VIDEO: Thoughts on Fury-Wilder 3

I feel the same. I think the fact the two knockdowns for Wilder came directly after everyone thought he was done coloured their impressions of the rest of the fight and made it seem more dramatic than it was, especially given the fact Wilder visibly rocked Fury late in the fight despite looking ready to go. It's probably one of those fights where you needed to watch it live to feel the full edge-of-your-seatness and that feeling that anything could happen.

 

One of the greatest trilogies ever? Not even close.

 

There was a lot of drama, a lot of guts, and genuine bad blood, but due to its sloppiness, overall skill level (Wilder, mostly), and the fact that most of us had Fury winning roughly 24 of the 30 rounds they fought, I don't see it as being that close to the Bowe-Holyfield series. I don't see Fury as being forever altered, either. Wilder didn't land enough for that to be the case. Still, it was a trilogy that should be praised and put on a pedestal, given the state of the division. Every generation needs it defining fights and heavyweight ones usually carry the most significance. Fury-Wilder III put on a nice show for the Heavyweight Championship of the World.

 

This is long but a couple things.

First, I loved both series. They were very different, but I loved both.

Second, you giving Wilder six rounds in three fights is nonsense ... but I get that some of you guys are going to be biased about this for some time. And I'm not really interested in talking about that right now.

My main point is keep in mind the Bowe-Holyfield series was basically one point away in Fight 2 from being a 2-0-1 series win for Bowe, too. And it arguably should've been ... at the BARE MINIMUM. If not a 3-0 sweep for Bowe.

In Fight 1, Bowe threw 236 MORE punches than Evander and he landed 115 more punches than Evander. And two judges only gave Evander three rounds (117-111 twice in Bowe's favor). It's the kind of scoring you'd expect when one boxer is so much busier and lands so many more shots.

In Fight 2, the only fight Bowe lost in the series by a majority decision, Bowe threw 270 MORE punches than Evander threw . ... and Bowe LANDED 100 more punches.

But Evander didn't go down in Fight 2, and the Fan Man interrupted things for the better part of an hour, and everything seemed very topsy turvy that night.

Bowe certainly threw and landed FAR more shots. Nearly the same as Fight 1. The only difference was no knockdowns in Fight 2 and the long fan man delay.

It's the only time I've ever seen a defending heavyweight champion throw a 270 more punches than his challenger and land a 100 more punches than his challenger and still have the title taken from him.

In fight 3, again, Bowe LANDED nearly 100 more punches (98 to be exact) than Evander, and Bowe threw 278 MORE punches than Evander. (Bowe scored two knockdowns/Holyfield scored one knockdown.)

In all three fights, Bowe out-threw and outlanded Evander by roughly the same number of punches. Two of those fights were considered clear wins for Bowe. The second, inexplicably, went to Holyfield.

Can you imagine the uproar if Fury threw 270 more punches than Wilder, landed 100 more punches than Wilder, if Fury never went down ... and he LOST the decision?

Hell, Wilder threw 100 more punches than Fury in their first fight and Fury landed 13 more punches than Wilder. And Wilder scored two knockdowns to Fury's none. And it ended in a tie. And some of you thought that was unfair TO FURY.

Compare that to what happened to Bowe in Fight 2. You could live another 100 years and never see that again. Evander caught a HUGE break.

So, while all three fights were exciting, you're literally one point in Fight 2 from that series ending 2-0-1 as well ... if not a 3-0 clean sweep by Bowe.


Finally, over their three fights, Bowe threw 784 MORE punches than Evander threw. (Not total punches thrown. Bowe threw 784 MORE punches than Evander threw) ... Bowe LANDED 313 MORE punches than Evander landed ... And Bowe scored three knockdowns to Evander's one.

By comparison, over their three fight series, Fury only threw 56 more punches than Wilder. Not 784 ... just 56.

And Fury landed 139 MORE punches than Wilder over their three fights combined ... That was nearly as many punches Bowe outlanded Holyfield by in their first fight alone ... Fury scored five knockdowns in the series. Wilder scored four knockdowns.

I understand that aesthetically, Bowe and Holyfield are more classic boxers and Fury and Wilder are more brawlers. So that may be more pleasing to watch.

But, in terms of the closeness of the actual battles, the Fury-Wilder series was probably closer.

The number of punches thrown by the two were closer in number. The punches landed by the two were closer in number. Both Fury and Wilder scored more knockdowns. The anticipation that Fury-Wilder could end at any moment was also always there as the fights unfolded.

And, frankly, the stakes were higher in the Fury-Wilder series. All three fights were for the WBC heavyweight title. The last two for the Ring/Lineal championship, as well.

The last Bowe-Holyfield fight wasn't even for a title. There were three alphabet champs and the Lineal champ (Foreman) running around. Bowe didn't win anything.

And, having ordered all three Bowe-Holyfield PPVs and having watched Bowe-Holyfield live as they happened, other than the moment Bowe dropped Holyfield in fight one, and the craziness in the closing seconds of fight three, there was never any anticipation either man was going to KO the other at any moment. We were all just sitting back enjoying the fights and trying to score it.

Very long story short, the Bowe-Holyfield series has had nearly 30 years to grow in stature. While the Fury-Wilder series had had less than a week.

They were very different series. Let the current biases die down and give the Fury-Wilder series a decade or two ... and I'm sure it will grow on you.

 

Not to be sarcastic, but no ****. Is this something you never realized before?

Every sporting event is less dramatic when you know the outcome.

I'm certainly less shocked watching John Tate fall face first to the canvas against Mike Weaver with 45 seconds for the 200th time than I was that night WHEN IT HAPPENED and my mind was blown!

