Tuan_Jim wrote:But guys, Vitali beat a guy who dominated and destroyed Michael Bentt!
You wonder what % of fans buy the pretty win-loss record, title defense BS.
Tuan_Jim wrote:But guys, Vitali beat a guy who dominated and destroyed Michael Bentt!
Vitali wasn't faster; in fact he was probably even slower.pacios box wrote:Carnera is undervalued. By his time he was a rather clever boxer; Took advantage of its height and its physical strength, maintained the distance well and had a certain technique.
It was not a phenomenon, but not a package.
On the other hand, in a fight with Vitali I would lose more than anything because of the modern times.
Vitali is faster, more skilled and more experienced
Assuming it's a 12 round fight, I lean towards Vitali winning by ko between 9 and 12
You’re posting sheer nonsense HomicideHenry.HomicideHenry wrote:Carnera defeated fellow giants Jose Santa and Ray Impelltierre in relatively easy fights. They were taller than Primo, and just as heavy. So Vitali's height, weight, etc is relatively meaningless.
one can argue that the Italian had the better resume of wins: Tommy Loughran surely was a superior win than Tomasz Adamek, no?
ALOT of people say that Primo was nothing more than a manufactured heavyweight, etc. but fake fighters couldn't stand toe to toe, getting up numerous times against a murderous puncher like Max Baer
We've done this before Henry -- Vitali Klitscho's list of victims as he became a 3-time Heavyweight Champion included:HomicideHenry wrote:You can't really make an argument that Adamek was better than Loughran