If Fury ducks Usyk, Joshua will earn even more respect for fighting him twice when he could have vacated the belt. If Fury fights at Wembley in April against someone other than Usyk, it will not sell well at all. Anderson would appeal to American fans I guess. Fury Usyk won't be Undisputed as well if it takes place afterwards. Frank Warren is probably happy with this as Dubois is mandatory for the WBA, so either Usyk will end up fighting Dubois or Dubois will have a vacant World Title shot. I think the IBF mandatory is due soon too (likely to be Hrgovic).
Sure, https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/amer-abdallah-on-the-undisputed-negotiations.699698/ Though, perhaps I am over stating my theory, as my intial thread had zero traction haha Though I did see @Trafford posting something very similar a few days later about Saudi negotiation rumours.
I don't buy in to this Joshua deserves credit for fighting Usyk narrative because he could've vacated. First of all Usyk wasn't fancied after the Chisora fight. Then Joshua also insisted on a rematch clause. Then there's the fact him and his team have done nothing but talk up undisputed since he became champion and even made a movie about it. He can't exactly claim it's his only goal and he's all about legacy and fighting the best then vacate a belt can he? He was cornered and he had to take the fight. Fury has to take this fight and it will look bad if he doesn't. But Joshua got everything he wanted from those fights, who knows what the issue is here.
"First of all Usyk wasn't fancied after the Chisora fight" - He only dropped 3 rounds and although a lot of people didn't think it was a terrific performance, they all knew he was ready for the top fighters. "Then Joshua also insisted on a rematch clause" - Every top fighter has a rematch clause in their contracts. Nothing new there - it's standard negotiations. "He was cornered and he had to take the fight" - They could have easily said negotiations were taking too long and fought someone else, something Fury is doing now. They didn't and Joshua decided to fight one of the all-time greats.
Disagree. The odd person here and there still believed but most wrote him off. I remember Adam Smith saying Joshua skipped out of the arena after as though he didn't see anything to worry about. Not on mandatories. Fury didn't with Whyte. The point is that unless he got it he was willing to vacate. How can the take on all comers throwback fighter obsessed with undisputed countenance relinquishing a belt? Usyk was mandatory. After the Fury fight collapsed the WBO called it and gave him a deadline to agree a deal otherwise purse bids would've been ordered. He didn't choose to do anything, this wasn't valour. It was fight him or destroy your brand by vacating.
You make some good points but they could have easily vacated the WBO belt and made some BS excuse. I always thought Usyk would beat Joshua and I wasn't unimpressed with his performance against Chisora but I guess I was in the minority. Either way, Joshua and Usyk ended up fighting each other in their next fights. Hopefully the Fury Usyk talks can be reinvigorated. Another issue is that for it to take place in Saudi Arabia, they would want control of the TV rights which Warren and Arum aren't happy with.
It is strange how Warren and Hearn don't seem to get on, but when it came to freezing out Usyk they were suddenly working hand in glove.
I remember Hearn sounding very wary when that fight cropped up. Usually he's full of himself when discussing possible Joshua opponents.
Usyk ha clearly has best wins beating the guy with the best record in the division back to back in AJ. Beating Chisora who is better than anyone Wilder has beaten. Wilder has a slightly better win than Chsiors in heating Ortiz compared to Chisora best win against Takam (who is better than anyone Wilder beat aside from Ortiz). Similar level of records between Chisora and Wilder in terms of overall quality of opposition beaten (although Chisora was much more impressive against Spzilka than Wilder was who struggled).