Heavyweight top ten looking something like this now?

Unify fully the division.

 

Do you have every other division's champ as vacant? If so, I respect the consistency even if it's not the route I'd take.

 

Wlad already possesses the WBA, WBO, IBF, IBO belts and is recognized as the Lineal champ. The importance of the WBC strap to justify his reign is grossly overstated it's just another also ran that happens to have a bargaining chip. We know Wlad wants the strap whether he gets it's is very difficult ascertain. He has to consistently make mandatory fights, then he has to navigate cable networks, promotional teams, alphabet agendas etc. It's impressive he's unified this much.

 

I don't know, Mac. I guess you've laid out all the bullet points for explaining why many have Fury that high. I'm just not moved to accept him that high.

I'm no less a critic of present-day HW than anybody, but to me Fury being the number two man (when I'm not sure I consider him top fifteen h2h, as in there are well over a dozen men I think beat him including those with lesser resumes; for instance Takam would absolutely blow his block off, clean, of that I'm 100% certain, but the man has sh|t for official wins outside Thompson and old Grant/Botha, most of his stock coming from good showings in the Perez draw and Povetkin loss) is just untenable. I just can't wrap my head around it. The division can't possibly be that bad.

I just have a very, very, very low opinion of the man's ability. I get that rankings are based on what's actually been done given what's actually available relative to what everybody else has actually done given the same materials at their disposal, but ****. This guy? With his crowning achievements being post-Vitali (thereby worthless) Johnson, 37-year-old career 200lber 1-1-at-HW-at-the-time Cunningham (unimpressive fashion at that, in what could've arguably - IMO easily - been a TKO and then DQ if not PTS win for Cunningham instead...) and inconsistent headcase Chisora x2, once green as grass and once after he put together four decent W's in a row (but that only after losing three in a row)??

That just doesn't seem right to me.

I get your logic for demoting Povetkin and Pulev, and why that keeps the contention door revolving and everything. The Jennings stuff, we'll just have to agree not to. I think Perez is very clearly a better HW than Chisora (and should've been ranked somewhere around the same as him when they fought Jennings and Fury II respectively). Cunningham, while he may be a better HW (which I'd debate; better p4p fighter no doubt, but whom that he beat would Szpilka not? And he beat Adamek clearly, by a wider margin than anyone thought Cunningham may have deserved to when he got robbed in their rematch) and may have gone on to do some nice things since, but when he lost to Fury he wasn't a better (and shouldn't have been a higher rated) HW than Szpilka when he lost to Jennings. Fedosov can, yes, be painted with the same "just okay" brush as Chisora I and Johnson, but is a higher grade of "just okay". Fair-to-good, whereas Chisora I and Johnson are more on the opposite border, poor-to-fair, to simplify it.

But the Jennings comparison aside, all you say works, logically. I just can't understand how someone that flawed, with only three remotely decent (by world standards) opponents defeated, one in controversial fashion and one after he ceased to be a threat, gets him #2.

I might just have to stop following the HW division.

Stiverne vs. Arreola being for a major belt felt like the last straw. If that lug gets his mitts around one (and being ranked that high, as you say nearly universally, makes it seem dangerously plausible) that might really tear it for me.

What a HORRIBLE division. If you trimmed the fat and just deactivated all the complete jokes in the rankings it would really just be Klitschko rematching (and dominating) Povetkin and Pulev over and over - and Povetkin and Pulev facing off in between for the right to be next.

 

^ that last paragraph makes sense. If you asked me the best three heavies I would say Wlad, Povetkin and Pulev. But because Pulev just lost and doesn't have any redeemable wins yet we must slide him down. I for one have not been impressed with Fury's skills (or Wilder's to a lesser degree) but Fury has a few decent wins and was willing to face Haye and now either Wlad or Wilder so I give him credit unlike many heavies he is seeking challenges.
Takam would prob beat both he and Wilder. I think the divsion is actually on an upswing. I really like Parker. Joshua looks good too. There are a few other.,

 

I can't understand why arreola has been getting thrown under a bus. He lost close to Adamek and wide to Vitali going into the first Stiverne fight and knocked off Mitchell after. Everyone not named Vitali or adamek got smashed, without fail, which includes plenty of top 25 heavies. He has some talent and beating him means something.

 

Why not?

Michael not Leon.

 

I have a question. Who does Pulev return against? I have a feeling he will be avoided like the plague. Because he a chance if ppl fight him to re-establish himself. I think he could beat both Fury and Wilder if given the chance.

 

:rofl


And yesterday, you called someday's post "harsh."

 

That's a good fight. The winner would be right back into title contention too. The loser relegated to gatekeeper status. If I were Pulev and Don King I make it happen. Since both are on outside looking in.

 

• [yt]eDfTP_JnLsQ[/yt]

This clown, if he plays his cards right, could end up participating in a historic four-belt HW unification? :-(


Chisora x2, Johnson, Cunningham (by the skin of his teeth, could've lost by TKO2, got away with murder rabbit punching a smaller man to bail himself out from a loss down on the cards), and possibly Wilder could pave the way for this goofball to be the B-side in the epic "all the marbles" showdown? ...and with a lucky shot, he could become THE undisputed man? This slob, in the history books, as that, with that little in the way of accomplishment (much of it checkered/asterisked) under his belt?

The heavyweight division wouldn't even be a joke at that point. I'd seriously consider a full-on boycott, as far as petitioning every sanctioning body in the world to just stop recognizing fights above 200lbs going forward.


...and no, Mac, I don't think Fury vs. Wilder eliminates a pretender in the least. I think it eliminates one pretender but, more importantly (and the bad here by far outweighs the good of having eliminated one) unduly rewards another.