Why doesn't Vitali get enough credit for his achievement?

First topic message reminder :

A Boxer technically undefeated if u consider the two matches he lost due to injuries not made by opponent and in both matches he was leading hands down on all referee cards. One of the biggest knockout ratios, this guy last all 12 rounds against any heavyweight pitted against if needed, one of the best chins I have seen in the history.

Unlike Wlad Vitali is more aggressor yet plans his punches in a much calculated way, he doesn't hug and thug like his brother Wlad does, Lewis certainly knew he had remote chance of a win on a rematch with Vitali at that time and hence timely saved his legacy, however Lewis knows very well he always has his chance against Wlad if he could get one of his right upper punch even if happened to be by accident.

Vitali in my view should easily make top 10 boxers of all time and could close in top 5, yes I would agree Boxers like Ali, Tyson, Robinson, Foreman, Frazier were there and could be above Vitali's accomplishments, but having seen Vitali fight and box I would certainly give him benefit of doubt to be along this great group.  

The seem definitely catches him, but no evidence of a cut in that video?

Looks nasty if it did cause the cut, real stinger.

Don't think I ever claimed Lennox poked him in the eye, more that that's not the sort of impact Lennox was looking for, and if you gave him a do over, I doubt he'd have been looking for the glancing thumb, rather than the straight right.

kingraf wrote: I doubt he'd have been looking for the glancing thumb, rather than the straight right.

great line

kingraf wrote:Don't think I ever claimed Lennox poked him in the eye, more that that's not the sort of impact Lennox was looking for, and if you gave him a do over, I doubt he'd have been looking for the glancing thumb, rather than the straight right.

What about the other three cuts?

The other one above his eye, the massive one on his cheek and the one inside his mouth, guess they were all caused by thumbs too?

The ringside physician stopped the fight on account of the cut ABOVE Vitali's left eye, which in his opinion, limited his vision. So to answer your question about the other cuts - The fight wasnt stopped because of them, it was stopped because of the cut caused by the vaunted lead thumb. I wouldn't think it's a difficult concept - Vitali had cuts on his face - but the fight was stopped on account of the one created by a trailing thumb.

You still insist on saying 'thumb' though, whether 'lead' or 'trailing'. Which suggests it was some kind of untoward move by Lennox to 'thumb' Vitali.

He threw a legitimate punch which happened to fail to land cleanly, with the side of the glove opening up a cut above the eye.

Would he pull this off in a rematch? Probably not.

Would he know in a rematch that Vit's face cuts up badly and he eats jabs like a hungry pacman? Yes.

I doubt Vitali fights the same way in a rematch. Fact is, thats not how he generally fights, it was a conscious attempt to catch Lewis quickly. He hadn't fought like that before, and he hasn't fought like that since.

And I can just as easily say the same, and say in a rematch Lewis doesn't sack off training camp and come in flabby expecting an easy pay day but takes Vit serisolusly like he did Golota and Grant - and look what happened to them.

Also, Vit has always been the more aggressive come forward fighter of the two K's. Ever wonder that the reason he's never fought quite the same as he did against Lewis is becuase he never fought anyone anywhere near that good again??

Vitali's chin is a helluva lot stronger than those guys', with all due respect.

He is the more aggressive of the two, but I don't understand your argument. You'd think he'd be more aggressive against guys less likely to hurt him, not so?

You're saying his game plan was specifically to come in intense and cause Lewis trouble early doors. I'm saying he never fought someone again where he needed that gameplan, a better boxer that could outpoint him down the stretch, so Vit was free to do as he wanted.

lets put this way

Would Vitali beat the Tomato Tyson lewis beat?
Ans Yes

would Vitali beat holyField of late 30's
Ans Yes

would Vitali beat Rehman [any given time]
Ans Yes

So the only difference between lewis and Vitali is Lewis was lucky to meet most boxers at the wrong time of the opponents career and Vitali never to meet anybody of a staggering career.

Wrong.

Vitali met an ATG at the tail end of his career and still managed to lose.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Wrong.

Vitali met an ATG at the tail end of his career and still managed to lose.

I would put it this way, Lewis didn't have the guts to take Vitali on for a rematch, coz he knows fluke won't happen twice.

Lewis was crap, lucky and a coward it seems..and here is me having him down as a great Heavyweight..

Ali and Foreman must pray to Allah every day to thank him for keeping Vitali out of their era..

All relative isn't it? Lewis was 29 when he got knocked by McCall. Had McCall retired after that, and he walked into this era, how would he have been looked at?

All heavyweights are rubbish, would like to think we had learned that by now. Louis is most peoples number two and apparently he cannot beat any other heavyweight with a pulse. If our number two is so rubbish what hope is there for the rest of them.

