BoxRec

Of course they are. They both bossed the division for long enough.

bollox wrote: ↑16 Jan 2016, 22:29 No they're not all time greats. The bar has been lowered so far that there ARE no more ATG's IMO. The door is shut

Agreed

Why are they a combined entity?

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑04 Nov 2018, 17:15 Why are they a combined entity?

If there was only one Klitschko, the late 2000s - early 2010s era would have had an undisputed champion, who would have been any of them Klitschkos. But in the actual situation they had to share the throne, so they became a kinda combined entity.

I think it's more that they're very popular and people perceived vitali to be better but since his resume is trash they try to share his little brothers accomplishments.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑04 Nov 2018, 20:01 I think it's more that they're very popular and people perceived vitali to be better but since his resume is trash they try to share his little brothers accomplishments.

Little?! He’s younger, nothing little about him.

Noxy wrote: ↑04 Nov 2018, 23:01

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑04 Nov 2018, 20:01 I think it's more that they're very popular and people perceived vitali to be better but since his resume is trash they try to share his little brothers accomplishments.

Little?! He’s younger, nothing little about him.

Little and big brother in the States is referring to age.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑04 Nov 2018, 20:01 I think it's more that they're very popular and people perceived vitali to be better but since his resume is trash they try to share his little brothers accomplishments.

I dunno, what somebody can think, but for me Wlad's resume obviously has always been far better. Despite this Vitali's resume wasn't plainly trash.

His loss to Lewis was a good one, but too many people give him a pass for fighting exceptionally weak opposition in a weak era.

Lewis loss wasn't the only good one. He dominated Byrd til withdrew due to an injury. Sanders and Peter wins were pretty good.

I'm not giving much credit for the Byrd loss. Peter was impressive off the layoff, Sanders is what he is. Losing a fight to a great fighter and another two a good one coupled with two wins over fringe guys is hardly the stuff of legends.

Of course, Vitali's conquered opponents weren't legends, but still some of them were pretty tought, everything isn't that bad.

It's asking if he's an all-time great. He never won a fight against anyone of note. His lack of power would carry most of them too

The thing is, not every ATG has another ATG in the list of his scalps. For example, Holmes and Tyson has defeated quite some amount of decent, but inconsistent names, but had never defeated an ATG in prime. Bowe won only one. So why Vitali isn't comparable?

Because his scalps are a joke compared to Tyson's and Holmes.
Tyson and Holmes did not beat any legends (at least when the legends were anywhere near their primes.)
However, they each defeated several very good fighters during their career. Yes, you can come up up with losses that these very good fighters had. However, they had good overall careers and had ability.

In fact some of the guys they beat were better than Vitaly.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 12:14 In fact some of the guys they beat were better than Vitaly.

I'm even a bit afraid to ask who.

It's interesting how many top atg heavys beat other great heavys. Not good fighters I mean great ones at heavy. May have left out a few but...

Holmes - Norton, ali
Tyson - Holmes
Evander - Tyson, Bowe, Holmes, foreman
Lewis - Tyson, evander, Vlad k
Joe Louis - schmeling, Baer, Walcott
Marciano - Walcott, Charles, Louis
Charles - louis, Walcott
Walcott - charles
Dempsey - none
Tunney - Dempsey
Vit k - none
Wlad k - none
Johnson - Jeanette, mcvea, Langford, Jeffries, fitz
Ali - Liston , Patterson, Frazier, foreman, Norton

Take out those clearly well past their best. Now a few of these are debatable but maybe?

Holmes - none
Tyson - none
Dempsey - none
Tunney - none
Rocky - none
Lewis - none
Wlad - none
V klit - none
Evander - bowe
Charles - Walcott
Walcott - charles
Louis - schmeling, Baer, Walcott
Johnson - langford, mcvea, jeanette

And Ali - Liston, Patterson, Frazier, foreman, Norton
He really was the greatest :-)

DrDuke wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 06:15 The thing is, not every ATG has another ATG in the list of his scalps. For example, Holmes and Tyson has defeated quite some amount of decent, but inconsistent names, but had never defeated an ATG in prime. Bowe won only one. So why Vitali isn't comparable?

