Replies

[BrutalBodyShots]

I read that this fight is happening in September. Thoughts?

I'm personally not a fan of the smallest relevant heavyweight fighting the biggest relevant heavyweight, but whatever. I kinda like Adamek and think he'll give it his all, but there's a huge natural size difference that he's up against.

[BGv2.0]

I have no idea why so many people seem to give Adamek any more of a chance than most of the bums the Klits fight. He looked like absolute shit against a fat arreola and was lucky to even get out of that fight, had it not been for Arreola's horrific conditioning, he would have gotten beat down ugly. He's a skilled fighter, but due to the sheer size issue...he has little chance of actually pulling off the upset with either Klit.

NOW ON TO THIS BS!

The Klits are definitly dominant HOF fighters who quite possibly would have dominated any era of boxing due to their unique size and athletic ability.

How can you type that? Based on what? They have dominated a GOD AWFUL HW division. Vitali lost to a couple of the last remnants of that division of the 90's...one to Byrd, the other to Lewis...and I'm not even taking the crap losses by Wlad into account.....yet you are going to tell me they would have "dominated" in the same fashion with the likes of Mercer, Holy, Tyson, Bowe, Lewis, Byrd, Morrison, Foreman, Holmes, Rudduck, Moorer, Tua, Tucker, Bruno, McCall, etc????

No F'N way.....no doubt they get wins..but they get losses to to a few on that list as well....and you can do the same comparison to other HW era's as well.

There is no way you can allow yourself in to being taken in by their supposed dominance in THIS era....because this is the worst EVER...that's a fact....not even the once rediculed division of the early 80's touches this one.

[The Original MrF...]

I have no idea why so many people seem to give Adamek any more of a chance than most of the bums the Klits fight. He looked like absolute shit against a fat arreola and was lucky to even get out of that fight, had it not been for Arreola's horrific conditioning, he would have gotten beat down ugly. He's a skilled fighter, but due to the sheer size issue...he has little chance of actually pulling off the upset with either Klit.

NOW ON TO THIS BS!




How can you type that? Based on what? They have dominated a GOD AWFUL HW division. Vitali lost to a couple of the last remnants of that division of the 90's...one to Byrd, the other to Lewis...and I'm not even taking the crap losses by Wlad into account.....yet you are going to tell me they would have "dominated" in the same fashion with the likes of Mercer, Holy, Tyson, Bowe, Lewis, Byrd, Morrison, Foreman, Holmes, Rudduck, Moorer, Tua, Tucker, Bruno, McCall, etc????

No F'N way.....no doubt they get wins..but they get losses to to a few on that list as well....and you can do the same comparison to other HW era's as well.

There is no way you can allow yourself in to being taken in by their supposed dominance in THIS era....because this is the worst EVER...that's a fact....not even the once rediculed division of the early 80's touches this one.

I can easily say that the Klits would have been dominant in any era of boxing. Their size and their ability to use their size to hit and not get hit is incredible. I'm not so sure that this era of heavyweights is sooo terrible. Its certainly not 80's or 40's bad. It could easily be that these guys are so good. I cant help but to bring up old stuff. If the Klits were from a ranch in Montana, they'd ultimately be much more popular in this country. Their standing among many would be elevated because they are American's. They would have had their stiffest tests with the the 90's crop due to the closer equity in size and athleticism. Bowe and Lewis(who has a W against Vitaly) would probably have given them their stiffest tests because they were the best big men of the era.

The Klits would have wiped through the 80's. Too many guys that never reached their potential due to drugs or whatever. the 80's were horrible. Holmes would have given them their stiffest challenge. I think Larry would have stood a chance at winning a decision against them. I think that in 10 fights with either Klit, Larry would lose at least 6 out of 10.

The Klits would have dominated the 70's too. Ali, Frazier and Norton were all too small. 6'2" 210 aint gonna cut it, just ask Chris Byrd and Eddie Chambers. No they arent Ali or Frazier, but they were both good heavyweights in the 2000's, who measure up sizewize and stylewize with Ali. Would Ali/Wlad be that much different from Eddie Chambers/Wlad?? What would 1973's Ali have done that much differently against a guy thats 6'6" and 240lbs with a great jab?? Foreman stood a punchers chance, but again Foreman showed the ability to be outboxed by a lighter hitting Ali. How many rounds would it take before Foreman realized he was not able to get off and getting beaten to the punch mercilessly?

I dont really want to even go to the pre 1970's. Vitaly would have wiped the floor with Marciano, Charles, Liston because they were either way to small or too slow afoot. Young Cassius Clay would have the same troubles Chris Byrd(also with a W against the older Klit) had. He's fast and great defensively, but would have trouble getting close enough to hit Wlad without taking fire himself.

Then we talk about Joe Louis, who, at his best was 190 pounds. he blew up to over 200 late in his career, but was methodical and robotic. I've heard some people question his era of heavyweights. Jack Dempsey, I wont even entertain a conversation about him and the Klits. Same with Jack Johnson.

I dont think they go 100-0 against the top tier guys in any era. I'm not saying they would be unbeatable, but I do think that they'd win a lot more than they would lose. They would come away as dominant because their wins would greatly outnumber their loses to guys in other era's. Much of their dominance may be due to improvements in sports medicine, dieting, work outs and equipment. I think all of those things play a role in these guy's success. Some folks are just too enamored due to the historical context a great fighter such as Ali fought in. What is not taken into consideration is the fact that athletes in general, today are bigger, stronger and faster than they were yesterday. In boxing, the Klits may very well be the best big men ever.

[blackbelt2003]

What is not taken into consideration is the fact that athletes in general, today are bigger, stronger and faster than they were yesterday.

Sorry dude, that may be true in athletics or racing or any sport where you can measure speed and power...but it's not true in boxing.

Today's fighters are NOT faster or stronger than previous generations. BIGGER I'll give you. Perhaps more powerful. But CERTAINLY not faster or stronger or better conditioned.


The reason is that in sports where performances are measured you can see definitive improvements over time. A guy runs the 100ms in 12 seconds, the next guy can quantifiably measure his results against that and improve on it. He can shave tenths of a second off the time and develop his speed against it.

If there were no stopwatches, and he had no clue what the previous guy had ran 100ms in, I guarantee he'd never improve on it. That's how records get broken in sports like this, and the perception is that athletes are faster, stronger etc...and that's true, but only BECAUSE the performances are measured.


In boxing, however, the performances are not measured. A punch speed isn't timed. A fighter's strength isn't measured. Therefore the boxers aren't training to shave split seconds off their speed, and therefore the overall speed and strength of the fighter's HASN'T improved.

In fact, I'd venture to say that due to the generally easier lifestyle of today's western population, the majority of fighter's natural strength attributes has DECREASED a little, which is why Eastern countries where they still live a hard slog have began to take over. The scientific training may have added to their explosive power, but strength is more than that.



Just my two cents, as I keep hearing about faster, stronger athletes, but when I see old 70's vids I see guys just as fast as today's fighters. In fact, with the benefit of today's high quality, HD video, Ali et al would probably look even faster!!!



Black