People get bored watching Dempsey-Tunney II now. A couple people THAT NIGHT actually had heart attacks and at least one guy died listening to that fight, they were so worked up. When you know Tunney will get up and Dempsey will lose, it removes A LOT of the luster.

Nobody has had a heart attack watching Dempsey-Tunney II since that night. Trust me. (LOL)

Hell, I've heard people on this board say they didn't think Ali-Frazier 1 or the Thrilla in Manila were all that great. They were two of the biggest most entertaining fights of the 20th Century. But, when you know who wins, and you sit there wondering how long 15 rounds is going to last, and you know none of these shots are going to knock anyone cold, some here have said they were tedious or not that great.

Sports are meant to be watched live. The excitement, the emotions and the anticipation of not knowing what's coming next IS DRAMA.

It's like the definition of Drama.

When you go "This is the round Fury goes down twice, but he gets up and finishes the round ...hmm, that doesn't seem as dramatic as people who watched it when it was happening described it" ... that's because you've lost about 99.9 percent of the drama.

The people watching it live didn't know he was going to go down the first time or the second time or whether he'd get up either time.

Knowing the outcome isn't the same experience AT ALL. The people who watched it that night will always be able to draw on and remember the excitement they felt. You never will feel the same thing they experienced because you knew what was coming before you saw it the first time.

I thought that was pretty much common sense.

 

Many good points there - however, for me personally, what I would term TRULY ATG fights are ones that get the juices going no matter how many times you come back to them - due to quality, adjustments, counter-adjustments and so forth.

Maybe it's because of how wild and sloppy Wilder is most of the time, but adding in an obviously out of sorts Fury in to the equation dampened my enjoyment of it significantly - sweet science it was not - and FWIW, I watched it on a deferred stream, but did NOT KNOW THE OUTCOME.

Maybe it just suffered a bit in contrast to the Usyk vs AJ fight a few weeks prior which I thought although had less drama was fought at a much higher quality throughout.

 

Just my opinion of course. I think its up there for heavyweight. Far from the best one ever even at Heavyweight but its pretty damn good. To each there own innit.

 

EPIC as usual.

 

I meant to say 23 of the 30 rounds they fought, but plenty of people had it 9-3 for Fury in the first fight. I had it 8-4 in the first fight, gave Wilder one round in the second, and two in the third.

To me, Fury-WIlder should have been a 3-0 sweep for Fury just as Bowe-Holyfield should have been a clean sweep for Bowe. The difference is, and this is as far as I am aware of, more people had Holyfield taking the second than people had Wilder winning the first.

In regard to the stakes, the Lineal Championship was on the line in 2 out of 3 fights in both of the series. Personally I couldn't care less about alphabet trinkets, but the only reason Bowe-Holyfield didn't have one is because Bowe punted it. He didn't want to make a b.s. defense before taking on Holyfield a third time. He made the right call. There is more to this, though. Bowe-Holyfield had a greater impact historically than Fury-Wilder precisely because they were a significantly better overall tandem than Fury-Wilder. Legacy has to be a factor when we talk about stakes.

I think the combination of two other things you mentioned are important. Bowe and Holyfield were more classic boxers and that was more pleasing to watch, but they were also closer to their primes and more evenly paired, whereas there is a sizable talent gap between Fury and Wilder. The punch stats, as you illuminated, were nowhere near one another and this meant that both Bowe and Holyfield took far more clean shots collectively than Fury or Wilder did. For instance, Bowe landed 225 power punches against Holyfield in the first fight alone, meaning he connected with 15 more than Fury landed on Wilder in all three fights combined.

It's also the totality of the three bouts together which differentiate them. Outside of round 12, the first Fury-Wilder bout wasn't that exciting. The knockdown in round 9 was far from devastating and it appeared more the result of Fury being in poor condition and being sloppy than anything. It was a fairly shabby boxing match.

Fight two was largely one-way traffic and fight three was too, though to a lesser degree. I don't have a problem conceding that fight three of Fury-Wilder may have a had a greater degree of uncertainty as to who would wind up winning than any of the Bowe-Holyfield fights, but the latter still had palpable danger. It wasn't akin to Tua-Ibeabuchi where you somewhat had the sense that neither man could bring the other down. Both Bowe and Holyfield were hurt multiple time in their fights and I think you have wrongly simplified it. Holyfield was not only dropped in round 11 of the first, but badly hurt in the 10th and rocked on other occasions. Furthermore, Bowe hit the deck pretty hard in the third contest and Holyfield looked as if he might be able to stop him. Bowe clawed back to earn the knockout.

Rivalries usually do get more glowing reviews as time passes. I have said similar things about Alvarez-Golovkin in the past. And as I stated, I believe Fury-Wilder III is the heavyweight of this era and I enjoyed it more than Joshua-Klitschko. I had fun with all of the drama that it brought. However, seeing as we have over 100 years of history to work off of, I don't think the Fury-Wilder series enhances its prestige among the upper echelon rivalries over 30 or so more years. Bowe-Holyfield and Ali-Frazier pitted greats amongst each other. Fury may wind up being an all-timer, but Wilder has virtually no shot at it.

 

The 3rd fight was exciting and dramatic but as many have said it was devoid of much finesse and became more of a street brawl. The entire rivalry was mainly one sided in favor of Fury but Wilder's punching power was always going to make it interesting.
It's far from being the best HW fight of all time but it's definitely the best fight that we've seen from the HW division in a while, which is something the sport really needed.

 

Great as always, Rummy!

 

Any idea why?

 

Great stuff, Rummy.

I do wonder, when history looks back on Fury vs Wilder III, it will be seen as a great war but not a great fight? Skills went out of the window as soon as Wilder got dropped. Doesn't make it any less of a spectacle but probably does mean it should be ranked below some of the others you highlighted which had similar drama and brutality but more skill on display...