When Fury beat Vlad he did so by facing a champion who had an entire era named after him that ended that night. He did so in this champions back yard. He did so in 2015 when this champion was on an 11 year win streak and in that year had been rated #2 POUND FOR POUND by Ring Magazine. He did so when, while less impressive in the Jennings fight, people rated Vladimir very highly and far from over the hill (hence being a huge favorite over Fury). This fight was not competitive and Fury didn't have to get out of first gear (since then he's revealed many, many more tools he could have used that he didn't have to). When Fury won he won by a landslide. Fast forward almost two years later. Vlad no longer has belts. He is now 41 years old and considered by many to be well past his best. He has had, by far, his longest period of inactivity in his entire career. He is not on any pound for pound lists. He travels away from his home base for the first time in a long time. All of this is readily apparent as Klitschko is nearly a 3 to 1 underdog. After being dropped Vlad drops Joshua in what was a fight of inches. When Joshua won it was life and death. These two fighters don't "both have a win over Klitschko" and that's that. That's not how boxing works, and that's not how fighters are rated in a historical context. Context matters. I will never abide fans of a fighter parading around the name of a diminished legend without context. It made me sick when Calzaghe fans did it, and it's becoming very tiring when people discuss AJ.
Well, one thing is for damn sure, AJ beat him a lot more impressively and gave us a FOTY. Fury stunk out the joint and gave us one of the most unwatchable painful borefests in recent memory. It was Sanchez-Ajagba horrid. It's like an Taylor-Postol>>>>Crawford-Postol or Inoue-Doniare>>>Rigo-Donaire argument. One fought the opponent's fight, took a lot of damage.... and beat him at his own game, whereas the other outclassed his opponent in a safety first stinker. Which one will people ultimately remember? And yes... that does matter.
Wrong on several points, it was competitive and Fury did not win by landslide. Wlad also looked very gunshy and unimpressive in the Jennings fight. The only reason he was favourite was because he was champion and Fury was just some clumsy unproven gypsy. I've said this many times after bearing myself the pain of watching Wlad Fury a grand total of 3 times - Fury won 7-8 rounds and many of the rounds he won were by 1 or 2 scuffy inside glove slaps and 1 or 2 partially connecting jabs. Wlad has a very strong case for 5 rounds. Wholly unimpressive against a 39 year old too. I think the showboating and jabs that were a few cms from Wlads face swayed many watchers. Unfortunately rounds aren't won by showboating AJs performance was against an older inactive Wlad which you've got to take into account.. But at least it was a damn good fight to watch.
B-b-but There was something off with Wlad that night. He wasn't his usual b-b-brave self. He j-j-just needed to l-l-let his hands go! Uh-huh, ok, right. Wonder why he didn't punch, though? Maybe he took Fury lightly. Or maybe it was Hayden and her baby blues. I mean, Fury only could've lost a daughter, not quite harrowing enough to stop him doing what he needed to do in his fight with an opponent he was sick to his guts of this past weekend, but Hayden's postnatal funk was some serious ****. It's simple. Wlad was never in his life good enough to beat Fury. Fury wasn't letting him set and he wasn't brave enough to throw on the move because he was scared of the inevitable consequences, which is why he saved it all for the 12th. How about them apples? He can tee off on Mariusz Wach like a real hero, though. I will say it again; Wlad is lucky he never ended up getting his rematch, because he was in for what Wilder just got. With no Tony Weeks for Fury to worry about in Manchester, Wlad's would've been bounced all over the MEN until he could go no more. And to hell with any disingenuous rat who wants to talk about positive tests that were mysteriously dug up eighteen months after the fact (i.e. after explanations had apparently been accepted by UKAD) and, uh, coincidentally, in the thick of an ongoing media witch-hunt against Fury. Each of us is living in glass houses as fans of fighters, whether we possess the integrity to acknowledge it or not, and you can call me a hypocrite if you can find one instance of me slamming or discrediting a fighter for popping dirty. Historical Fury-haters — who may or may not have pulled a thin veil over their contemptuous feelings toward him in the years since he clowned Wlad, strategic mileage varies with these guys — are like LDBC Wildettes; they'll never accept reality and give Fury his just dues for Düsseldorf and no amount of reason will ever penetrate them, because they are not remotely reasonable, so who cares. Just enjoy the seethe. It's going to keep coming, because Fury isn't done defeating Ukrainians, and there's plenty of overlap between those who backed that Ukrainian to stop Fury and those who back the current Ukrainian HW titlist to stop Fury. The current Ukrainian HW titlist is much more worthy of laudation than the other one was, but that's beside the point. Their interest in this matchup is every bit as much about hatred of Fury as it is about wishing glory on their guy. And don't let them tell you different, because the receipts are there. The prophecy will be fulfilled. Ain't squat any of these Punchinellos can do about it.
