Lewis or Vitali?

First topic message reminder :

I was reading another post there by onetwoforever about Lewis being an all time great he makes a very good point about the fight with Vitali. Not many people knew how good Vitali was when Lewis fought him and Lwis was expected to win easily beacuase he was a class above. So Lewis got very little credit for winning the fight even though he smashed Vitali up completely no other heavyweight has come close to doing that. Vitali became a great champ afte rLewis retired and now people know how good he was so Lewis should get more credit for that win. Imo Lewis is the second best of all time only Ali is better but some people do not have Lewis number 2 so maybe he desrves higher from those people for beating Vitali he was also at his worst that night and not in peak condition he had to take the fight at very short notice so the win showed his class to be able to beat a guy like Vitali when he was at his worst.

But I was shocked to see people that think Vitali would have won that fight if it had not been stopped did you see the guys face?? He was getting completely smashed up he was very lucky the ref stopped it or Lewis would have knocked him out he was coming on much stronger than Vitali who was starting to struggle.

The ref was spot on to stop that fight those cuts were the worst I have seen Vitalis career could have been over if it was stopped but imagine the fight was not stopped who do people think would have won? Me? I reckon Lewis would have knocked him out soon after he was coming on strong and catching Vitali with to many big shots the guy needed 60 stitches this shows how badly he was getting smashed.

Waingro wrote:I think many people on here do not like Lewis or else they dont realise how good he was. It is the same with alot of our fighters sadly people want to criticise them everyone seems to back against them.

The only people who don't rate Lewis are the one's who have a personal dislike for him, would have given problems to any fighter in any era,I had idiots coming up to me telling me how much they couldn't stand Lewis and hoped Tyson would Knock him out, they got the response from me that it deserved and weren't very happy with it.

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Azania,, by the letter of the law, or at least the English language, you are technically correct that Vitali "quit".

However it implies "quiting" without reasonable justification, when I think most would accept it was a very serious injury with long term consequences if aggravated further. Pointing to examples where fighters have continued is intended to show exactly what? That Vitali could have continued? Yes he probably could have hung around one armed and crippled and yes, might have even hung on to win the fight (he tried for at least one round). Just ike Solis might have hobbled around the ring on one leg - for all the good it would have done. Is it adviseable? No it isnt really, not in a sport like boxing. Who knows what further damage would have been caused or what kind of punishment Byrd could have inflicted if it went on. I dont think fighting the guts of half a fight with one arm, in crippling pain and near defenceless is to be recommended. When you brand him a quitter, you throw him in with the quitters who have given up or thrown in the towel for no good reason and I dont think this is the case in this particular event.

I'm not questioning his bravery one bit. He could have continued I believe. For me that strikes as a confidence fighter. One who is liable to tank should the going get tougher than predicted.

Byrd wasn't doing much and I believe Vit was carrying the injury for 2 rounds. All he had to do was stay upright to win.

Whats this based on though? Theres plenty to consider. You dont know how severe the pain was, whether he felt the injury getting progressively more serious and aggravated, whether he felt it was a threat to his long term career, what the effects of carrying on and aggravating the injury further were. He had three rounds to go, in all liklihood was in severe pain, and had only one good arm to defend himself. Technically perhaps he could have go on, the bigger question is shoud he have or was he obliged to?

Nico the gman wrote:

Waingro wrote:I think many people on here do not like Lewis or else they dont realise how good he was. It is the same with alot of our fighters sadly people want to criticise them everyone seems to back against them.

The only people who don't rate Lewis are the one's who have a personal dislike for him, would have given problems to any fighter in any era,I had idiots coming up to me telling me how much they couldn't stand Lewis and hoped Tyson would Knock him out, they got the response from me that it deserved and weren't very happy with it.

I find that odd. I'm non plussed about Lewis. I dont consider him to be a top 10 ATG. Just a good fighter who fought the best when the best had seen better days. I dont know him personally to like or dislike him. For me its purely boxing and dont let personalities get in the way of my opinion of them as fighters.

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Azania,, by the letter of the law, or at least the English language, you are technically correct that Vitali "quit".

