BoxRec

Was Vitali Klischko the world's # 1 in heavyweight 2004/05?

(PS: "No, John Ruiz was" is the Decagon option).

Decagon wrote:I'm not the one who voted for it.

Who cares.

It's troublesome to imagine John Ruiz being a leader at any time. The ’04-’05 years never truly had a leader, just potential leaders.

Decagon wrote:

AndreWardFan2006 wrote:It's troublesome to imagine John Ruiz being a leader at any time. The ’04-’05 years never truly had a leader, just potential leaders.

I think that most people would vote for that, if it had been an option.

Yes, I think you're right. That's probably why he didn't include that option.

The Great John L wrote:

Decagon wrote:

AndreWardFan2006 wrote:It's troublesome to imagine John Ruiz being a leader at any time. The ’04-’05 years never truly had a leader, just potential leaders.

I think that most people would vote for that, if it had been an option.

Yes, I think you're right. That's probably why he didn't include that option.

There is always a #1.

Klitschko was easily the best heavyweight in the world. Ruiz and those other guys may have been considered top guys in the States, but no where else.

Cap

Decagon wrote:But there isn't always a clear #1. Who was the #1 boxer in 1970, Muhammad Ali or Joe Frazier? Both were World Heavyweight Champion claimants, but until they fought, no one knew who was really the best. It was all guesswork, as all rankings are.

Of course.

Decagon wrote:Then why didn't you include a "there wasn't a clear #1" option? There was no undisputed World Heavyweight Champion.

Even if their wouldn't have been a "clear" #1, there would have been a #1. Just make up your mind.

But there was a clear number one, of course, as the result of this poll shows. Vitali Klitschko.

P

Btw: Frazier was #1 before Frazier-Ali

As has been said...there was no clear #1 heavyweight and there has been no clear #1 since Lennox Lewis, but the heavyweight who had the best claim at being #1 during the time was Chris Byrd...not Vitali!

pundit wrote:Even if their wouldn't have been a "clear" #1, there would have been a #1. Just make up your mind.

Most of us on this forum choose to ignore the ratings of the four families. And no, there does not HAVE to be a number 1. Maybe you need it to feel more comfortable with the world, but it’s hardly an absolute.

pundit wrote: But there was a clear number one, of course, as the result of this poll shows. Vitali Klitschko.

Your poll was hardly a scientific survey. I think that if you had included the “none of the above” option, then the clear winner would have been “none of the above”. It would have been a landslide.

Are you somehow related to the Klits? You sure do expend a great deal of effort defending his tainted reputation.

The Great John L wrote:

pundit wrote:Even if their wouldn't have been a "clear" #1, there would have been a #1. Just make up your mind.

Most of us on this forum choose to ignore the ratings of the four families. And no, there does not HAVE to be a number 1. Maybe you need it to feel more comfortable with the world, but it’s hardly an absolute.

This is silly. At least in everybody's mind there HAS to be a #1 for pure logic necessity. Just count -- 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,... See? It starts' with "1". "One".

Or do you reguallary start counting with "2"?

It may be that people can't agree on a #1 - 30 percent votes for fighter X, 28 for fighter Y, 25 for fighter Z; rest undecided -- but then this would be the RESULT of the poll, not it's starting point.

pundit wrote: But there was a clear number one, of course, as the result of this poll shows. Vitali Klitschko.

Your poll was hardly a scientific survey. I think that if you had included the “none of the above” option, then the clear winner would have been “none of the above”. It would have been a landslide. [/quote]

Move your eyes up a little bit and ------- you will see that "yes, of course" is the landslide winner

Here is my take: you don't like this result, hence you look for ways to discredit the poll invalid.

Are you somehow related to the Klits? You sure do expend a great deal of effort defending his tainted reputation.

Yeah, I'm the third brother, but I did not pursue a boxing career because I fell into a pot of magic potion when I was a kid. Hence I would be disqualified whenever doing a doping test. Instead I use my super-powers to suppport my brothers when they come under attack in internet boxing forums.

barry wrote:As has been said...there was no clear #1 heavyweight and there has been no clear #1 since Lennox Lewis, but the heavyweight who had the best claim at being #1 during the time was Chris Byrd...not Vitali!