Thanks for the replies, fellas. It sounds like the first two replies don't actually disagree with me. Not seeing anything to suggest that the title of the thread is wrong. AJ-Vlad is most certainly a more entertaining fight than Fury-Vlad. That said, this thread is not about entertainment value, but boxing legacy. This thread is discussing Greatness, not Fame. It seems you both want to discuss HOF legacies and not ATG legacies. To call Vlad-Fury "competitive" is inaccurate. Fury had everything to gain, Vlad had everything to lose. Plan A was working for Fury in a fight that was 10x the magnitude of anything he'd been part of, why should he do anything different? It was a May-Pac type of performance that was low entertainment value but tremendously important for the history of the division.
Of course they're not equal. Fury fought a younger Wlad AND he fought him away from home in Wlads backyard as the B-side. Joshua fought Wlad as the A-side at home in the UK. Wlad also came back after an 18 month layoff while Wlad fought Jennings seven months before he faced Fury. Fury sent a younger and more active version of Wlad into retirement and did it on the road. Joshua got a set up fight at home against an older version and was one punch away from getting knocked unconscious. FURY WIN OVER WLAD > JOSHUA WIN OVER WLAD. Otherwise: YDKSAB.
AJ has not been the same since the Wlad fight. He has always fought like a fighter scared of gassing, engaging in a fire fight and being caught. The Ruiz defeat just reinforced the caution to another level
This seems so painfully obvious to me, and yet I am often seeing people suggesting that...somehow...AJ's win over Vlad is better. Just can't wrap my head around it. I guess it's a YDKSAB and move on situation.
Damn straight! It's a personal opinion but for me the Joshua win over Wlad is far superior for a lot of the reasons CST80 posted. Is Fury tougher and a better all round fighter than AJ? Fair to say yes but you can still use some common sense. Everything is not just black and white. Say what you want about AJ but he just lost a living legend and even Ruiz had good skills even if he is fat! A lot better skills than the bum squad who Furys been ****ing around with for the last few years.
I thought it was common knowledge furys win was better It makes it a lot more interesting when you factor in that Wlad almost got away with cheating by having a foot of padding in the ring
How did Joshua beat him a lot more impressively when he was down and was there for the taking? He was very close to losing that bout and Fury was never in any danger of losing it. He coasted to victory. You're obviously confusing "impressively" with "entertainingly". You're having a tough few days.
They're not the same but they're both impressive. Wlad said he would have fought different against Fury in the rematch, and Fury retired before it could happen. So if Wlad had let his hands go, he may have had a closer fight vs Fury.
This. Wlad had probably the worst camp of his career and if he'd landed literally 2 more jabs every round he'd have swept the fight. Fury also ducked the rematch which tells us what he thought about his chances against a fired up Wlad. His win is neither decisive nor particularly impressive. Granted Wlad was older against AJ but he also looked much more focused and narrowly lost a hard fought affair. I prefer the AJ win. Joshua was also up for a rematch and it was Klitschko that decided (probably on account of his age) that it was not worth it.