DirectView wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Wrong.

Vitali met an ATG at the tail end of his career and still managed to lose.

I would put it this way, Lewis didn't have the guts to take Vitali on for a rematch, coz he knows fluke won't happen twice.

Or he knew he won fair and square, a rematch wouldn't change or prove anything, so in a division that turns on one punch more than any other - why take the risk of dealing with something already dealt with?

Not like Vit was a draw that could bring big money to the table.

Rowley is having a mid life crisis...

In fairness Louis can beat heavies that have pulses..

I'll give him that..

Come on now toppy, you know as well as the rest of us the rematch would have sold. Good fight first time by heavyweight standards, genuine debate about who would have won second time round and enough question marks left due to the ending of the first to stimulate interest. Pretty much everything you need for a rematch.

Should add I am not criticising Lewis for not taking the rematch in any way, shape or form, but his decision was most assuredly not a fiscal one. He would have made a shedload.

Lost his desire....After all a disinterested Lewis punched him with ease when the spirit moved him..

kingraf wrote:All relative isn't it? Lewis was 29 when he got knocked by McCall. Had McCall retired after that, and he walked into this era, how would he have been looked at?

Probably as a fairly average heavy with a great chin who'd lost to every half decent guy he fought... before landing one dream punch.

I think most of us wish lewis had got himself in shape and taken a rematch. Either he'd just lost the motivation or he'd realised he was on the slide. Maybe both. Who knows for sure.  But didn't have the guts? Don't think so.

I like vitali.  Anyone that big, tough and athletic is a hard night's work for any heavy in history, but the lewis bashing is bit OTT

TopHat24/7 wrote:

DirectView wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Wrong.

Vitali met an ATG at the tail end of his career and still managed to lose.

I would put it this way, Lewis didn't have the guts to take Vitali on for a rematch, coz he knows fluke won't happen twice.

Or he knew he won fair and square, a rematch wouldn't change or prove anything,

Fair and square ? now thats a joke, everybody knew Vitali was leading hands down on all judges count till the stoppage, lewis to be frank had no guts in facing Vitali in the ring again.

No he wasn't......Leave it out..

Reading your stuff...You come across as thick..

Milky - think I phrased that wrong.

Had McCall retired after the Lewis fight, and Lewis stepped into this type era, how would Lewis have been looked at?

Losing to McCall is a bigger blight on your record than the thumb of god. Only difference is, Lewis' conqueror didn't retire, and he walked into an era with decent fights to be had.

If my Mum was my Auntie what would I have looked like ??

Leave it out Kingy

If...If..If..

Quite a few fighters suddenly become very average if you deny them the rematch in a close fight, or quality opposition

you would have obviously looked like your other aunt

The irony of you telling me to leave out hypothetical situations is not lost on me.

That's good to know..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:No he wasn't......Leave it out..

Reading your stuff...You come across as thick..

Now why resort into personal attacks?

You caste your views and i counter it logically why should I be branded for it.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:If my Mum was my Auntie what would I have looked like ??

Leave it out Kingy

If...If..If..

Shouting poor examples doesn't make the answer.  

Didn't you write that Sanders was the best champion when Lewis was still WBC champ ...Kingy Mate ??

No doubt McCall and Rahman are bigger blights than Byrd and Lewis because of the nature of the defeats. The defeat to lewis was a legitimate defeat, but it was unsatisfactory and its fair to say vitali never lost to a man who proved himself better on the night.

But then its also fair to say he never got to fight anyone who could 'prove' how good he was... With the exception of whatever spin you wish to put on the lewis fight.

Hard to rank the klitschko's in a historical perspective. But it's always a fruitless task, you can only beat what's in front of you and they'll both be better thought of in a few years time... When we whinge that the next era is the worst in history.

DirectView wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:No he wasn't......Leave it out..

Reading your stuff...You come across as thick..

Now why resort into personal attacks?

You caste your views and i counter it logically why should I be branded for it.

Your views are illogical that's why, branding Lewis a coward couldn't be further from the truth. He beat Vitali fair and square without any controversy at the end of his career, the state of his face meant a rematch wasn't a necessity.

I did, and you'll find that that was because I thought Lewis had retired by then, as I told Hammer.

I did, and you'll find that that was because I thought Lewis had retired by then, as I told Hammer.

DirectView wrote:Fair and square ? now thats a joke, everybody knew Vitali was leading hands down on all judges count till the stoppage, lewis to be frank had no guts in facing Vitali in the ring again.

Lewis had no guts? This is cringeworthy. He went in with some massive punchers and rematched and beat the two guys who knocked him out.

