All depends if your preference is quality or quantity. He's beaten Wilder and Wlad when he was the lineal HW champ, those are already better wins than some guys who are in the top 15 or even top 10 possess. If he beats AJ then his resume will be undeniably deserving of a top 15 place at minimum, if Fury can also beat Usyk then IMO he's a lock for top 10.
I don't wanna sound like a **** but I like my top ten guys go have both lol I don't rate Wilder highly. To me, he's not better fighter than Razor Rudduck. Tyson beating him twice is more impressive than Fury drawing with him and stopping him, for instance. The Wlad is good, and the fact that Wlad was champ adds to it (I think it's Fury's best win by some distance so far), but it's the only which will be known as a top win IMO. Even still, there's plenty of guys who've beat aging all-time greats, especially at HW. I rate both Joshua and Usyk in a similar way to how I rate the Witherspoon/Byrd/Norton/Pinky type guys. Very good fighters and depending on the manner of it, potentially great wins. If Fury trounced the pair of them, he'd have two great wins IMO. As a lock for the top ten would just be hard for me to admit though, man. Usyk and Joshua are good, bit are they good enough to compete with all of Frazier's, Marciano's, or Tyson's résumé (more or less) on their own? I don't think so. It's probably a me thing because I'm a cynical, pessimistic twat
You make a good point. People say "Wilder is overrated" or whatever, and "Wlad was old", but honestly, Lennox Lewis and even Larry Holmes don't have 2 or 3 top wins that are much better than that, if at all.
No AJ and Usyk don't compete with Frazier, Tyson and Marciano's best wins but they absolutely do compete with Wlad, Vitali and maybe Jack Dempsey who most people have in the top 10. Vitali's best win is Corrie Sanders or Sam Peter. Wlad's best wins are Povetkin and Chris Byrd - I'd take AJ, Usyk, Wilder and Wladimir as better wins over the K Bros best wins.
Yeah, I suppose. I was just going off the bottom three names in my own top ten, which are those three guys. Wlad only ranks highly IMO because of how many title defences he made. I don't think it's a stretch to say that Fury will reach higher levels than Vitali or Dempsey, though.
Lewis has at least three wins better than Wilder. And at least one better than Wlad, and two that are at least two that are even. Holmes has plenty of wins better than Wilder IMO. Depends on how you rate that version of Wlad, but I don't think it's a stretch to say that Holmes has better wins than him.
Wilder stopped Ruddock who was honestly better than Wilder and his win over Mercer and his absolute destruction of Golota far surpasses the Wilder win. Lewis beat past it Holyfield who is on a similar tier to past it Wladimir and beat Vitali Klitschko who is better than past it Wladimir
On no planet was Razor Ruddock better. Razor Ruddock lost to Dave Jaco, for God's sake. Watch it sometime. Neither was Golota. Neither was Mercer. Christ. (LOL) Having watched them live from the amateurs to pros, I can't believe people actually type this garbage. Mercer not only lost to Jesse Ferguson, he tried to bribe him during the fight to go down. (LOL) And everyone stopped Jesse Ferguson. He drew with Marion Wilson, and they robbed Marion. (LOL) People who type this stuff are invariably the same guys who will admit on other threads that they have only seen a couple of the fights of the people they spend hours insisting were awesome. The Wilder bashing needs to stop. You guys just sound like morons, honestly. I'm going to be bumping old Wilder threads for YEARs around here after you guys finally wake up. Some of the stuff you guys have said is so cringeworthy.
Wasn't that very early in his Career ? He improved significantly since then to the point where he murdered Dokes and went Toe to Toe with pre prison Mike Tyson. Tyson Fury for example should have lost against John McDermott back in his early days but that was his early days, he improved. Those 2 wars with Mike Tyson are better than anything Wilder has ever done. If he went to war with Fury then you'd have a point but thats not what happened, he got starched when Fury pressed the action
The irony of this statement is golden. Some of the dimmest things I've ever read on this forum are stuff you and a few others have claimed about Deontay Wilder. It's laughable.
Well, what's clear is that AJ and Fury need each other. Neither would be looked upon very favourably if they never fight. Or should I say, a lot less favourably. Fury is lineal, but his rival claimant has a very credible claim to the title himself. At this point, neither is the man. Both need to eliminate their most notable rival. Which is why fans are getting annoyed. All this talk and bluster, but still apparently nothing concrete in place yet. The story seems to change from week to week. Also, one has to ask what a win over Fury does for his legacy. They're both in the same boat.
Neither is? How does Joshua have a credible claim HE is the world champion? All the belts Joshua has he won from Andy Ruiz. And all those belts were Fury's, and he never lost them in the ring. Joshua and Ruiz (and Charles Martin and Joseph Parker) never beat Fury for those belts. Those IBF, WBA, WBO belts have been passed around almost as much as the guys in the 80s - like Spoon, Dokes, Coetzee, Page, Thomas and Tubbs - passed belts around. Fury has won all the titles at heavyweight (as well as the Ring belt) and won them by defeating the two longest reigning champions in the 2010s. Fury is the world champ.
Someday he will fight, maybe at the same time as the general election, he will become rusty, who knows. The division has too much drama, just like a soap opera.
