - advantage ali
    punch output - advantage ali
    more exciting to watch - huge advantage ali

    in a 12 round fight I'd have Ali winning 8 rounds to 4

    Quite simply the most ridiculous factor in deciding a fight I have ever seen


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 759 ✭✭✭tryingmybestt


    Daroxtar wrote: »
    Quite simply the most ridiculous factor in deciding a fight I have ever seen



    it obviously wasnt a factor lol

    i was comparing their styles


  • Registered Users Posts: 54,495 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Daroxtar wrote: »
    Quite simply the most ridiculous factor in deciding a fight I have ever seen

    Tell that to some of the judges!


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,748 ✭✭✭corny


    i wouldn't agree vitali never relies on his power.....most of wins are by stoppage so i think it's fair to say his power is an important element of his gameplan

    No one said he was weak. He's a powerful puncher no doubt but if you look at his record very few of his fights (later fights that is) are ended by flash early knock outs. Its the accumulation of punches that often destroys his opponents in the 8-12 rounds.

    Best way to look at it. His power never gets him out of trouble because his style dictates that he's never really troubled in the first place.

    These comparisons are hugely subjective and often futile if you ask me but no one should underestimate how tough an obstacle Vitali would be for any fighter in history. A man with zero weaknesses and physical assets nearly unmatched isn't bettered without a fight. No one wins 8 rounds against him in my book.


  • Registered Users Posts: 54,495 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Ali's big issue here is connecting clean and often to a man 4 inches taller. Ali loved to head hunt. He was not one to go to the body.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    Ali is Ali so I'd never write him off but it's refreshing to see Vitali get some credit on here, I thought this was going to be the typical nostalgia posts that past fans usually go by.

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭runboyrun


    I feel Ali is too good.

    From current boxer ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,730 ✭✭✭sxt


    Can anybody name any other sport where a 60s version would be competitive with today's equivalent... Do you think a mcenroe, Connors would be able to compete with nadal or Djokovic ? How do you think a gaa or soccer team from back then would do against today's crop.what about the the Olympic athletes from way back then, how many gold medals would they win today ? Is boxing somehow exempt from this dramatic physical scientific observable progression in all other sports... Vitali would seem like some futuristic terminator made in a lab compared to these smaller weaker less refined athletes.(that's not being disrespectful, but is true of every sport, 40/50 years is along time for humans to learn of new and better ways to improve themselves in for their chosen sport) . The klitschko brothers dominance would be even greater than it is today in my opinion.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 84 ✭✭runboyrun


    sxt wrote: »
    Can anybody name any other sport where a 60s version would be competitive with today's equivalent... Do you think a mcenroe, Connors would be able to compete with nadal or Djokovic ? How do you think a gaa or soccer team from back then would do against today's crop.what about the the Olympic athletes from way back then, how many gold medals would they win today ? Is boxing somehow exempt from this dramatic physical scientific observable progression in all other sports... Vitali would seem like some futuristic terminator made in a lab compared to these smaller weaker less refined athletes.(that's not being disrespectful, but is true of every sport, 40/50 years is along time for humans to learn of new and better ways to improve themselves in for their chosen sport) . The klitschko brothers dominance would be even greater than it is today in my opinion.



    I've often heard people saying that they feel boxers today are worse than boxers from older generations because they don't fight regularly enough.

    The Ring's pound for pound bext boxers list is dominated by older generation fighters, as is the Ring pound for pound hardest punchers list.

    That must mean something?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    runboyrun wrote: »
    I've often heard people saying that they feel boxers today are worse than boxers from older generations because they don't fight regularly enough.

    and it will always be said-it's easy to say how great people are when their career is over compared to someone still in it-legend tends to make people be biased.

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Registered Users Posts: 54,495 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    sxt wrote: »
    Can anybody name any other sport where a 60s version would be competitive with today's equivalent... Do you think a mcenroe, Connors would be able to compete with nadal or Djokovic ? How do you think a gaa or soccer team from back then would do against today's crop.what about the the Olympic athletes from way back then, how many gold medals would they win today ? Is boxing somehow exempt from this dramatic physical scientific observable progression in all other sports... Vitali would seem like some futuristic terminator made in a lab compared to these smaller weaker less refined athletes.(that's not being disrespectful, but is true of every sport, 40/50 years is along time for humans to learn of new and better ways to improve themselves in for their chosen sport) . The klitschko brothers dominance would be even greater than it is today in my opinion.

    In many other sports today's athletes are better, stronger, faster etc, because of progress and diet and technology, AND, Money. Boxing is to me the ONE sport where that progress etc has not really changed much, and when one looks at some of the world champs today, they have seriously regressed. Look at he HWs, apart from Klits, and none would be champs in the 60s or 70s.

    Take some of the champions today. Some of the top contenders. Mackilin, Lee, Chavez, Sturm to name a few. Theses guys wouldn't get top ten ratings during the 60s of 70s. Can you imagine SRR, Fullmer, Jake, Monzon in there with Sturm or Chavez or Lee? Massacre. And, as said previously, today's men take advantage of previous day weigh in. So, Lee may be a LHW, Chavez too. Can you imagine them giys in the ring with Spinks or Ezzard Charles?

