Oleksandr Usyk is clearly the best fighter of the 21st century uncontested.

Unwarranted ? The premise of the thread already warrants criticism. Complete disrespect to the Pacquiaos and Inoues for suggesting Usyk is the best boxer of the century uncontested, not even clear of Floyd. This is where half the criticism comes from, a response to the the exaggerated extollation

 

The disrespect given to Roy Jones and Hopkins...

 

Did Usyk disrespect Inoue or Pac?

No??

Then, yes, that line of criticism would be entirely unwarranted.

How fans rate-- or overrate-- Usyk has nothing to do with his ability, character etc and thus whether he's worthy of criticism.

That much should have been obvious...but here we are.

 

It isn't unwarranted when the criticisms are a response to people are making arguments that Usyk is the best of the century above everyone else, which is hilariously inaccurate.

Yet here we are, most criticizing Usyks resume in this thread is exactly that, explaining why Usyk isn't greater than some aforementioned. Or perhaps you're just strawmanning as usual and I just fell for the bait

 

Strawmanning as usual?

Kindly forward some examples of my previous "strawmanning." Take your time. I'll wait.

So, to reiterate, your position is that Usyk warrants criticism......because his fans overrate him? Brilliant, totally unimpeachable logic there, my guy.

But I'm feeling charitable, so here's a pro-tip-- if you have an issue with how fans rate Usyk, the logical approach would be to level that criticism at.....wait for it now......his fans. Wow--that'd be a novel approach, huh?

For example, I have had many back-and-forths with Floyd The Best Ever, YO! types, and I have had no trouble separating warranted criticism (ie questioning the judgment of the fans who said as much) without engaging in unwarranted criticism of the fighter (ie ridiculously claiming Floyd was cowardly etc).

However, if you---or anyone else on here for that matter--- are incapable or unwilling to do the same, that's your problem, not mine.

 

In this thread sure, especially for the historical comparisons, because warrent means to justify, don't overthink it. The position of the thread topic is asking for it. Criticism at its core is mere judgement of qualities, not necessarily disapproval, but that doesn't get through narrow minds

 

lol. No. It’s a tie for #1 between Mayweather and Pacquaio, #2 is probably Canelo.

don’t get me wrong, Usyk is special. But he does not have the resume of these guys, and he’s too old to develop one.

 

You suffer Stockholm Syndrome by proxy.

 

If someone posts that Usyk isn't a particularly hard puncher for a heavyweight, that's legit, reasonable and warranted criticism. Likewise, it's certainly not unreasonable to question the judgement of those who consider him the best fighter of the 21st Century. But that's a fan, not a fighter, based criticism.

On the other hand, arguing that Usyk "ducks" fighters, "sucks," and only fights opponents who are damaged goods (as a poster on another thread recently did) is not only unwarranted but ridiculous. It also invites speculation about the poster's true motivations.

My remarks to Serge referred to this kind of unwarranted criticism.

All you had to do was ask, my man, and I would have been glad to explain what I meant. Don't shoot from the hip and assume things.

 

It's the same thing that happened to Loma. In his prime there were unironically people on here calling him the best ever, picking him over Roberto Duran and even Sugar Ray Robinson ffs. Just usual forum recency bias, which I find crazy considering Usyk's career isn't even over yet. It should be no surprise that some people get annoyed by it.

 

Manny is the best imo.. Floyd was too precious.. & u can't give it to Roy Jones because he lost to Tarver & Johnson .. & moving up & beating huggy Ruiz isn't on a par with moving up & beating Fury, Joshua, Chisora & Dubois.

 

To the Usyk Haters

Jealousy is a disease, get well soon.