Seems this is minority opinion (and rightly so, of course. A one-armed Vitali proved way too much for little Byrdie).

pundit wrote:Yeah, I'm the third brother, but I did not pursue a boxing career because I fell into a pot of magic potion when I was a kid. Hence I would be disqualified whenever doing a doping test. Instead I use my super-powers to suppport my brothers when they come under attack in internet boxing forums.

Thanks, this helps me to better understand your mental capabilties.

The Great John L wrote:

pundit wrote:Yeah, I'm the third brother, but I did not pursue a boxing career because I fell into a pot of magic potion when I was a kid. Hence I would be disqualified whenever doing a doping test. Instead I use my super-powers to suppport my brothers when they come under attack in internet boxing forums.

Thanks, this helps me to better understand your mental capabilties.

Yeah, since I didn't have to do the boxing I finished three PhDs, not only one.

pundit wrote:

barry wrote:As has been said...there was no clear #1 heavyweight and there has been no clear #1 since Lennox Lewis, but the heavyweight who had the best claim at being #1 during the time was Chris Byrd...not Vitali!

Seems this is minority opinion (and rightly so, of course. A one-armed Vitali proved way too much for little Byrdie).

Chris Byrd KOd Klit. Or did we all miss something?

The Great John L wrote:

pundit wrote:

barry wrote:As has been said...there was no clear #1 heavyweight and there has been no clear #1 since Lennox Lewis, but the heavyweight who had the best claim at being #1 during the time was Chris Byrd...not Vitali!

Seems this is minority opinion (and rightly so, of course. A one-armed Vitali proved way too much for little Byrdie).

Chris Byrd KOd Klit. Or did we all miss something?

Seems you did.

>>>Seems this is minority opinion (and rightly so, of course. A one-armed Vitali proved way too much for little Byrdie).<<<

Typical statement of the Klitschko-lovers, but what I remember is that Quitschko did his best "No Mas" imitation and quit in a bout that he was winning, but a bout that was looking more and more like he would be knocked out in, so instead of being put down, he takes the coward route and quits with an injury that is not all that painful to begin with!

No matter how many excuses some of you Quitchko nut-huggers might want to bring up the fact of the matter is this...when the going got tough Vitali quit instead of gutting it out and his reason for quitting was due to Chris Byrd, so no matter how much you try to tell yourself that the bout really should have been a win, it will never be a win...it will be a technical knockout in which the giant Klitschko quit against the much, much smaller and very light-hitting Chris Byrd and as a result Chris Byrd had the best claim of being number one and that is FACT...not the fictional fairy-tales that the Quitschko-lovers like to make up!

barry wrote:>>>Seems this is minority opinion (and rightly so, of course. A one-armed Vitali proved way too much for little Byrdie).<<<

Typical statement of the Klitschko-lovers, but what I remember is that Quitschko did his best "No Mas" imitation and quit in a bout that he was winning, but a bout that was looking more and more like he would be knocked out in, so instead of being put down, he takes the coward route and quits with an injury that is not all that painful to begin with!

No matter how many excuses some of you Quitchko nut-huggers might want to bring up the fact of the matter is this...when the going got tough Vitali quit instead of gutting it out and his reason for quitting was due to Chris Byrd, so no matter how much you try to tell yourself that the bout really should have been a win, it will never be a win...it will be a technical knockout in which the giant Klitschko quit against the much, much smaller and very light-hitting Chris Byrd and as a result Chris Byrd had the best claim of being number one and that is FACT...not the fictional fairy-tales that the Quitschko-lovers like to make up!

Cool it, barry. I'm not interest in getting into a slugfest. It was nice here in recent weeks, now it seems to be heating up again because some folks can't distinguish factual and personal, but maybe the two of us shouldn't get involved.

As for the factual, I simply assess the fight very differenlty from you--Vitali quit because he was injured, he dominated Byrd as long as the fight went even though he had only one arm, and as a consequence it seems rather misguided to me to rank Byrd above Vitali. Sure, the official score is "Byrd TKO Klitschko", but boxing fans should be able to go beyond the official score.

Cheers, P

pundit wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

pundit wrote: Seems this is minority opinion (and rightly so, of course. A one-armed Vitali proved way too much for little Byrdie).

Chris Byrd KOd Klit. Or did we all miss something?

Seems you did.

I checked boxrec and they've got Byrd winning. You might want to let them know that they've got it wrong.

The Great John L wrote:

pundit wrote:

The Great John L wrote: Chris Byrd KOd Klit. Or did we all miss something?

