But an 'average causal type' years from now won't even know who Usyk and Wilder are, or look at history books. Anyone who remotely cares about boxers of the past and sees this fight will see it as a shameless soft defence and wonder how someone as 'shot' as Wilder could be given a chance in a sanctioned, after losing to other contenders. It won't look good to anyone. FFS, Trevor Berbick (a non-champion at the time) doesn't even get credit for beating Muhammad Ali. And Wilder was never an Ali
As it stands, Jake Paul has done about as much to deserve an Usyk fight as Itauma, except he brings WAY more to the table!
You made little sense as always I read your crap sure but listening would be me taking onboard what you say
I know a honest discussion will not be possible here but if itauma with more than twice the opponents at heavy compared to usyk ( 13 vs 5 ) and a very impressive overall performance isn,t worth a title shot , how was usyk ever worth a title shot against AJ with a legacy of witherspoon and old chisora on his hw resume at that time ? Can you answer this simple question ?
Simple - Usyk came up as undisputed, that gives you rights to a title shot. Besides which... Usyk beat Chisora before getting a title shot - Chisora might have a lot of losses but realistically beating him established Usyk was a contender at minimum... Itauma doesn't have a single win close to that version of Chisora yet - and hasn't actually established himself as definitely a contender, yet. Downplay Chisora all you want - he was better than one of the beltholders of the time.