However it implies "quiting" without reasonable justification, when I think most would accept it was a very serious injury with long term consequences if aggravated further. Pointing to examples where fighters have continued is intended to show exactly what? That Vitali could have continued? Yes he probably could have hung around one armed and crippled and yes, might have even hung on to win the fight (he tried for at least one round). Just ike Solis might have hobbled around the ring on one leg - for all the good it would have done. Is it adviseable? No it isnt really, not in a sport like boxing. Who knows what further damage would have been caused or what kind of punishment Byrd could have inflicted if it went on. I dont think fighting the guts of half a fight with one arm, in crippling pain and near defenceless is to be recommended. When you brand him a quitter, you throw him in with the quitters who have given up or thrown in the towel for no good reason and I dont think this is the case in this particular event.

I'm not questioning his bravery one bit. He could have continued I believe. For me that strikes as a confidence fighter. One who is liable to tank should the going get tougher than predicted.

Byrd wasn't doing much and I believe Vit was carrying the injury for 2 rounds. All he had to do was stay upright to win.

Whats this based on though? Theres plenty to consider. You dont know how severe the pain was, whether he felt the injury getting progressively more serious and aggravated, whether he felt it was a threat to his long term career, what the effects of carrying on and aggravating the injury further were. He had three rounds to go, in all liklihood was in severe pain, and had only one good arm to defend himself. Technically perhaps he could have go on, the bigger question is shoud he have or was he obliged to?

Its my opinion based on how he was fighting even after he initially sustained the injury. He seemed ok and was surprised he pulled out. It wasn't as obvious as Audley's injury where his arm was a passenger.

It was Vit's call whether to continue or not. All I can give is my opinion and bearing in mind that I have a healthy disregard for whatever boxers say regarding themselves.

It wasn't as obvious as Audley's injury where his arm was a passenger.

How it looked is still no indication of the pain and discomfort he might have felt. You also have tot ake into account the context. Audley was really in last chance saloon as far as his career was concerned. Regardless of our view of Audley, he had world title aspirations and he needed the victory over Sprott to keep those aspirations alive. Perhaps that's why he refused to quit. Vitali retiring meant he lost the WBO title - it wasn't going to effectively end his career.

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:

azania wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Azania,, by the letter of the law, or at least the English language, you are technically correct that Vitali "quit".

However it implies "quiting" without reasonable justification, when I think most would accept it was a very serious injury with long term consequences if aggravated further. Pointing to examples where fighters have continued is intended to show exactly what? That Vitali could have continued? Yes he probably could have hung around one armed and crippled and yes, might have even hung on to win the fight (he tried for at least one round). Just ike Solis might have hobbled around the ring on one leg - for all the good it would have done. Is it adviseable? No it isnt really, not in a sport like boxing. Who knows what further damage would have been caused or what kind of punishment Byrd could have inflicted if it went on. I dont think fighting the guts of half a fight with one arm, in crippling pain and near defenceless is to be recommended. When you brand him a quitter, you throw him in with the quitters who have given up or thrown in the towel for no good reason and I dont think this is the case in this particular event.

I'm not questioning his bravery one bit. He could have continued I believe. For me that strikes as a confidence fighter. One who is liable to tank should the going get tougher than predicted.

Byrd wasn't doing much and I believe Vit was carrying the injury for 2 rounds. All he had to do was stay upright to win.

Whats this based on though? Theres plenty to consider. You dont know how severe the pain was, whether he felt the injury getting progressively more serious and aggravated, whether he felt it was a threat to his long term career, what the effects of carrying on and aggravating the injury further were. He had three rounds to go, in all liklihood was in severe pain, and had only one good arm to defend himself. Technically perhaps he could have go on, the bigger question is shoud he have or was he obliged to?

Its my opinion based on how he was fighting even after he initially sustained the injury. He seemed ok and was surprised he pulled out. It wasn't as obvious as Audley's injury where his arm was a passenger.

It was Vit's call whether to continue or not. All I can give is my opinion and bearing in mind that I have a healthy disregard for whatever boxers say regarding themselves.

I understand you believe he could have continued, but do you believe he should have? Or that he was obliged to in order to avoid a "quiteer" tag? In essence do you think it was unreasonable for him to withdraw?

superflyweight wrote:

It wasn't as obvious as Audley's injury where his arm was a passenger.

