I mean, yes, beating fighters who had a 20-40 lb advantage over you and were the top dogs of the division for years is incredibly impressive, especially when you're a smaller heavyweight whose best work was done at cruiserweight. And let’s not forget, Usyk was the underdog against both Joshua and Fury, yet he still came out on top. That level of success against significant size and skill disadvantages speaks volumes about his greatness. As for your point, I was responding to your claim that Usyk only wins because the heavyweights he’s facing are slow and lumbering and would struggle with smaller opponents. I brought up his cruiserweight run to highlight that he hasn’t shown trouble handling opponents closer to his size either. He’s proven his effectiveness against both smaller and larger fighters, which further underscores his greatness.
Beating them both twice was an impressive achievement. Was it ATG level achievements though? Nope. Both were damaged goods. He has not proven himself vs smaller faster HEAVYWEIGHTS. Breidis is nowhere near HW size. All his HW success has been fighters who are even slow even for HW.
Hang on This doesn't make any sense. How are you saying Briedis nowhere near HW size but you want Usyk to prove himself against smaller heavyweights? How small are we talking ? Briedis isn't that much smaller than Usyk Briedis is a heavyweight by 1970s and a small heavyweight by 1990s standards. All of Usyks cruiserweight competition are heavyweights back then. You can argue Briedis never beat any top 10s so it doesn't count. But what other small heavyweights was Usyk supposed to beat ? Michael Hunter ? He did that. What heavyweights of this era were faster than prime Usyk ? Wilder ???? You're not giving Usyk his credit. He's clearly an ATG, he's separated himself from the best of the pack.
Breidis would not even be a HW in the 90s, and would be small in the 70s, he is 6-1 and 200 pounds with narrow shoulders. Frazier was 5'11 but built like a Tank. When I say fast HW I mean a legitimate HW who is not a lumbering giant like AJ and Fury. Someone like Parker for example would test Usyk in a different way. You are giving him too much credit.You can't be clearly an ATG HW 7 fights in the division vs 5 opponents. . Wlad is clearly not an ATG HW despite achieving much more at HW than Usyk so how the hell can Usyk be?
Nonesense. Briedis has fought at heavyweight before. And most fighters in this era rehydrate post weigh in, even when Briedis was a cruiserweight, he was likely about 210 in the ring. We know for a fact Briedis was 213 against Charr and smashed him. Briedis is the exact same size as Joe Frazier, look up how much he weighed against Ali, nostalgia might be blinding you. It's all subjective, but Gassiev, Briedis, Hunter, all weighed well over 200 on fight night. They would be heavyweights in the 70s and I rate his undisputed run at cruiserweight highly. The Gassiev win didn't age well, but Hunter, Glowacki, Huck, Briedis were solid wins. Yeah we're going to have to disagree hard. Wlad in his prime is absolutely an all time great. Top 10. He beat as many ranked fighters as Larry Holmes, just had some hiccups before he went under the wing of Steward. Dominated for 10 years after becoming a much better fighter than before, only losing that winning streak at the age of 40.
Of course he is. He's has four wins over Fury and Joshua, both of which are going to finish comparably to a Ken Norton, Floyd Patterson or Riddick Bowe, and one against Dubois, who is doing well and has a chance to build. It simply doesn't matter that he didn't beat a lot of Scott Ledoux, Lorenzo Zannon, Francesco Pianeta and Tex Cobb types. And again, it is to Usyk's CREDIT that he fought the best of an outstanding cruiserweight division rather then go the usual route of bums, journeymen, gatekeepers and has-beens. We are acting like this has never been done before, and guys like Bob Fitzsimmons, Ezzard Charles, Gene Tunney and Michael Spinks don't exist. Usyk has spent nine years AGGRESSIVELY pursuing the best he can get his hands on. He pees excellence, and poops all over his detractors. He's Oleksandr Usyk, and you're not!
Top 1 or 2 CW. Top 15 HW. If he gets another 2 wins at HW top 10. Like Rummy said, Marciano had only a few fights as champ and he is an ATG .
I disagree. Both Joshua and Fury were still great fighters when Usyk faced them, and they demonstrated that in their fights against him. They gave him plenty of trouble and forced him to adapt, but Usyk proved he was a level above by beating them both twice. Breidis would have been a decent-sized heavyweight in many eras and has even fought at heavyweight before. The same goes for Huck, Gassiev, and Hunter. All of them are above 200 pounds and would have been considered decent-sized heavyweights in the past. I’m not sure how you’re defining a heavyweight right now, but it seems inconsistent given that these fighters have competed successfully in or near the division.
It's not just about weight its frame and power. Tyson was the same weight as Briedis but he clearly has HW frame and hit much harder. I have never heard CW fights counting as HW fights before Usyk came along, it shows the contortions that are being used to boost his HW legacy. Briedis has zero wins at HW but apparently because he is as big as 70s HW, he counts as a HW now along with Huck and Hunter.. Michael Moorer was 22-0 at LHW, moved to HW and became a 3 time champion including unified and lineal by beating an ATG in Holyfield. He had 25 fights at HW. When he beat Holyfield he was 35-0 with 30 KOs. How can you even put Usyk ahead of that HW legacy?
This is circular, because the conclusion they were still great is based on presuming usyk is a great HW. You could also say Chisora proved his greatness by also giving Usyk just as many problems. AJ was utterly exposed by Dubious , so you can't say he was great sorry.
Maybe, but Usyk has already beaten similar-sized opponents, so I don’t see why Parker would present a unique test, especially since he lost to Joshua in a pretty one-sided fight. Wlad is clearly an ATG heavyweight,I have him in my top 5. It’s hard to see how someone with one of the most dominant and long-reigning championship reigns in heavyweight history wouldn't qualify as an ATG
It’s not circular. I’m saying they were great because they were the top heavyweights in the division for several years, held championship titles, and demonstrated strong performances against Usyk. Chisora, while not a great fighter, is a tough and rugged heavyweight who has proven to be a difficult fight for many opponents. Usyk was clearly uncomfortable at first, facing someone with such a significant size advantage in his first real test at heavyweight, but he adapted and decisively beat him. That’s a testament to his skill and versatility.
Yeah, I think that was a really level-headed summary at the end by Rummy. Though we should acknowledge that Marciano established himself at the champion and then made 6 defences before retirement. Comparatively, Usyk has only made one defence of his newly established lineal title after becoming undisputed. Plus, Marciano had something like double the fights. Sure, we can say quality over quantity, but Usyk should still sit a fair bit behind Marciano for me, yet. But as you and Rummy say, Usyk's story has yet to come to its end.