Get a clue.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:
Your views are illogical that's why, branding Lewis a coward couldn't be further from the truth. He beat Vitali fair and square without any controversy at the end of his career, the state of his face meant a rematch wasn't a necessity.

Lewis should get his critics for not playing a rematch, after all he got all his rematches so why not return the same favor for Vitali? if Rehman wouldn't have offered the rematch to Lewis i guess how different lewis legacy would have looked like.

It's RAHMAN.

It's also good to get your facts straight, Rahman had no option but to rematch Lewis it was in the original contract that he would get an immediate rematch if he wanted one. As for the rematch with McCall, they were ranked number one and two by the WBC at the time so were mandated to fight for the title vacated by Tyson.

Had Lewis gone on to fight somebody then he may have deserved a small amount of criticism but when a great champion decides his time is up and retires for good then that is entirely his choice. He had nothing left to prove and beating Vitali again would have done little for his legacy.

Scottrf wrote:

DirectView wrote:Fair and square ? now thats a joke, everybody knew Vitali was leading hands down on all judges count till the stoppage, lewis to be frank had no guts in facing Vitali in the ring again.

Lewis had no guts? This is cringeworthy. He went in with some massive punchers and rematched and beat the two guys who knocked him out.

Get a clue.

I said lewis didn't have guts to face Vitali again and your statement above mentions the same [i.e lewis only took on the boxers he thought he could win the rematch and not the won he thought he could win convincingly to put to rest the doubts of previous win].

Hope you got the clue.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It's RAHMAN.

It's also good to get your facts straight, Rahman had no option but to rematch Lewis it was in the original contract that he would get an immediate rematch if he wanted one. As for the rematch with McCall, they were ranked number one and two by the WBC at the time so were mandated to fight for the title vacated by Tyson.

Had Lewis gone on to fight somebody then he may have deserved a small amount of criticism but when a great champion decides his time is up and retires for good then that is entirely his choice. He had nothing left to prove and beating Vitali again would have done little for his legacy.

Well Rahman could have retired to save his legacy.  

I am pretty sure had he did that people would have called him a coward/duck/no-hoper etc,...   

DirectView wrote:I said lewis didn't have guts to face Vitali again and your statement above mentions the same [i.e lewis only took on the boxers he thought he could win the rematch and not the won he thought he could win convincingly to put to rest the doubts of previous win].

Hope you got the clue.

It's nothing to do with guts. He was happy with his career, didn't have the motivation didn't need the money, and decided it wasn't worth the risk. If only more boxers left the game like Lewis did. There's always 'one more fight'.

You didn't address any points, you shouldn't use the word guts. It shows a lack of respect for the profession.

Rahman had no legacy and he hadn't earned enough money to retire when he wanted, retiring when when you're past it at 38 is a bit different to retiring as a never was at 29.

Scottrf wrote:
You didn't address any points, you shouldn't use the word guts. It shows a lack of respect for the profession.

Well I have a huge respect for the profession and so do I for lewis and Vitali.

I felt expression with aggression is acceptable as long as I don't abuse anybody with swear words.

For me Lewis CV has a question mark and that would he have won Vitali on a rematch, I certainly don't think so and neither he proved me wrong.

English isn't your first language is it?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Rahman had no legacy and he hadn't earned enough money to retire when he wanted, retiring when when you're past it at 38 is a bit different to retiring as a never was at 29.

If Lewis would be considered the 2nd greatest of all time then obviously Rahman should have got a legacy built on that win, but seems like no body cared for that win except for the money he gained from that match.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:English isn't your first language is it?

Is that a mandatory requirement to post on boxing forum?   , your statement clearly shows to duck an argument you don't mind winding up somebody.

Why on earth it matters to you whether English is my first language or not, r u a WUM?  

John H Stracey doesn't have a legacy built on a single win over the great Jose Napoles nor would Rahman have built a legacy based on one win either.

DirectView wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:English isn't your first language is it?

Is that a mandatory requirement to post on boxing forum?   , your statement clearly shows to duck an argument you don't mind winding up somebody.

Why on earth it matters to you whether English is my first language or not, r u a WUM?  

Your use of smileys will not get you very far on here, it's an immediate sign of an infantile imbecile.

I mentioned your first language because it's very difficult to decipher what you're trying to say, it's just a lot of words jumbled together.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

I mentioned your first language because it's very difficult to decipher what you're trying to say, it's just a lot of words jumbled together.

You should have mistaken your comment for me then, coz its very funny when a guy with poor grammar calls it on others.  

Its very difficult for you to understand coz its your adapted language and not your natural spoken one.   

If my smileys irritate you, then let me add more of it.