How it looked is still no indication of the pain and discomfort he might have felt. You also have tot ake into account the context. Audley was really in last chance saloon as far as his career was concerned. Regardless of our view of Audley, he had world title aspirations and he needed the victory over Sprott to keep those aspirations alive. Perhaps that's why he refused to quit. Vitali retiring meant he lost the WBO title - it wasn't going to effectively end his career.

As far as I am aware, most boxers enter into a fight thinking that a loss will cost them everything so do all in their power to win. I can't comment on your context there because its pure guesswork.

I understand you believe he could have continued, but do you believe he should have? Or that he was obliged to in order to avoid a "quiteer" tag? In essence do you think it was unreasonable for him to withdraw?

I thought at the time he should have continued. I maintain that belief.

I can't comment on your context there because its pure guesswork..

If we all applied those rules, Az, you'd probably have to resort to speaking to yourself.

The first punch to open the cut was lucky, but the other 100 punches or so Lewis then landed on it was not lucky whatsover.

Cuts happen all the time in boxing, but its up to the boxer to take advantage of it.

Reading about the cut on here from some posters would make you think that Lewis only landed one single punch to open it up before the doctor jumped in the ring to stop the fight...

azania wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

It wasn't as obvious as Audley's injury where his arm was a passenger.

How it looked is still no indication of the pain and discomfort he might have felt. You also have tot ake into account the context. Audley was really in last chance saloon as far as his career was concerned. Regardless of our view of Audley, he had world title aspirations and he needed the victory over Sprott to keep those aspirations alive. Perhaps that's why he refused to quit. Vitali retiring meant he lost the WBO title - it wasn't going to effectively end his career.

As far as I am aware, most boxers enter into a fight thinking that a loss will cost them everything so do all in their power to win. I can't comment on your context there because its pure guesswork.

That is a fudge and you well know it, you don't have to take too great a leap of faith or assume too much to realise a guy of 38 with a reputation for consistently failing to deliver can less afford to quit through a shoulder injury than a guy some ten years his junior for who it would represent his first loss. If based on nothing other than their age one clearly has a far greater amount of time to repair any damage to his reputation than the other.

superflyweight wrote:

I can't comment on your context there because its pure guesswork..

If we all applied those rules, Az, you'd probably have to resort to speaking to yourself.

At least I'd be having an intelligent conversation

kevchadders wrote:The first punch to open the cut was lucky, but the other 100 punches or so Lewis then landed on it was not lucky whatsover.
Cuts happen all the time in boxing, but its up to the boxer to take advantage of it.

Reading about the cut on here from some posters would make you think that Lewis only landed one single punch to open it up before the doctor jumped in the ring to stop the fight...

Thats pretty much what I said earlier.

rowley wrote:

azania wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

It wasn't as obvious as Audley's injury where his arm was a passenger.

How it looked is still no indication of the pain and discomfort he might have felt. You also have tot ake into account the context. Audley was really in last chance saloon as far as his career was concerned. Regardless of our view of Audley, he had world title aspirations and he needed the victory over Sprott to keep those aspirations alive. Perhaps that's why he refused to quit. Vitali retiring meant he lost the WBO title - it wasn't going to effectively end his career.

As far as I am aware, most boxers enter into a fight thinking that a loss will cost them everything so do all in their power to win. I can't comment on your context there because its pure guesswork.

That is a fudge and you well know it, you don't have to take too great a leap of faith or assume too much to realise a guy of 38 with a reputation for consistently failing to deliver can less afford to quit through a shoulder injury than a guy some ten years his junior for who it would represent his first loss. If based on nothing other than their age one clearly has a far greater amount of time to repair any damage to his reputation than the other.

From my point of view, Vit failed the gut check in that fight. It seemed to me that when the going got tough, he stopped (not quit). That to me is a sign of a front runner.

azania wrote:

rowley wrote:

azania wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

It wasn't as obvious as Audley's injury where his arm was a passenger.

How it looked is still no indication of the pain and discomfort he might have felt. You also have tot ake into account the context. Audley was really in last chance saloon as far as his career was concerned. Regardless of our view of Audley, he had world title aspirations and he needed the victory over Sprott to keep those aspirations alive. Perhaps that's why he refused to quit. Vitali retiring meant he lost the WBO title - it wasn't going to effectively end his career.