Seems you did.

I checked boxrec and they've got Byrd winning. You might want to let them know that they've got it wrong.

Maybe you should do a bit more than check boxrec--such as: watching the fight, or read at least a couple of reports.

pundit wrote:At least in everybody's mind there HAS to be a #1 for pure logic necessity. Just count -- 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,... See? It starts' with "1".

Looks like you might have some problems with abstract thinking. I’m pretty sure you can also start counting with 2, but you might find that more difficult.

>>>>I'm not interest in getting into a slugfest. It was nice here in recent weeks, now it seems to be heating up again because some folks can't distinguish factual and personal, but maybe the two of us shouldn't get involved<<<

All I am doing is presenting some actual facts of what really happened in the bout and also some opinion on certain things...if you can't respond in an intelligent way without starting name calling then maybe you should move on, but I'm not going to stop posting, or not post simply because someone doesn't want me to. And if that does not work for you then perhaps you should just keep quiet about this issue.

What I see in your debate is that you want to post things about the bout that you like to believe are correct, but in all honesty they are mostly fictional, “fairy-tale-like” accounts of why Vitali quit, or statements such as “Vitali dominated the fight as long as it lasted” That is fiction, whereas fact states that he dominated the early rounds, but Byrd took over in the second half of the fight.

Several Klitschko fanatics want to look at the arm injury as a freak accident whereas I look at in that the injury occurred because of how Bryd boxed and how he handled himself in the ring…it was Byrd’s boxing that caused the injury.

And then there are several who do not want to give Byrd the proper credit and would choose instead to make-up fantasy-like excuses about why Vitali quit while I give Byrd all credit for winning the bout...just the exact same way that I give Wladimir credit for beating Byrd….there is no difference...fact is fact, but fiction is not no matter how someone might try to spin it!

Chris Byrd stopped Vitali Klitschko fair, square and very legitimately; there was no freak-accident that caused the injury, the injury was because of Chris Byrd! Byrd just did what he does and Vitali injured his arm trying to land...not to mention all the shots that Byrd landed on Vitali's arms and shoulders, which no doubt played a big part as well. Some like to try to claim that Byrd was lucky that Vitali injured himself, but the only thing lucky about that fight is that Vitali was lucky that he did not get knocked out in those final two rounds before he quit!

>>>he dominated Byrd as long as the fight went even though he had only one arm, and as a consequence it seems rather misguided to me to rank Byrd above Vitali. Sure, the official score is "Byrd TKO Klitschko", but boxing fans should be able to go beyond the official score<<<

He most certainly did not! The last three, or four rounds Byrd was clubbing Vitali pretty much at will, pushing the big guy back and Byrd did rock Vitali on several occasions during the second half of the fight.

Following the end of the 7th, 8th and 9th rounds Vitali was looking very much the worse for wear and it was pretty obvious from his physical motions and his movement manners when going to his corner at the end of the final three, or four rounds that Vitali certainly did not want to be in that fight any more and he was certainly very much on the verge of being a knock out victim...so lucking for a way out…he quit. Why did he quit...because of Chris Byrd...plain and simple!!!

barry wrote:>>>>I'm not interest in getting into a slugfest. It was nice here in recent weeks, now it seems to be heating up again because some folks can't distinguish factual and personal, but maybe the two of us shouldn't get involved<<<

All I am doing is presenting some actual facts of what really happened in the bout and also some opinion on certain things...if you can't respond in an intelligent way without starting name calling then maybe you should move on, but I'm not going to stop posting, or not post simply because someone doesn't want me to. And if that does not work for you then perhaps you should just keep quiet about this issue.

OK, I'm out of here.

So why don't the 5 guys who did not vote for Vitali (but for Byrd -- or Ruiz - ) agree among themselves why Klitschko wasn't #1 and look for ways to declare the other 15 votes invalid. Sure you'll enjoy yourselves.

And when you look at your fist and put the thumb up you loudly proclaim: "two".

Cheers, P

Why Vitali wasn't number 1...it's easy, because during the time, if anyone was number 1, it was Chris Byrd!

>>>I think that a lot of the reason why people think of Quitali as the concensus #1 heavyweight after Lewis is that Ring magazine broke its own rules to name him the "World Heavyweight Champion." That title was complete rubbish.<<<

That is exactly right!!! That's also why the Ring belt is no better than any of the other alphabet soup titles!