Boxing

In Defence of Wlad Klitschko-Whereto From Here?

By T.Kaye

12.03 - In the United States, they call it Spin-Doctoring, that is to say an attempt being made to make the best of a bad situation , to turn an apparent setback into something tantamount to victory, to turn a total con into an absolute pro. Perhaps that is what I am attempting here. Perhaps I am trying to put a palatable veneer on that most unpalatable of situations in boxing, the rout of a popular rising contender or established champion by somebody considered a lesser fighter, be he a faded former champion, a has been, a never-was or a combination of sorts. That is the impression that would be formed by some readers of this piece. If so, that is unfortunate. The events of Saturday night, March 8th 2003 are but a replication of that event which is common in all sports yet particularly common to boxing: the upset.

I don't know what the odds on Sanders were. Sanders was world-rated and had held the WBU belt. He had toyed with Rahman before Rahman stopped Lewis. To attack Sanders credibility, to attempt to diminish it, is to merely introduce points of pedantry into the argument. The simple fact is that he won. He won in a clear and undisputable fashion, stopping a rising contender who, despite his 40 fights, fought like a rank novice because he, despite his own status as a slow starter, attempted to engage early perhaps the fastest starting heavyweight champion of recent. Analysis of the particulars of this folly are unwarranted-he tried to beat a specialist at his own game, and that was the fight right there. Sanders is a heavy hitter. Manny Steward is, albeit indirectly, on the record as saying so. He told Lewis the exact same before Lewis blew it against Rahman. Sanders caught Klitschko early and often and that, as is so often the case in heavyweight fights, was that. The magnificently conditioned and brave Michael Grant couldn't overcome his horrid start against Lewis. Klitschko couldn't overcome his against Sanders. So let's proceed on foot of the following general assumptions:-

1. It was a turn-up for the books, as big as anything in the last few years
2. Klitschko lost clearly
3. Exactly how he lost is of minimal relevance-he lost and that will suffice for the time being
4. Upsets are common, and this is neither the first of its kind, nor the last
5.This is far from the end for either fighter

Bearing the above in mind, let us ask ourselves just what the cons are for Klitschko.

First, he shouldn't have lost. He is better than Sanders, and if the inevitable rematch should prove contrary, he at least is better than that. Interestingly, the loss itself is of more importance than the consequences of the loss. The immediate consequences of the loss are actually minimal. It's another minus on his record, it's a minus he could and should have avoided. In addition he lost his prestigious WBO belt in a manner he'd rather not have lost it. That means a loss in pay, and the businessman in him, underpaid as he was, should regard this as a setback. The belt was worth as much as, say, the WBA strap, whose value is diminished by the way, and from whom, it was inherited by its last 3 holders. A loss of a strap is a loss, no matter how it is looked at. Another con is the inevitable and bigoted bile that is likely to flow from US "writers", who will inevitably suffer a bout of collective amnesia [as well as a collective bout of relief] in deciding to forget how Sanders near ruined their own beloved Rahman. Vitali will be guilty by association. For proof of this see the comments of the normally objective Lou DiBella about Wladimir after Vitali lost to Byrd. Additionally, the tripe about how if he can't beat Sanders he can't beat so-and-so will start, and this will in turn lead to claims that he never deserved to be in the running for this shot and that shot and doesn't he remind you of Tommy Morrison etc….

Interestingly, the penultimate con leads to the ultimate pro. Wladimir was never in the running for a shot at either the WBC/WBA belts. Nothing is lost in terms of title shots or opportunities. He wasn't scheduled for any in the first place. Bunkum? No. Take a look at the landscape as it stood both before and after his loss. Friday night, March 7, word is that Vitali Klitschko, WBA and WBC #1 is to be made fight Evander Holyfield to secure a shot at Lewis. That means a fight vs. Lewis [for Wlad] was at least 18 months away. Then factor in Tyson. A fight against Lewis was maybe 2yrs away-that's if it was ever going to materialise in the first place.

Vova occupied a void, a pugilistic vacuum where he was free to win and lose almost as often as he sees fit. It's almost as if he wasn't part of the scene. It was only thru losing the WBO belt that he became part of the WBA/WBC ratings. Of course there are cons-see above. So what is the real result of his losing? In answering that we must have some regard to the nature/manner of the loss

First up, his loss was not as embarrassing or as physically debilitating as Lewis' loss to Rahman.So if Lewis can come back from defeat, at that advanced stage of his career, then so can a 26 yoa Wlad. Klitschko was caught cold, caught early and caught often. He was stopped on his feet. No 15 second snoozes here. No 15 round beatings, no sucker punches, a stupid mistake, a wicked left uppercut under the jaw that could have felled anybody. This is his 2nd defeat, his first real beating, involving a healthy dose of contributory negligence. No lasting effects, except the aforementioned embarrassment, "justifiable" bigotry and knock-ons for Brother Vitali. He can but learn from this. Sure he had fought southpaws, but they're not all cuties. His name is not being struck from any sweepstakes, indeed it may be added to them instead, for this veneer of fallibility will cause some to fancy their chances. Of course, this aside, the lost was better avoided-because inevitably, and rightly, his chin is now to be questioned-by Wladimir himself, and self-doubt is an always unlikely and unwelcome addition to the inventory of any athlete. But even the most brutal of stoppages cannot be always taken as proof positive of a poor jaw. Sanders is a noted finisher-indeed before the fight he had 18 Round 1 KO's. After the fight he still had 18 first round KO's. The shots that had stopped 18 fighters in the first round had not stopped Wladimir and encouragement, however minimal, is to be drawn from that. But caught as he was, at that embryonic stage of the fight by the punch he was caught with [he couldn't have seen the uppercut-come hook corkscrewing into the underside of his unprotected jaw] and caught by whom he was caught, it could reasonably be said that the fight was to have only one likely outcome. Klitschko will at least be reminded of his own shortcomings, shortcomings last pointed out to him some 4 years ago. Perhaps another was due. But even Louis had setbacks as a young fighter, and similar to Klitschko, he encountered them before his run at glory. In short, the loss was timely. It's never good to lose a fight, but this loss was as timely as they come.

Pitiful padding it may be, a blessing in disguise is not out of the question, yet a disappointment it remains. Bring on the rematch.

I thank the readers of eastsideboxing.com and fightworld.us for taking the time to read this article and consider its points, and the staff of both sites for allowing me to post it. If this is the end,[and the decision rests with Wladimir and not the scribes and shysters who decided Ali's fate] then above all, I thank Wladimir Klitschko for the nights of fistic entertainment he has not only given me and his other causal fans, but also the many Soviet Ex-patriots, from Brighton Beach NY to Munich, Germany, as well as the millions of people in Kazakhstan, The Ukraine and Russia to whom he has offered and will continue to offer something more than mere entertainment.

Last but not least I offer my congratulations to the new WBO Champ, Corrie Sanders.

0 comments
 


Bookmark and Share

 

If you detect any issues with the legality of this site, problems are always unintentional and will be corrected with notification.
The views and opinions of all writers expressed on eastsideboxing.com do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Management.
Copyright © 2001- 2015 East Side Boxing.com - Privacy Policy