As far as I am aware, most boxers enter into a fight thinking that a loss will cost them everything so do all in their power to win. I can't comment on your context there because its pure guesswork.

That is a fudge and you well know it, you don't have to take too great a leap of faith or assume too much to realise a guy of 38 with a reputation for consistently failing to deliver can less afford to quit through a shoulder injury than a guy some ten years his junior for who it would represent his first loss. If based on nothing other than their age one clearly has a far greater amount of time to repair any damage to his reputation than the other.

From my point of view, Vit failed the gut check in that fight. It seemed to me that when the going got tough, he stopped (not quit). That to me is a sign of a front runner.

For someone that bangs on a lot about the 'business side of boxing', you're criticising a guy an awful lot for making a sound business decision.

Choice 1: Continue, but risk permanent injury and never box again but retire (WBO) champ.
Choice 2: Pull yourself out, take the heat of the loss relatively early in your career but, knowing you were winning and confident of your own ability, come back stronger and fight another 10 or 20 or 30 fights possibly regaining your belt or another one and make a lot more money in the process.

He didn't quite, he took the sensible level-headed business decision. Thought you'd love him for that?

There was no risk of permanent injury. Not with a dislocated shoulder anyway. As for business decisions, it damaged him as he was known as a quitter in USA. It took a while (and the Lewis fight) for him to get passed that.

I have no personal feelings. I try to look at things objectively. Sometimes I may be harsh or overly critical, but its never because I like or hate the guy. In short I'mno fanboy or the opposite.

azania wrote:There was no risk of permanent injury.

Sorry but you have no way of knowing that, am guessing you don't have a medical degree and even in the unlikely event you do am fairly certain you did not either examine Vitali personally or have first hand sight of his x rays.

Az couldn't possibly make sense of an x ray, jeff.

They are, after all, in black and white.

HumanWindmill wrote:Az couldn't possibly make sense of an x ray, jeff.

They are, after all, in black and white.

Bravo, genuinely made me chuckle that one.

HumanWindmill wrote:Az couldn't possibly make sense of an x ray, jeff.

They are, after all, in black and white.

OK, I'll give you that one.

7-1 to you. I'm catching up...........

Byrd beat Vitali fair and square...Was not a shut out I suggest you watch the fight again.

Byrd made Vitali miss a lot and Vitali looked awful in that fight...I wonder why Klitschko never wanted a rematch.

Vitali quit no doubt...Byrd is a very underrated heavyweight.

The genius of PBF wrote:Byrd beat Vitali fair and square...Was not a shut out I suggest you watch the fight again.

Byrd made Vitali miss a lot and Vitali looked awful in that fight...I wonder why Klitschko never wanted a rematch.

Vitali quit no doubt...Byrd is a very underrated heavyweight.

I need to double check but I´m sure vitali was winning every round or nearly every round in that fight.

89-82, 88-83, 88-83 all in favour of klitschko

From Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Punchstats Total Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 102 156
Thrown 222 432
Pct. 46% 36%
Jabs Lewis Klitschko
Landed 52 77
Thrown 120 240
Pct. 43% 32%
Power Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 50 79
Thrown 102 192
Pct. 49% 41%

In addition,in round 5 after the cut, Vitali was still out-punching Lewis 27 to 23 (Got that stat from the HBO video).

lovely_london wrote:From Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Punchstats Total Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 102 156
Thrown 222 432
Pct. 46% 36%
Jabs Lewis Klitschko
Landed 52 77
Thrown 120 240
Pct. 43% 32%
Power Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 50 79
Thrown 102 192
Pct. 49% 41%

In addition,in round 5 after the cut, Vitali was still out-punching Lewis 27 to 23 (Got that stat from the HBO video).

Still lost though.

lovely_london wrote:From Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Punchstats Total Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 102 156
Thrown 222 432
Pct. 46% 36%
Jabs Lewis Klitschko
Landed 52 77
Thrown 120 240
Pct. 43% 32%
Power Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 50 79
Thrown 102 192
Pct. 49% 41%

In addition,in round 5 after the cut, Vitali was still out-punching Lewis 27 to 23 (Got that stat from the HBO video).

Highlights the excellent accuracy of Lewis' punches, no wonder he did such a good job of working on that cut and leaving Vitali with a battered pizza face!

