Do you consider Tyson Fury and Anthony Joshua to be all time greats ?

When you dislike someone it's very easy to spin it however you like to demean them.

That's fine if you feel it necessary and it keeps you happy

 

Great thread. I lol'd.

 

It is fine because what i posted is 100% true.

 

An ATG defines an era. They don't have the names or the longevity.

 

In 100 yrs time will anyone mention Fury or Joshua ? NO

 

Beating a guy a few months from forty in a staring match was pathetic. Beating a complete bum without a good win to his name three times is just sad. Hilarious legacy.

Dope.

A few months from forty and has a record long career as champion without any all time wins, showing, or even sequence of events logged as legendary.

There's a lot one could say about Wlad if one's being hateful:

Wlad's best win? Doesn't matter, his entire career is old, short, and/or fat ... or losses.

It's easy to do ... because he made it easy to do.

 

I'd have Fury top 25.

 

Sure thing fella. Your opinion is totally irrelevant, however angry you are at Tyson Fury. That's your perogative

He didn't help himself at all, he could have fought maybe one or two others in his era at the right times and that's why he's not in the top 10.

Nonetheless he is going to be remembered in exactly the bracket I just put him in for what he has done and that will be the case whether you're fuming about it or not unfortunately.

If you feel the need to insult someone to desperately try to make your point then I'd say you come off looking a bit more dopey than the person you're accusing.

 

Fury's a candidate for the top 5 worst lineal heavyweight champions in history.
I would rate Joshua a notch below Fury.
Both would rate higher than Wilder, obviously.

 

The Three Kings era!

 

No. Although Fury had the potential to be.

 

He pretty much made every choice to self sabotage his status in that regard.

 

Equally, he made quite a few necessary decisions to keep himself in the conversation...

Ducking the Wlad rematch, for example, probably saved him from losing much of the credit he got for beating him.

Ducking Joshua potentially prevented him from a further loss of position - it's difficult to tell who'd have won that, and there are decent arguments both ways.


So, whilst he chose not to train for Ngannou and made himself look silly, likewise for Wilder 3 (which would've been an extremely embarrassing loss given how thoroughly he'd dominated him when actually fit)... He did actually get lucky despite being severely flawed when it came to turning up properly prepared sometimes.

It's funny how Fury could be so incredibly inconsistent, yet often seems to get credit for his best performances with the poor one's ignored... Whilst other highly inconsistent fighters, Ruiz jr for example, get judged by their poorer performances with the best ones largely dismissed and/or ignored.

Fury gets an exceptionally generous ride from a lot of people.

 

Neither are ATG level. Fury is much higher rated than Joshua imo. Before Usyk moved up to heavyweight we can't forget that Fury was the clear #1 heavyweight. After Joshua got wrecked by the journeyman Ruiz, his confidence was shot. From that point on he made sure to duck Fury and Wilder, so to me he will always be low rated, as I don't rate scared fighters. Anthony Joshua thought he'd take the easy route and fight a blown-up cruiserweight, who ended up being far better than any of the top hw's including Fury, Wilder, and Joshua. Usyk essentially erased the careers of Fury and Joshua.

 

How is a ATG defined?