Why isn't vitals weak resume comparable to Holmes? Maybe because if you took their top 10 combined wins Larry would have all of them? Hell, Larry's win over Mercer as a fat old man is miles better than any of vitals conquests. He could fight, but his list of victims is sewage.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 14:02

DrDuke wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 06:15 The thing is, not every ATG has another ATG in the list of his scalps. For example, Holmes and Tyson has defeated quite some amount of decent, but inconsistent names, but had never defeated an ATG in prime. Bowe won only one. So why Vitali isn't comparable?

Why isn't vitals weak resume comparable to Holmes? Maybe because if you took their top 10 combined wins Larry would have all of them? Hell, Larry's win over Mercer as a fat old man is miles better than any of vitals conquests. He could fight, but his list of victims is sewage.

Yeah, Holmes had a better opposition, but still both of them had no ATGs defeated, at least in primes.

I never said that was needed. Vitali doesn't have any present time good fighters defeated. I'd confidently take Witherspoon to beat him.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 15:38 I never said that was needed. Vitali doesn't have any present time good fighters defeated. I'd confidently take Witherspoon to beat him.

I would pick an in shape focussed Witherspoon over some of these supposed all time greats. Witherspoon is under rated

True. I thought about putting the spoon in my list. He was a fabulous boxer.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 15:38 I never said that was needed. Vitali doesn't have any present time good fighters defeated. I'd confidently take Witherspoon to beat him.

Sanders was good. The likes of Peter, Adamek, Chisora, Donald, Kirk Johnson, Briggs were decent anyway, they were considered to be top competitors of that time.

And I won't be so sure about Witherspoon. Yes, he was very good, he would have made that look competetive, but he would have failed to overcome Vitali's jab. As against Holmes, Larry won that fight, all the controversy is blown up.

DrDuke wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 16:57

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 15:38 I never said that was needed. Vitali doesn't have any present time good fighters defeated. I'd confidently take Witherspoon to beat him.

Sanders was good. The likes of Peter, Adamek, Chisora, Donald, Kirk Johnson, Briggs were decent anyway, they were considered to be top competitors of that time.

And I won't be so sure about Witherspoon. Yes, he was very good, he would have made that look competetive, but he would have failed to overcome Vitali's jab. As against Holmes, Larry won that fight, all the controversy is blown up.

Lmao, none of them were considered top competitors. Christ, guys like Donald and Johnson were past it guys that were never good to begin with. Briggs? Listen to yourself. It's not an opinion that he beat abysmal opposition, it's a fact. Witherspoon took away Holmes jab, vitali could barely hit Kevin Johnson.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 17:08

DrDuke wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 16:57

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑05 Nov 2018, 15:38 I never said that was needed. Vitali doesn't have any present time good fighters defeated. I'd confidently take Witherspoon to beat him.

Sanders was good. The likes of Peter, Adamek, Chisora, Donald, Kirk Johnson, Briggs were decent anyway, they were considered to be top competitors of that time.

And I won't be so sure about Witherspoon. Yes, he was very good, he would have made that look competetive, but he would have failed to overcome Vitali's jab. As against Holmes, Larry won that fight, all the controversy is blown up.

Lmao, none of them were considered top competitors. Christ, guys like Donald and Johnson were past it guys that were never good to begin with. Briggs? Listen to yourself. It's not an opinion that he beat abysmal opposition, it's a fact. Witherspoon took away Holmes jab, vitali could barely hit Kevin Johnson.

Donald and Johnson wasn't past it. All those guys weren't anything special , but they wasn't that bad and had some wins over then noticeable opposition. I'm not telling, that they were very good, but they weren't completely trash either.

And Witherspoon was outjabbed for the half of the fight, until he managed to make it more intense and thus equaled it.