The art of boxing is to hit without getting hit. Judging by those stats, the result, and the state of each boxer after Lewis clearly did a much better boxing job than Vitali, not to take anything away from big Vit's terrifically valiant performance.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

lovely_london wrote:From Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Punchstats Total Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 102 156
Thrown 222 432
Pct. 46% 36%
Jabs Lewis Klitschko
Landed 52 77
Thrown 120 240
Pct. 43% 32%
Power Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 50 79
Thrown 102 192
Pct. 49% 41%

In addition,in round 5 after the cut, Vitali was still out-punching Lewis 27 to 23 (Got that stat from the HBO video).

Highlights the excellent accuracy of Lewis' punches, no wonder he did such a good job of working on that cut and leaving Vitali with a battered pizza face!

The art of boxing is to hit without getting hit. Judging by those stats, the result, and the state of each boxer after Lewis clearly did a much better boxing job than Vitali, not to take anything away from big Vit's terrifically valiant performance.

But the stats show that Lewis got hit more than Vitali, while hitting Vitali less.

Final Punch stat – Klitschko 132/502 26%...Byrd 124/284 44%

Shows this fight is closer than many think...Looks like I was right Byrd made Klitschko miss a lot.

manos de piedra wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

lovely_london wrote:From Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Punchstats Total Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 102 156
Thrown 222 432
Pct. 46% 36%
Jabs Lewis Klitschko
Landed 52 77
Thrown 120 240
Pct. 43% 32%
Power Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 50 79
Thrown 102 192
Pct. 49% 41%

In addition,in round 5 after the cut, Vitali was still out-punching Lewis 27 to 23 (Got that stat from the HBO video).

Highlights the excellent accuracy of Lewis' punches, no wonder he did such a good job of working on that cut and leaving Vitali with a battered pizza face!

The art of boxing is to hit without getting hit. Judging by those stats, the result, and the state of each boxer after Lewis clearly did a much better boxing job than Vitali, not to take anything away from big Vit's terrifically valiant performance.

But the stats show that Lewis got hit more than Vitali, while hitting Vitali less.

Lewis landed the more effective punches...Once Vitali got hit with that uppercut he was never the same and on the verge of being knocked out.

Biggest punch of the fight by far.

From a purely boxing perspective Lewis did a better job than Vitali, all well and good throwing a lot of punches but you have to be effective with and the winner of that fight was arguably the more effective. I hate punch stats personally as they sway opinions too much, a glancing blow clearly is not as effective as a punch bang on the chin or body, you can only gauge this by watching the fight.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

lovely_london wrote:From Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Punchstats Total Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 102 156
Thrown 222 432
Pct. 46% 36%
Jabs Lewis Klitschko
Landed 52 77
Thrown 120 240
Pct. 43% 32%
Power Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 50 79
Thrown 102 192
Pct. 49% 41%

In addition,in round 5 after the cut, Vitali was still out-punching Lewis 27 to 23 (Got that stat from the HBO video).

Highlights the excellent accuracy of Lewis' punches, no wonder he did such a good job of working on that cut and leaving Vitali with a battered pizza face!

The art of boxing is to hit without getting hit. Judging by those stats, the result, and the state of each boxer after Lewis clearly did a much better boxing job than Vitali, not to take anything away from big Vit's terrifically valiant performance.

If I throw one punch a round that connects and over 12 rounds I connect 12 times I'd have a 100% record. Means litle though when the other guy lands 100 more than I do.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:From a purely boxing perspective Lewis did a better job than Vitali, all well and good throwing a lot of punches but you have to be effective with and the winner of that fight was arguably the more effective. I hate punch stats personally as they sway opinions too much, a glancing blow clearly is not as effective as a punch bang on the chin or body, you can only gauge this by watching the fight.

Depends on ther glancing blow. Lewis's glancing blow caused the cut. That punch was more effective than the full blooded blows Lewis landed.

azania wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

lovely_london wrote:From Boxrec Boxing Encyclopaedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Punchstats Total Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 102 156
Thrown 222 432
Pct. 46% 36%
Jabs Lewis Klitschko
Landed 52 77
Thrown 120 240
Pct. 43% 32%
Power Punches
Lewis Klitschko
Landed 50 79
Thrown 102 192
Pct. 49% 41%

In addition,in round 5 after the cut, Vitali was still out-punching Lewis 27 to 23 (Got that stat from the HBO video).

