BoxRec

I only bring this fight up to point out a dynamic of hypotheticals that rarely gets factored in by our vast gestalt intellect.

Fights are surely (but not purely) physical.....and we seem to be fully fixated on assessing this as the only criteria. I often see hypotheticals appear here where there is a very high degree of understanding demonstrated of the skill set/s I'm often impressed with the degree of knowledge demonstrated in this area.

I'm also often entertained by the degree of passion that some folks have for some fighters that leads them to absurd assumptions about how their favorite fighter would somehow overcome any/all disadvantages and eek out a win over what may seem to be a far superior opponent.

I do understand that intellect, cleverness, bravado, and determination can only get you so far......I can't imagine a world where Neil Degrasse Tyson somehow overcomes his deficits to defeat Mike Tyson or Tyson Fury.

However some "intangibles" should be considered more often IMHO. Some fighters can punch above their weight simply by how they effect their opponent. I"m not sure that the skill levels of Mike Tyson and Mike Spinks were so unbalanced as to assure a first round KO for Mike. (Though in this case I'd still favor Mike T) If you don't like that example I"m sure you can come up with some of your own. Where the skill level simply did not match the outcome. Sometimes it's just a fluke.

However, Psyche's are an important dynamic, and the mix of psyche's that enter the ring may need to be considered. Some fighters could NEVER be affected by their opponents reputation. Tommy Hearns, and Evander Holyfield come to mind. Some fighters had a reputation that profoundly affected the public as well as many of their opponents......Mike Tyson, George Foreman are good examples. This can throw a monkey wrench into an assessment. I would say one of the greatest examples of this was what I would refer to as "Ronda Rousey Effect" Which affected both the public and a few of her opponents.....until she ran into Holly and Amanda....who were versions of Tommy and Evander....IMHO.

So a fighters reputation, and how he viscerally affects his opponent/s performance are a legitimate dynamic........as is a fighters ability to never be affected by ANY opponent should also be a part of the equation.



so......as to the title of this Hypothetical:

I think Wlad is the better fighter and by any clinical analysis should win.....IF YOU FAIL to take mental/emotional/personal factors into account. I believe he loses to Vitali because of the examples I have given here. In this case it's a very personal example....and neither of these fighters would typically fall prey to my premise.....but for the intangible of family. Which I believe changes things in this case. Big Brother prevails. EVEN if on every measurable level, they are both 100% fully serious, well trained, and determined to win this fight.

Vitali wins.

Wlad was better in many aspects. Technique, arsenal variety, speed, ring IQ. Vitali had a better chin, a quite unique one. Wlad's chin spoiled a lot for him. If he felt, that he was in danger, his mentality could make him to avoid the risk. The mental/emotional factor really could work here against Wlad. But if Wlad established the control, what could Vitali suggest? Vitali himself was quite pragmatic, remember the Byrd fight. He looked vulnerable in the last round of the Lewis fight, even despite his bravado after the stoppage. Actually, we had never seen Vitali dealing with adversity. The Lewis fight only brings question marks. While Wlad overcame adversity in the Peter fight and in the Joshua fight, after the early KD. He wasn't even out at the end, he was waved after the flurry of Joshua, in which many punches weren't clean. So, Wlad wasn't that bad mentally.

Lil bro by dec, around 116-112.

wlad had more tools but i get the feeling he'd be mentally f@cked fighting his bigger bro

Vitali RTD 10.

I am going to pick this as if they weren't brothers.
Waldimir was simply better at almost every phase. Of course he did have a glass jaw which could potentially cost him.

If Wladimir fought aggressive (like he often did early in his career) he might likely Vitaly. He would have little trouble reaching him and of course Wladimir had a lot of power. Eventually that would probably take it's toll.
Doing this, he does run the risk of getting in trouble himself.

If he fought cautious, he would win a boring, easy decision.

setting aside any possible brotherly mental impact, vit's biggest edge over wlad is stamina, if wlad comes out gunning and cant get rid of sturdy vit, it's quite feasible he gasses and gets taken out by vit

wlad's safest route to a W would be to use his superior speed and boxing to just keep edging rounds with a couple more shots getting through

aside from chin and stamina wlad was better in pretty much every area. he'd be winning as long as he kept the first 2 in check

i think they are quite different as fighters

wlad is far more 'athletic' --speed, power, sharper movement, etc. vitali slower, not as explosive, and a bit of a clumsy look to his movements, but much sturdier and fitter though

wlad at one time was an aggressive, combo throwing 2 handed fighter, but then became very cauitious. vitali never fought nervous or hesistant and his output was quite a bit higher than wlad's became from mid 2000s on

Their boxing-related similarity is majorly in being keen on jabs and one-twos, using reach and height.

I don't think they were the same fighters at all. They differed in many ways.

