BoxRec

Ambling Alp II wrote:To many people it just confirmed that Vitaly wasn't very good. He fought an obese Lennox Lewis and only lasted 6 rounds. That Kltischko has been as successful as he was is just more evidence that the division was much, much better when Lewis was closer to his prime.

Now AA, to be fair your post is not worded entirely fairly. Vitaly fought an overweight Lewis (not obese). Yes, he did only last six rounds BUT (I'm not even going to say it, you know what happened as well). That aside, I have to disagree with people seeing Vitaly as not being very good after that fight. The way I saw it (as I said in my other post) his stock actually rose. For a start he shed that image of being a bottler that had been hanging over him since the Byrd fight. Also, the way he was able to stand and "have it" with Lennox was something not many people were expecting.

The fact is that after the fight the public were clamouring (and I don't use that word lightly) for a rematch as there was a distinct feeling of unfinished business. Lennox won that fight fair and square, at the same time after the fight he had two options - Vitali or retirement. That's because Vitali was there like the elephant in the room.

minter - Sibson

havard - cowdell - great call this palooka

Vitali's stock definitely rose after the Lewis fight and I think it was clearly a breakthrough bout for him. While Lewis retired Vitali became an HBO star, a PPV A-side, and was shortly after the consensus top fighter in the division; focusing on how the fight confirmed that Vitali wasn't very good is just typical Boxers of the past negativity towards the Klitschkos.

When did Vitali become a "PPV A-side"?

Vitali/Sanders and Vitali/Williams were hardly big business - in fact the Sanders fight was for purses that by heavyweight championship standards were extremely low. And since those two ungainly affairs, how many times has his odious robo-fencing been broadcast by HBO? One time, versus Arreola?

Syntax Error wrote:
Herbie Hide -v- Michael Bentt

What torch do you think was being passed by a man making the first defence of his second division strap, and losing to a man who went on to lose it in his first defence? The torch of mediocrity? Or were you thinking of the torch that would be necessary to find these men in the darkness they inhabited in the shadow of Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson, Lewis, Moorer?

Noxy wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:To many people it just confirmed that Vitaly wasn't very good. He fought an obese Lennox Lewis and only lasted 6 rounds. That Kltischko has been as successful as he was is just more evidence that the division was much, much better when Lewis was closer to his prime.

Now AA, to be fair your post is not worded entirely fairly. Vitaly fought an overweight Lewis (not obese). Yes, he did only last six rounds BUT (I'm not even going to say it, you know what happened as well). That aside, I have to disagree with people seeing Vitaly as not being very good after that fight. The way I saw it (as I said in my other post) his stock actually rose. For a start he shed that image of being a bottler that had been hanging over him since the Byrd fight. Also, the way he was able to stand and "have it" with Lennox was something not many people were expecting.

The fact is that after the fight the public were clamouring (and I don't use that word lightly) for a rematch as there was a distinct feeling of unfinished business. Lennox won that fight fair and square, at the same time after the fight he had two options - Vitali or retirement. That's because Vitali was there like the elephant in the room.

No, Lewis was obese. Take a look at him.
Sure it was a back and forth fight, but the fact he remains he could not put Lewis and his defense was so bad that he could only last 6 rounds. And that was against a Lewis woefully out of shape.
It was interesting to watch, but it was a horrible fight. Two tired guys with no defense.
Clamoring for a rematch? Seriously? If Vitaly couldn't beat him under those circumstances, he isn't going to beat a reasonably in shape Lewis.
Two options? If Lewis wanted to, he certainly could have fought someone else. He did not have anything to prove.
He certainly was not afraid to fight Vitaly again. But why bother? What would it prove?

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:
Herbie Hide -v- Michael Bentt

What torch do you think was being passed by a man making the first defence of his second division strap, and losing to a man who went on to lose it in his first defence? The torch of mediocrity? Or were you thinking of the torch that would be necessary to find these men in the darkness they inhabited in the shadow of Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson, Lewis, Moorer?

Ok this actually made me laugh

crusader wrote:Vitali's stock definitely rose after the Lewis fight and I think it was clearly a breakthrough bout for him. While Lewis retired Vitali became an HBO star, a PPV A-side, and was shortly after the consensus top fighter in the division; focusing on how the fight confirmed that Vitali wasn't very good is just typical Boxers of the past negativity towards the Klitschkos.

PPV A-side? LOL Vitali's lone PPV vs Williams was an absolute bomb!

To say his stock rose is not telling the whole story, because his stock was incredibly low to begin with. He'd been beating a bunch of C and B raters in Germany and his lone appearance on HBO he'd quit on his stool in a fight he was winning. Yes people appreciated his courage and valiant effort vs Lewis but he in no way became a "star" in America . . .even Larry Merchant continued to confuse one brother for the other.

Ambling Alp II wrote:

Noxy wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:To many people it just confirmed that Vitaly wasn't very good. He fought an obese Lennox Lewis and only lasted 6 rounds. That Kltischko has been as successful as he was is just more evidence that the division was much, much better when Lewis was closer to his prime.

Now AA, to be fair your post is not worded entirely fairly. Vitaly fought an overweight Lewis (not obese). Yes, he did only last six rounds BUT (I'm not even going to say it, you know what happened as well). That aside, I have to disagree with people seeing Vitaly as not being very good after that fight. The way I saw it (as I said in my other post) his stock actually rose. For a start he shed that image of being a bottler that had been hanging over him since the Byrd fight. Also, the way he was able to stand and "have it" with Lennox was something not many people were expecting.