Highlights the excellent accuracy of Lewis' punches, no wonder he did such a good job of working on that cut and leaving Vitali with a battered pizza face!

The art of boxing is to hit without getting hit. Judging by those stats, the result, and the state of each boxer after Lewis clearly did a much better boxing job than Vitali, not to take anything away from big Vit's terrifically valiant performance.

If I throw one punch a round that connects and over 12 rounds I connect 12 times I'd have a 100% record. Means litle though when the other guy lands 100 more than I do.

Not if your punches land on the point of his chin (or maybe huge gaping cheek wound) and his all land on your gloves, elbows or shoulders.

A spinning backfist doesn't count as a legit punch.

Vitali was winning the fight up to the point of the stoppage. That is what the stats are supporting. You can argue they mean little by way of the final result, or on what might have happened - which I would agree with. But to suggest the stats somehow indicate Lewis was having the better of the fight is not true as far as I am concerned. The fight itself as supported by the stats and the judges cards would clearly show Vitali was having the better of the fight up until the point of stoppage. I am not arguing that Vitali would have won, or that the win was not legit. I am merely disputing the fact that the stats suggest Lewis was having the better of the fight.

Punch stats do mean next to nothing and not sure they can really be used to support anything. Watching the fights I would say Vitali was winning the fight but not dominating as many seem to suggest, there's a very good case for Lewis winning any of the last four rounds, personally have it 3 to Vitali, 2 to Lewis and one even.

I dont consider punch stats irrelevant. They are not the be all and end all but they do provide relevant information in my view. I agree that Vitali was not dominating the fight. He was winning though and had the cut not occured its anyones guess what would have happened. But the cut happened, and the rest is history.

I dont draw any massive conculsions from the fight either way due to the way it panned out. It just seems to me to be often the case that Lewis/Klitschko fans/detractors try to shoehorn the 6 rounds into one definate conclusion either way when personally I find it hard to do so.

Something that no one considers is how Lewis tackles the rest of the fight without the cut, taken for a given that he does exactly the same but think he tries boxing a bit more than he did.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Something that no one considers is how Lewis tackles the rest of the fight without the cut, taken for a given that he does exactly the same but think he tries boxing a bit more than he did.

I agree, its anyones guess. I would give the edge to Vitali by virtue of having a headstart on the cards going into the second half, and possibly being the slightly fitter of the two at the time. But it was a very physically demanding fight and its difficult to say how it would have panned out.

I have watched the fight numerous times and had VK winning by a fair margin. However, as others have said, it might have been luck in Lewis' favour which caused the cut, but it was his ability and accuracy which exploited it to the extent that the fight was stopped.

Had the fight continued, or if the cut was N/A, I tend to think VK would have scored at least a knock-down, probably a TKO win.

I think that both were really tired, but that VK was better prepared and fitter to go on longer. Naturally its all conjecture, but I think Lewis knew he got away with one there, and rightly chose to retire afterwards. Had he been fitter (I think we would all agree he was not in his best shape and maybe took training a little lightly), who knows what would have happened had the fight went the full distance.

People are forgetting that Lewis was coming on the stronger of the two Vitali was tiring I dont think he had much chance of winning even if the ref let the fight go on or the cut didnt happen. Lewis would have figured him out and got the knock out over Vitali who is not as good.

I think Vitali made a mistake not trying to get Oliver McCall in his corner.

rowley wrote:I think Vitali made a mistake not trying to get Oliver McCall in his corner.

McCall was not in Lewis class. Yes he beat him once but he was very lucky. Lewis was not at his best that night and McCall landed a lucky punch and to make matters worse the ref stopped the fight far too early imo when Lewis was ok to continue he also told the ref he was ok to continue. Even today Lewis will tell you that the ref made a mistake imo if the ref had not stopped it Lewis would have won.

But Lewis also got McCalls trainer Steward to train him which was a great move he made Lewis even better. He also trains Wlad who is Vitalis brother. I think Stewrd would have been a great help to Vitali but he couldnt have trained him for the fight against Lewis he was in the other corner. Steward makes fighter alo better look at Wlad who was not as good before Steward now he is the best heavyweight in the world and got alot better. Vitali is worse now maybe he should have got Steward to train him aswell but tbh it would not have mattered against Lewis who is just a different class. Lewis would have too much quality for Vitali no matter who trained him.

