Best Ever In EVERY sport by the numbers...

[Jedi Vader]

It's different for hockey and soccer.

Truth is: Vitali's skin is the wrong color for a lot of people.

In the sport of boxing, most Americans can only have high regard for non-white fighters, especially black fighters.

You think Maradonna is better than Messi?

No chance. If Maradonna wasn't such a **** & was committed to the sport; he would be probably be the greatest ever.

Messi however, to me, is. The guy is insane. He turns up pretty much every game & does it in the big matches as well. The only thing he hasn't done is shine at a WC but he's got plenty of time to do that.

Messi greatest footballer to ever do it.

Messi isn't good enough to sniff Maradona's farts

How anyone can compare the two has either no grasp of football from the past or they have a short memory. Argentina's march to the 86 World Cup would not have been achieved without Maradona. They had outstanding players in that team like Pumpido, Olarticochea, Brown, Valdano and Burruchaga. Maradona was the only one in that team that was a top 20 all time great. He took a much inferior 1990 team to the final too.

Messi cannot even have a great game for argentina, let alone a great tournament.

[THE REED]

You're a moron. Vitali's faced the same exact opposition other greats have when you factor in 80 to 90% of there work.. so they have a few more recognizable names on there resume.. does that exclude all of the tomatoe cans & journeymen they fought who were no better than Vitali's opponents... these are all lies... LOOK at Foremans resume... littered with bums.. so was Louis.... even ALI FACED nonamers for the majority of his carreer.. what about Holmes.. all or most were hapless victims of the jab.. it's your logic that is flawed.

Yeah... minor detail.

[sfalcus]

To be the best, you gotta beat the best imo

[spyvsspy]

YOU'RE WRONG... i'm biased towards sports that don't make the backpage headlines even if they gave the papers hush money to acknowledge them.. Shoot even the Horses make the sports section... lol @ your chutzpah!

You just discredited yourself with your ****** comment. I would be wasting my time debating this anymore with a dumb azz chutzpah like you.

[Light_Speed]

if you saw the landed shots & the unlanded shots on him for all his 45 fights... you'd see the highest discrepancy in heavyweight history

But not in BOXING history, and not against great fighters.

You got jokes... son.. Vitali has his last 7 of his fights without a losing a rd. does that mean the other 38 he didn't lose a rd? Only means he didn't lose more than 10 rds in those fights.... your boy has 23 fights unaccounted for & he was certainly Not A MASTER of the sweet science... so unless he ko'ed all 23 fighters in one rd which we all know he didn't i suggest you come back with your AGAME........ kapish!

He KOd 19 of them in the first round, so that leaves 4 fights where he may or may not have lost more than 2 rounds.

Here's the bottomline :

Vitali is not the most accurate fighter ever - FACT

Vitali is not undefeated - FACT

Vitali has never beaten a great fighter - FACT

Vitali doesn't have the highest KO ratio in boxing history - FACT

Vitali doesn't have the most number of title defenses - FACT

Vitali doesn't have the most number of championship wins - FACT

Vitali is not ranked #1 in his division - FACT


That's the best fighter ever?

[cupocity303]

Vitali has never beaten a great fighter - FACT

:

Why do people keep using this distorted argument, over and over?

Again, if you are the Champion within the Heavyweight Division, then everybody else who is a contender cannot be great, unless they beat you. Unless they're established as Greats at a lower weight Division, moving up to Heavyweight (which I'm pretty sure you wouldn't give Vitali credit for).

The only other way is to spare some contender (i.e. Povetkin), let them win a vacant Title, and defend it for 10 or 15 times, before you give that guy his first beating, and then maybe he has what would be considered a "Great one" on his Boxrec stats.

Why are people discriminating against Fighters who dominate their opposition 90% of the time? Yes, Vitali officially lost against Lewis in a Fight of the Year candidate. He's made up for it, by winning every round since. Does he need to invent a Time Machine and bring some of these "Greats" from the past to fight him or what?

[Light_Speed]

Why do people keep using this distorted argument, over and over?

Again, if you are the Champion within the Heavyweight Division, then everybody else who is a contender cannot be great, unless they beat you. Unless they're established as Greats at a lower weight Division, moving up to Heavyweight (which I'm pretty sure you wouldn't give Vitali credit for).

The only other way is to spare some contender (i.e. Povetkin), let them win a vacant Title, and defend it for 10 or 15 times, before you give that guy his first beating, and then maybe he has what would be considered a "Great one" on his Boxrec stats.

Why are people discriminating against Fighters who dominate their opposition 90% of the time? Yes, Vitali officially lost against Lewis in a Fight of the Year candidate. He's made up for it, by winning every round since. Does he need to invent a Time Machine and bring some of these "Greats" from the past to fight him or what?

It's not a distorted argument it's a valid one. Vitali hasn't beaten a single great fighter. Is that is fault? No but you still need to take this into account when it comes to all time rankings. And I didn't just use one argument, I listed several other reasons why you can't say he has the "best numbers" in boxing and is the best ever.

[daggum]

Why do people keep using this distorted argument, over and over?

Again, if you are the Champion within the Heavyweight Division, then everybody else who is a contender cannot be great, unless they beat you. Unless they're established as Greats at a lower weight Division, moving up to Heavyweight (which I'm pretty sure you wouldn't give Vitali credit for).

The only other way is to spare some contender (i.e. Povetkin), let them win a vacant Title, and defend it for 10 or 15 times, before you give that guy his first beating, and then maybe he has what would be considered a "Great one" on his Boxrec stats.

Why are people discriminating against Fighters who dominate their opposition 90% of the time? Yes, Vitali officially lost against Lewis in a Fight of the Year candidate. He's made up for it, by winning every round since. Does he need to invent a Time Machine and bring some of these "Greats" from the past to fight him or what?

he's made up losing to an all time great by beating up a bunch of slobs? i don't think the two are equivalent. vitali won't fight the best fighter of his era and he's lost to the 2 best fighters he's faced so far. how is he great? he's only beaten 7 top 10 fighters and he's 40 years old? i don't get it.