How does Usyk’s HW era compare with Holmes (1978-1985) and Klitschko (2004-2015)

I only said that because in your post you said Holme's resume was good by not quite ATG.

 

Holmes is for me similar to wlad. He beat the guys who were put in front of him but not really special fighters. Wlad was similar but faced a bigger pool of styles and fighters. And Holmes lost to a smaller guy, that what hurts him in comparison to wlad.

Usyk beat small great fighters at cruiser and super heavyweights with credentials at heavy. That's what I really wanted to say

 

What shocks me about Jokic is his unbelievable feel for the game and how quickly and efficiently he processes the action unfolding before him. He really is a basketball savant.

I wish I could have seen a prime Arvydas Sabonis, not the injury-ravaged facsimile that played for Portland, compete against the great big men of the 1990s (Ewing, Hakeem, Mourning, Shaq, Robinson etc).

Perhaps Jokic is a window into what we all missed with Sabonis.

 

Videos of prime Sabonis are amazing!

 

Klitschko and Lennox Lewis eras are peak HW boxing imo. Before that most HWs were tiny like Joe Frazier and Rocky Marciano, after that we got bums like Tyson Fury getting bullied by MMA fighters.

 

Sabonis really was an absolute wagon.

I remember when the ESPN SportsCenter hosts would say, "He's not My-Vydas, he's not Your-vydas, he's AR-vydas."

 

one way is that if you fight often enough, an underdog will eventually beat you. modern fighters solve this problem by cherry picking and only fighting once a year.

 

don't interrupt his jerk off session with facts.

 

Briggs more than any. Wladdy has a dearth of big-sized punchers on his resume. That would have been at least one. And as a two time champ (yeah...I know...) he has the name.

Gomez earned his spot! He had campaigned at heavy for years and beat some quality guys, like Wlad Virchis.

As for how Vitlai's compared to Wlad's, again, not the point. If you could replace guys like Pianeta and with Adamek, Briggs and Gomez, it would be a boost to the legacy.

And again, the ultimate point is that he did not fight his #2, who was his brother, making for a very awkward era.

 

Usyk's consensus top ten, with vote tallies:
https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/usyks-top-ten-victories-so-far.731140/
Fury 1 9
Briedis 9
Joshua 1 9
Dubois 9
Gassiev 9
Fury II 8
Joshua II 8
Chisora 8
Bellew 7
Hunter 5/Glowacki 5

Klitschko's consensus top ten wins
https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/wladimir-klitschko-top-ten-wins.730677/
Byrd I 6
Haye 6
Chambers 6
McCline 5
Chagaev 5
Ibragimov 5
Thompson I 5
Peter I 5
Povetkin 5
Byrd II 4

Holmes consensus top ten wins
https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/name-holmes-ten-best-wins.719448/
Norton-5
Witherspoon-5
Shavers 2-5
Cooney -5
Berbick-5
Leon Spinks-5
Bonecrusher-4
Mercer-4
Shavers 1-4
Weaver-4

Just going to point out that I am not seeing the vast advantage for Wlad and Holmes despite their inflated records. I would take Chisora over Peter, and Briedis over Leon. Boil it down to a top five, and I think Usyk got it.

 

So losing your 1st fight via a very competitive decision at age 35 after 20 world title fights hurts Holmes's legacy compared to Wladimir's ?

But Wladimir getting stopped 3 times in his physical peak before the age 30 doesn't hurt his legacy compared to Holmes ?

Baffling logic.

 

Briggs was a nobody at that point, so he wasn't a miss on his resume.

Gomez was a Top 10 guy, he earned the spot, but was nothing major.

It would, I agree. But Wlad's reign is still 9/10, one of the best in history.

Still beat every top contedner beside Vitali and it's natural that brothers didn't want to fight each other.

 

I think it is just below top 10, and might have broke in with a few more good names.