    Yes, there will always be men from today that could compete in any era. But, when I looks at the top fighters today, nothing tells me that these lads were superior to men from 30-40-50 years ago.

    In other sports money has made a massive difference. Everything is professional. Big money keeps athletes hungry, determined and focused.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,549 ✭✭✭✭cowzerp


    I disagree, apart from the obvious scientific improvements to training, nutrition and rest and recovery knowledge there is also much for technical boxers around now, most boxers are technical where as years ago most where fighters, A good Boxer beats a good fighter most times out and thats why it has turned this way-of course there where technical Boxers back then but they where in the minority and usually dominated anyway.

    Rush Boxing club and Rush Martial Arts head coach.



  • Registered Users Posts: 54,495 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    cowzerp wrote: »
    I disagree, apart from the obvious scientific improvements to training, nutrition and rest and recovery knowledge there is also much for technical boxers around now, most boxers are technical where as years ago most where fighters, A good Boxer beats a good fighter most times out and thats why it has turned this way-of course there where technical Boxers back then but they where in the minority and usually dominated anyway.

    The point about technique is noted, and agreed with, but, still do not see them being better because of it. They may have a little better technique, but someting else is missing. I believe that years ago the frequency that they fought etc may have made them better, and also, the depth pool. Today and from recent years boxing is NOT the sport of choice. Years ago it was massively popular. That leads to so many more taking it up, and producing great talent.

    I look around at some of the world champs today, and some of them are quite ordinary and IMO would never have made it back in the 60s and 70s as champions.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 759 ✭✭✭tryingmybestt


    compare the top 10 boxers of any division today with the top 10 from the 70's and say which era is better......if any.......i definitely doubt today's boxers are better....they've improved in some areas such as diet and new training techniques but also they've become worse in other areas such as older training methods, fighting regurlarly etc.

    the 70's HW's are seriously better than the current crop


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,730 ✭✭✭sxt


    compare the top 10 boxers of any division today with the top 10 from the 70's and say which era is better......if any.......i definitely doubt today's boxers are better....they've improved in some areas such as diet and new training techniques but also they've become worse in other areas such as older training methods, fighting regurlarly etc.

    the 70's HW's are seriously better than the current crop


    None of the 70's version boxers would have been able to compete with Vitali or Vlad, especially with their brawling, open defense styles. George Foreman has the best chance of that generation, he would have had a punchers chance, especially against Vladamir, but he was too slow and would be too easy to hit often by much bigger , quicker, fitter men.

    Vital klitschko against a 6o's Ali is a fight like that would not be sanctioned today because of the overwhelming size difference! He would not be able to out stamina a relentless, clinical opponent with an overwhelming power and size advantage with boxing skills and speed unmatched for men of his size

    The klitschko's are a different breed of fighter even in any era . The first fighters ever of their mammoth size, with serious athlethic ability .They are also very talented boxers who have honed their skills to become completely Dominant . They usually don't lose any rounds. Vitali had probably lost maybe 4 rounds in the last decade?


  • Registered Users Posts: 54,495 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    sxt wrote: »
    Vital klitschko against a 6o's Ali is a fight like that would not be sanctioned today because of the overwhelming size difference! He would not be able to out stamina a relentless, clinical opponent with an overwhelming power and size advantage with boxing skills and speed unmatched for men of his size
    ?

    Adamek gets sanctioning, but a 60s Clay/Ali does not?:confused:

    Haye gets sanctioning.....

    What if Clay/Ali piled on 60 lbs and turned up like Danny Willliams?


  • Registered Users Posts: 54,495 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    I need to make a correction.

    Vit does make my fantasy tournament and gets 38 points. That puts him about 8th or 9th all time in a fantasy ten fight series tournament.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,730 ✭✭✭sxt


    walshb wrote: »
    Adamek gets sanctioning, but a 60s Clay/Ali does not?:confused:

    Haye gets sanctioning.....

    What if Clay/Ali piled on 60 lbs and turned up like Danny Willliams?

    Sorry my bad! I thought he was fighting at cruiserweight type weights for most of the 60's

    I think Ali would look a bit pudgy if he put on 60 ilbs, might lose a bit of zip in his footwork too!:P


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 956 ✭✭✭RiseToTheTop


    cowzerp, are you saying that progress in Science, nutrition plus rest and recover technology plays a big part in determining the outcome of a fight like this? You posts tend to reflect this IMO.

    I would leave my decision up to the boxers and whether they have enough fight in them, not advances in fields.

    I don't think the size difference is huge (pardon the pun), Ali fought at around 220, Vitali Klitschko very rarely above 250. There would be around 25lbs difference, which is not huge in heavyweight terms. Even in the lower weight classes (lightweight, middleweight.) opponents can rehydrate while the other fight doesn't, and the rehydrated fighter can weight 20lbs more. But the non rehydrated fighter can still win, and often does. (And that is in the lower weight classes where the weight matters more.)


Advertisement