The fact is that after the fight the public were clamouring (and I don't use that word lightly) for a rematch as there was a distinct feeling of unfinished business. Lennox won that fight fair and square, at the same time after the fight he had two options - Vitali or retirement. That's because Vitali was there like the elephant in the room.

No, Lewis was obese. Take a look at him.
Sure it was a back and forth fight, but the fact he remains he could not put Lewis and his defense was so bad that he could only last 6 rounds. And that was against a Lewis woefully out of shape.
It was interesting to watch, but it was a horrible fight. Two tired guys with no defense.
Clamoring for a rematch? Seriously? If Vitaly couldn't beat him under those circumstances, he isn't going to beat a reasonably in shape Lewis.
Two options? If Lewis wanted to, he certainly could have fought someone else. He did not have anything to prove.
He certainly was not afraid to fight Vitaly again. But why bother? What would it prove?

People forget . . .Lewis's people clearly laid out his final "3 fight plan" that was to follow the Johnson fight . . he was to fight Vitali, rematch Tyson, and then . . since Lewis was expected to beat Vitali and Wlad was seen as the heir apparent, fight Wlad in his final fight, which was supposed to be the "passing of the torch" fight. But then Wlad got bludgeoned by Sanders, and it became apparent no-one cared to see Tyson get beat up again. Since Lewis had beaten Vitali, he lacked any motivation to get up for another fight and smartly left the game.

Tuan_Jim wrote:When did Vitali become a "PPV A-side"?

Vitali/Sanders and Vitali/Williams were hardly big business - in fact the Sanders fight was for purses that by heavyweight championship standards were extremely low. And since those two ungainly affairs, how many times has his odious robo-fencing been broadcast by HBO? One time, versus Arreola?

Vitali became a PPV A side when he was the A side of a PPV main event on a major network, although maybe that logic is tough for LG and DF to understand. While some of his previous fights may have been on PPV in other countries (I'm not sure), in this case I'm referring to his bout with Williams, which as an HBO PPV was on about the highest stage it gets.

So he was widely seen as being at the top of the division and was strongly supported by the widest-reaching boxing medium in the US, and he did this on the back of his showing against Lewis, which he generally won a fair deal of respect and attention for even in defeat; he jumped into the spotlight to become the man of the division while the previous division ruler went off into the sunset, which in my view makes it appropriate for calling Lewis-Klitschko a passing of the torch bout. Obviously he was out for a while with injuries, but he came back and quickly retook his consensus position as the best or second best (next to Wlad) fighter in the division, one that was established in aftermath of the Lewis bout and the latter's retirement. Obviously he wasn't quite the American TV presence he was earlier, but his position as the top HW (what Lewis was) along with his brother was generally accepted and insofar as HBO ratings matter his bout with Arreola drew a massive 2.124 million viewers, which I believe is the most in the last seven years.

PPV A-side? LOL Vitali's lone PPV vs Williams was an absolute bomb!

Yep, he was the A-side of a major network PPV. Whatever was found out after the bout doesn't change that.

To say his stock rose is not telling the whole story, because his stock was incredibly low to begin with. He'd been beating a bunch of C and B raters in Germany and his lone appearance on HBO he'd quit on his stool in a fight he was winning. Yes people appreciated his courage and valiant effort vs Lewis but he in no way became a "star" in America . . .even Larry Merchant continued to confuse one brother for the other.

Right, so someone with an incredibly low stock won plaudits for 'his courage and valiant effort', on that showing became commonly regarded as the top fighter in the division with Lewis bowing out, and headlined HBO cards in his next three bouts, including a major PPV. Maybe he didn't become a star in America, but I hardly see why that is a requirement for Klitschko-Lewis being appropriately labeled a passing of the torch fight; Lewis was the man, he became widely seen as a faded force and retired, and heavily on the basis of their bout Klitschko first entered the top spot, which he arguably held for several years over the past decade or so.

would 19 year old tony canzoneri beating johnny dundee fit here ?

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:
Herbie Hide -v- Michael Bentt

What torch do you think was being passed by a man making the first defence of his second division strap, and losing to a man who went on to lose it in his first defence? The torch of mediocrity? Or were you thinking of the torch that would be necessary to find these men in the darkness they inhabited in the shadow of Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson, Lewis, Moorer?

LOL!!

That is funny; I'll give you that.

I was just trying to be clever, because all the biggest & obvious picks were mentioned, so I probably stretched credibility with that one.

Syntax Error wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Syntax Error wrote:
Herbie Hide -v- Michael Bentt

What torch do you think was being passed by a man making the first defence of his second division strap, and losing to a man who went on to lose it in his first defence? The torch of mediocrity? Or were you thinking of the torch that would be necessary to find these men in the darkness they inhabited in the shadow of Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson, Lewis, Moorer?

LOL!!

That is funny; I'll give you that.

I was just trying to be clever, because all the biggest & obvious picks were mentioned, so I probably stretched credibility with that one.

Good try but as you said a bit of a stretch.

doug.ie wrote:would 19 year old tony canzoneri beating johnny dundee fit here ?

Yes! A great example

Tomasino wrote:

doug.ie wrote:would 19 year old tony canzoneri beating johnny dundee fit here ?

Yes! A great example

i killed the thread with it though :)

Your new nickname should be The Thread Killer: -"The man who ends things with a good comment".