Waingro wrote:

rowley wrote:I think Vitali made a mistake not trying to get Oliver McCall in his corner.

McCall was not in Lewis class. Yes he beat him once but he was very lucky. Lewis was not at his best that night and McCall landed a lucky punch and to make matters worse the ref stopped the fight far too early imo when Lewis was ok to continue he also told the ref he was ok to continue. Even today Lewis will tell you that the ref made a mistake imo if the ref had not stopped it Lewis would have won.

But Lewis also got McCalls trainer Steward to train him which was a great move he made Lewis even better. He also trains Wlad who is Vitalis brother. I think Stewrd would have been a great help to Vitali but he couldnt have trained him for the fight against Lewis he was in the other corner. Steward makes fighter alo better look at Wlad who was not as good before Steward now he is the best heavyweight in the world and got alot better. Vitali is worse now maybe he should have got Steward to train him aswell but tbh it would not have mattered against Lewis who is just a different class. Lewis would have too much quality for Vitali no matter who trained him.

No luck in the punch McCall flattened Lewis with. He said exactly what he would do and did it.

Are Wlad and Vit brothers for real? No shoot sherlock. Who wudda thunk it.

Yeah but steward made wlad boring -he was well worth the watch earlier in his career. So Steward gets credit for Wlad being so good but wlad should retire because he is boring. But If Steward made him boring, then steward should retire because he made boxing boring. But Thomas hearns was exciting, so Thomas hearns should come out of retirement so steward wont be making boxing boring anymore. But then - if its not boring, then what will you complain about next - I mean should Haye go to steward? That would rob Wladimir of his trainer - but then you don't like robberies, because their hometwon is kronk. But then what about khan, he is overated iyo so if he goes to steward, will steward be overrated or robberied, or will he get knocked out by Brook, who is quality iyo? But Vitalis face was hanging of and Lewis was beating him up imo, but ifififififif (Raaaawhide) Cooper threw a left hook would he land on the right side of Bruno's face?

... obviously that would depend which way bruno was facing at the time. You have baby brain shah.

but if cooper threw a left hook he would knock bruno out because cooper is a very hard puncher. He nearly knocked out Ali and would have done if his corner hadn't cheated, and Ali is the greatest imo. Cooper made Ali's legs go rubbery and the result was a robbery. It was the rubberiest robbery in boxing history

milkyboy wrote:... obviously that would depend which way bruno was facing at the time. You have baby brain shah.

but if cooper threw a left hook he would knock bruno out because cooper is a very hard puncher. He nearly knocked out Ali and would have done if his corner hadn't cheated, and Ali is the greatest imo. Cooper made Ali's legs go rubbery and the result was a robbery. It was the rubberiest robbery in boxing history

but the rubberiest robbery robbed henry cooper of a place in the top ten - he was pencilled in but the writing mysteriously dissapeared.

He also trains Wlad who is Vitalis brother.

My favourite post of all time!

Genius from shah and milky as well. With mimicry like that you both go the top of the list of suspects of who was Wussman - just ahead of Truss.

ShahenshahG wrote:

milkyboy wrote:... obviously that would depend which way bruno was facing at the time. You have baby brain shah.

but if cooper threw a left hook he would knock bruno out because cooper is a very hard puncher. He nearly knocked out Ali and would have done if his corner hadn't cheated, and Ali is the greatest imo. Cooper made Ali's legs go rubbery and the result was a robbery. It was the rubberiest robbery in boxing history

but the rubberiest robbery robbed henry cooper of a place in the top ten - he was pencilled in but the writing mysteriously dissapeared.

one of boxings most famest mysteries shah... i think that was done by donovan eraser ruddock who was number 11 best heavyweight ever imo. He made mike tyson go rubbery and tyson was quality imo, so ruddock was quality imo. Ruddock wanted to be top 10 so he rubbered out cooper to go up a place in the rankings. If he goes up a place in the rankings he would go from 11 to 10 and that would make him top 10 imo. Not everyone knows that 10 is a smaller number than 11 but a higher number in boxing rankings. So, eraser was the rubberiest robberer. imo.