Wladimir was a lot faster with his hands, and a lot more agile. He hit a lot harder. He was the better boxer. Vitaly didn't have the glass jaw.
You could even argue that Wladimir was the more durable of the two; Vitaly was in two big fights and couldn't go the distance either time.

well, and wlad couldnt last vs purrity and sanders and vit ko'd both. vit didnt get dropped 3x by sam peter either. in fact he never had a KD ruled against him his whole pro boxing career. clearly he could take a far better shot and was less vulnerable stamina wise.

i certainly doubt that wlad wouldve lasted vs lewis either, i cant use that against vit in a durability argument vs wlad. wlad prob wouldve been done with that right hand from len in the third.

the knock on vit's durability is basically the byrd fight, but vit has far more evidence on the whole in his favour than wlad does when it comes to durability

He had two big fights and failed to go the distance both times. But sure, Wladimir was not durable either. Almost everything else clearly favors Wladimir.

and wlad failed to go the distance even in non big fights, getting stopped and taking a bunch of kds vs several guys who couldnt ever put vitali down. dont see any argument for wlad being the more durable of the two. vitali clearly also had better stamina

pretty much everything else though, ya wlad was superior

I said it was arguable. Wlad also managed to not get stopped in two fights against Byrd.
Would not count on the durability factor to win it for Vitaly, given that his brother was clearly better in just about every other area.
Neither one was durable.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:01 Wlad also managed to not get stopped in two fights against Byrd.

As if it was a hard task for him.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:01 Neither one was durable.

Despite numerous full-distance bouts.

Dumbling Alp's love of Klitschkos is amusing.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:01 I said it was arguable. Wlad also managed to not get stopped in two fights against Byrd.
Would not count on the durability factor to win it for Vitaly, given that his brother was clearly better in just about every other area.
Neither one was durable.

wlad didnt get stopped by byrd

vitali didnt get dropped 15 times
vitali didnt get stopped by sanders
vitali didnt get stopped by purrity
vitali didnt get ragdolled by peter

its not really arguable

DrDuke wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:06

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:01 Wlad also managed to not get stopped in two fights against Byrd.

As if it was a hard task for him.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:01 Neither one was durable.

Despite numerous full-distance bouts.

Dumbling Alp's love of Klitschkos is amusing.

Yes, despite numerous full distance fights. Just because you win a decision doesn't make you durable.
I don't think that was hard task to not get stopped by Byrd. However, his brother couldn't do it.
Could not go more than 6 rounds against a way past it Lewis. What else is there? They were by far his best opponents.

Marge made some points for Wladimir's case for not being durable. He had a glass jaw; it wasn't exactly a secret.

Anyway, this was supposed to be about a Mythical fight. Vitaly's durability advantage probably is not going to win him the fight. Wladimir was clearly better in almost every other way.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 15:58

DrDuke wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:06

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:01 Wlad also managed to not get stopped in two fights against Byrd.

As if it was a hard task for him.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:01 Neither one was durable.

Despite numerous full-distance bouts.

Dumbling Alp's love of Klitschkos is amusing.

Yes, despite numerous full distance fights. Just because you win a decision doesn't make you durable.
I don't think that was hard task to not get stopped by Byrd. However, his brother couldn't do it.
Could not go more than 6 rounds against a way past it Lewis. What else is there? They were by far his best opponents.

Marge made some points for Wladimir's case for not being durable. He had a glass jaw; it wasn't exactly a secret.

Anyway, this was supposed to be about a Mythical fight. Vitaly's durability advantage probably is not going to win him the fight. Wladimir was clearly better in almost every other way.

The fact of winning a decision itself doesn't make you durable, but the fact of vastly outworking different opponents in numerous full distance fights makes it, mr dumby alpy. While being out of a fight due to an injury / cuts doesn't defines durability at all.

Wlad 12-0

DrDuke wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 16:10

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 15:58

DrDuke wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 11:06
As if it was a hard task for him.


Despite numerous full-distance bouts.

Dumbling Alp's love of Klitschkos is amusing.

Yes, despite numerous full distance fights. Just because you win a decision doesn't make you durable.
I don't think that was hard task to not get stopped by Byrd. However, his brother couldn't do it.
Could not go more than 6 rounds against a way past it Lewis. What else is there? They were by far his best opponents.

Marge made some points for Wladimir's case for not being durable. He had a glass jaw; it wasn't exactly a secret.

Anyway, this was supposed to be about a Mythical fight. Vitaly's durability advantage probably is not going to win him the fight. Wladimir was clearly better in almost every other way.

The fact of winning a decision itself doesn't make you durable, but the fact of vastly outworking different opponents in numerous full distance fights makes it, mr dumby alpy. While being out of a fight due to an injury / cuts doesn't defines durability at all.

First it was Bozo. How clever. Now it's Mr dumby alpy? How old are you? 9 years old? 10?

