A cement chinned giant with a solid work ethic and high punch-output is a hard man to beat. Both Klits boys know exactly what their strengths are and are fully aware of their weaknesses. No advantage is too small and they stick to their game plans like a couple of zealots of the good book.SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Ezzard wrote:Not much in it.SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Vitali over Bowe? How?
Bowe is more fluid and has more to his game. Vitali is much more reliable. Both men were giants but Vitali fought more intelligently.
I just picked Vitali's consistency.
The consistency of weak opposition?
I don't get Vitali being more reliable at all. How can you say he is much more reliable? Bowe would never quit in a fight, that much I can guarantee. In all honesty, I can't agree with any of this. He was consistently in better shape, that's the only edge I can see. Have to give Bowe talent, resume, toughness & versatility.
Bowe, on his best, is easier on the eye… But if he fought 100 nobodies he’d be out of shape for 75 of them. He could almost never stick to a fight plan and would always look to out-man his opponent, often to his detriment.
Bowe from Holyfield I was exceptional. After that he was all about diminishing returns.
Don’t get me wrong, I knew it would be a controversial pick. I don’t think there’s much in it.
Yes, he shouldn't have quit against Byrd (he would have won a rematch). That was one of the few errors he made in the ring. Bowe may have taken his beatings but if his career was being marked by a maths teacher there'd be more red than a Tarrentino film.
The versatility angle is right. But Bowe used his versatility against himself. VK always knows exactly what he has to do and rarely veers from the path.
