Tyson Fury > Wlad Klitschko

Yeah. Just like Tyson vs Douglas and Ali vs Spinks.

 

This is an awful take. Invalid the minute you disregard Wlads best wins but big up Deontay Wilder as a spectacular win.

The fact beating 39 year old Wlad is Tysons claim says all you need to know.

Name the top 30 Heavyweights since Tyson turned pro in 08. See how many he fought and beat.

Name the top 30 Heavyweights since Wlad turned pro in 96, See how many he fought and beat.

Name the long list of world title fights Fury had. Now name the long list of world title fights Wlad had.

Name the Top 10 heavyweight contenders since Tyson Fury became World Champion, see how many he faced and beat.

Name the Top 10 heavyweight contenders since Wladimir became World Champion, see how many he faced and beat.

Resumes are literally different ends of the scale. Wlad is in discussions for Top 15 heavyweights of all time, maybe even top 10 depending how you judge it. Tyson Fury isnt close to that level.

End this monstrosity of a thread.

 

While I do genuinely enjoy reading ‘controversial’ takes - and I thank you for posting it - I don’t quite agree.I don’t rate Wlad as highly as some, perhaps because I watched his catastrophic losses to Purrity, Sanders and Brewster in real time. And, while I applaud his impressive comeback, I don’t think the 2005 - 2015 field of opposition was that strong. However, longevity does count for a lot. And he did face who he was meant to, even if the challengers weren’t great (though there are one or two decent wins in there, eg Povetkin, Haye).While Fury has some impressive highs (Wilder, Wlad himself) his competition in general is pretty weak. And that’s on him. Nor did he challenge himself to make his case. He CHOSE the weaker path. Wlad, in fairness, went through the opposition that was available. I’m also not sure how much you can take from their head to head, where Wlad, in fairness, was coming to the end of his career.I don’t think they’re *that* far apart, historically. But I don’t think Fury should be rewarded unduly for occasional highs balanced against sub par opposition. Wlad takes it on long, overall consistency for me - even if I don’t rate the opposition that highly.

 

Fury is not better and never was because he has the mental fortitude of a wet bag of noodles. Fury would never put together any meaningful reign because he'd find a way to blow it against a journeyman sooner rather than later, and he'd do it again and again. When Wlad was prime he didn't allow anybody to come within the same time zone as him. Fury got lucky he faced a mentally shot version of Wlad and then Fury bottled the rematch because he could see the ass kicking coming down the train tracks towards him.

 

Greatness is accomplishment. Vitali doesn't have it.

 

Lets not forget that most of Wlad’s top wins were in germany with that dodgy padded ring that peter fury sniffed out within 5 minutes

 

Throwing five to seven punches a round is not a “schooling” it was an awful fight to watch and score.

 

Well we will never know what would have happened n a rematch between fury and vlad because fury ran like a scared little *****.

 

A fighter whose a generation younger beating someone like Wlad 8-4 or 9-3 isn't going to elevate them above that fighter H2H. At least not because they won.

Fury and AJ beat Wlad. Wlad did well enough where he should be considered the better fighter. Everything thats happened since has only reinforced that.

People hold Wlad losing to "journeymen" against him. Fury got knocked down by Wilder and Ngannou 6 times and only beat Ngannou because 1 of those KDs went unscored. Today it is hard to imagine a HW champion accomplishing more then Wlad. It is hard to imagine a champion reigning as long as Fury did accomplishing less.