Quitting and getting stopped on cuts doesn't define durability at all? That's ridiculous.
It's obvious that you don't even know what the word durable even means. Being durable means that you last, even when things get tough.

Quitting and getting stopped by cuts is part of durability. It's absurd to try to dismiss this. It's a lot more important than "outworking" the mediocre competition that he beat. Given that he only had two major fights and didn't make the final bell either time, yes his durability should be questioned.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 17:57

DrDuke wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 16:10

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jul 2021, 15:58
Yes, despite numerous full distance fights. Just because you win a decision doesn't make you durable.
I don't think that was hard task to not get stopped by Byrd. However, his brother couldn't do it.
Could not go more than 6 rounds against a way past it Lewis. What else is there? They were by far his best opponents.

Marge made some points for Wladimir's case for not being durable. He had a glass jaw; it wasn't exactly a secret.

Anyway, this was supposed to be about a Mythical fight. Vitaly's durability advantage probably is not going to win him the fight. Wladimir was clearly better in almost every other way.

The fact of winning a decision itself doesn't make you durable, but the fact of vastly outworking different opponents in numerous full distance fights makes it, mr dumby alpy. While being out of a fight due to an injury / cuts doesn't defines durability at all.

First it was Bozo. How clever. Now it's Mr dumby alpy? How old are you? 9 years old? 10?

Quitting and getting stopped on cuts doesn't define durability at all? That's ridiculous.
It's obvious that you don't even know what the word durable even means. Being durable means that you last, even when things get tough.

Quitting and getting stopped by cuts is part of durability. It's absurd to try to dismiss this. It's a lot more important than "outworking" the mediocre competition that he beat. Given that he only had two major fights and didn't make the final bell either time, yes his durability should be questioned.

Bozo, dumby alpy, you're just a guy with many names.

Getting injured, cut, etc doesn't depend on you. It takes away an opportunity to go further from you and leaves a question mark, if you could go without those circumstances or not.

It's impossible to evaluate Vitali's durability in particularly those two bouts, nobody can know what could have happend. But you try to do it because of your notorious love for Vitali. If it wasn't him, there wouldn't be your biased ravings about durability being relevant in such cases.

In theory, anything could happen in the Byrd fight, nobody had an x-ray vision to determine, whether there was an injury. So, your amusing attempts to discredit Vitali here are more or less back up. But when there's a fight, the guy receives a cut, the doctor comes him and waves him and then some dumby bozo comes with his durability evaluations, that's the pure comedy.

Again with names. Grow up.

You argument is factually wrong. You might as well be arguing that 2 + 2 = 5.
Look up up what durability means.

Of course cuts and injuries count. and yes the fighter has some control.. He could have continued after the "injury" in the Byrd fight. A tougher guy would have. All he had to do was stand for three rounds.
Of course you have some control over cuts. Ever notice that bad fighters get cut less than bad defensive fighters?

You could argue that having a glass jaw is beyond your control.
Even if you believe that these things are beyond someone's control, it doesn't matter.

Durability is about the ability to last. It doesn't matter how (with the exception of the ref prematurely stopping it) you were stopped as far as durability is concerned. It doesn't matter if you were stopped of cuts, you weren't tough enough to continue with an injury, your chin let you down, you didn't have enough stamina, etc.

The reason I pick these two fights with Vitaly is because they are the only significant fights he ever had. They were by far the biggest tests he ever had. And he failed, both times.

Again, look up what being durable actually means.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 Jul 2021, 09:47 Again with names. Grow up.

You argument is factually wrong. You might as well be arguing that 2 + 2 = 5.
Look up up what durability means.

Of course cuts and injuries count. and yes the fighter has some control.. He could have continued after the "injury" in the Byrd fight. A tougher guy would have. All he had to do was stand for three rounds.
Of course you have some control over cuts. Ever notice that bad fighters get cut less than bad defensive fighters?

You could argue that having a glass jaw is beyond your control.
Even if you believe that these things are beyond someone's control, it doesn't matter.

Durability is about the ability to last. It doesn't matter how (with the exception of the ref prematurely stopping it) you were stopped as far as durability is concerned. It doesn't matter if you were stopped of cuts, you weren't tough enough to continue with an injury, your chin let you down, you didn't have enough stamina, etc.

The reason I pick these two fights with Vitaly is because they are the only significant fights he ever had. They were by far the biggest tests he ever had. And he failed, both times.

Again, look up what being durable actually means.

With your crippled logic, which you try to present as some sort of a truth, boxers won't be durable, if an asteroid falls on the ring during the fight, kills everybody and thus disallows to complete the fight.

Wow, I certainly can see how you come to that conclusion.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑12 Jul 2021, 10:53 Wow, I certainly can see how you come to that conclusion.

"Whatever" (c)

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑08 Jul 2021, 15:57 I am going to pick this as if they weren't brothers.

And....as happens far to often when one does not pay attention......the point gets missed.