The Only Hole In Usyk's Fabulous Resume

Nope. Beating Dubois in a rematch doesn't change the facts of the first fight. If you think the blow was legal than Usyk still potentially lost fight one.

Lewis didn't rematch Mercer after winning a controversial decision that is still debated today so there is plenty of precedent for fighters not rematching controversial fights.

Larry Holmes had 3 controversial wins over Norton, Witherspoon, and Williams and didn't rematch any of them

 

Yeah, but their coaches didn't go around antagonizing Holmes or Lewis by calling them "cheats" and stuff. Dubois got in the ring himself and called Usyk out after the 2nd Fury fight too.

Of course Usyk had to rematch him based on all of this.

 

Mercer still claims he beat Lewis. What does Dubois entering the ring have to do with anything?

Fans are already upset about all the rematches. Why have yet another?

 

Usyk has already had multiple unneeded rematches though and fights very infrequently. Given the circumstances that makes the fight far less easy to forgive.

Mercer fought again in December. Lewis team could have gone for an immediate rematch.

Mercer was no more inactive than Usyk has been. Usyk has been semi retired since 2018 by that logic

 

There's a difference.

1. There was already a rematch clause for the Joshua, Fury, fights so Usyk was obligated to fight those rematches under a contract.

2. Mercer fell off the world rankings after the controversial decision vs Witherspoon that most felt he lost and he was inactive for a year and a half and was never ranked again in the top 10.

3. Lewis was trying to get a fight with Tyson at the time that was expected to happen and the fight fell through. Lewis was looking for a title shot and was offered a shot at the vacant WBC title against the fighter who beat him "McCall". So a rematch vs McCall to revenge a loss and get a belt was a much more viable fight for Lewis.

4. Dubois was the highest ranked contender Usyk could've fought.

 

Usyk didn't have to agree to a rematch clause with Fury to begin with. He could have insisted on one fight and if Fury refused he would fight someone else. Usyk had the majority of belts and had plenty of options.

Mercer did not fall out of the rankings and was still ranked by ring magazine at the end of 1997. Lewis could have fought him instead of Golota Akinwande or Briggs after beating McCall. There are tons of examples of fighters not rematching after controversial fights. The list would go into the thousands.

Dubois had multiple losses going into the Usyk rematch including to Usyk himself in which he lost virtually every round and wasn't remotely competitive. From a competitive standpoint Kabayel seems like the more attractive option.

 

Another great example is Trinidad De La Hoya after a controversial decision for Trinidad that almost everyone felt he lost there was no rematch. That surely had a better case for a rematch anyone Usyk has rematched

 

What do you mean he didn't have to agree to it ? So Usyk shouldn't of agreed to it and not taken the biggest fight of his career ? How does that make sense ?

And how does that refute my previous point ? It doesn't.

Mercer never had a fight in 1997 and he was removed from the rankings shortly after he simply wasn't active and fell out of the world rankings.

Akiwande was Lewis's mandatory so Lewis was obligated to fight Akiwande.

Golota was fresh off beating up Bowe twice and the Golota fight was a bigger more relevant fight.

Usyk fought Dubois again because he was the highest ranked contender and had built himself up again with a string of good wins. And there was also the controversy of the low blow which added some hype to the rematch.

 

Eh, this is the same Chisora that has lost half of his fights. He came in with the right game plan against Usyk though, just a bit too old and worn to have much success with it.

I think Kabayel offers more challenges than Chisora would. But at the end of the day it's irrelevant if Usyk isn't planning on fighting much longer.

 

Tito wanted the rematch at 154, Oscar didn't. That's what killed it.

 

Rubbish. Remember that Usyk originally wanted to fight the winner of AJ v Dubios (the goal was to "re-unify" the belt he dropped), so had AJ won it he would have ended up with a 3rd fight with somebody he comprehensively beat twice already.

It was a cherry pick against opponents he had already beaten. End of.

Now I understand rematching Fury and AJ as they were the biggest fights he could take at the time as well as being the caveat he would have had to have agreed to for his shot in the first place, but there is zero justification for rematching Dubios and proceeding to fight Wilder over his other mandatory obligations.

 

Unification fights frequently do not have rematches. Mike Tyson didn't rematch Berbick, Smith, or Tucker after beating them. I've never see anyone he claim he should have either. So why exactly did Usyk have to agree to fight Fury twice? Usyk also won without controversy. No rematch was needed.

You also haven't addressed Holmes not rematching any of the guys he had controversial fights with.

Mercer fought in February 1998, his time out of the ring is no more than what Usyk has been subjecting us to year after year

 

You don't ever address any points you just change your argument from post to post that's all you ever do.

Your points get refuted so you make up another argument or irrelevant point that's pretty much you in a nutshell.

Weird argumentative behaviour.

 

What points? Usyk didn't have to agree to a two fight deal with Fury did he?

You didn't refute anything. He could have fought Mercer in an immediate rematch or he could have fought him instead of Golota. Golota could have waited until the following year.

 

What points ? The points are there for you to read maybe if you knew how to stick to one subject you could have a proper a discussion.

I'm not playing your silly games of changing arguments every single post because you like to be argumentative.