Usyk has legitimized Wilders legacy.

You was saying he out of shape, so we have to establish a baseline of him in shape. his peak performance in the trilogy and arguably his whole career, was in fight 2. In fight 3 he weighed 4lbs extra. For a giant like fury, that’s negligible.

You ignore wilder was about 25lbs over his ideal weight.

you just like giving bias pointless arguments with no neutrality at all. You can’t raise fury issues prior to the fight and then ignore wilders. Either ignore both or accept both.

Regarding the validity of the issues, I can’t see fury’s glucose levels, but I can see wilder is massively overweight and got a ridiculous coach. But let’s only be concerned about fury eh.

as if you don’t know a fighter generally has an ideal weight

 

Not being funny but different judges like different things

You alone really can not put every judge in the same bracket

 

Hmm, up to a point - I don't want to see him crippled, but I don't mind him taking a few beatings after that moronic wanting a body on his record stuff.

If he wants a legacy as the schadenfreude crash test dummy of the division, I'm down with it - as long as he doesn't end up vegetating or dead.

He has no real legit legacy as it stands, so why not?

 

I know, right?

He was clearly in poor shape and not well prepared... The gargantuan performance discrepancy between 2 and 3 doesn't make sense otherwise.

Fury fans won't want to admit it, though, because it devalues Wilder 2 if you have to admit there were just so many levels between them that Fury didn't even need to be in remotely good shape to win.

 

Those official ratings are not good at predicting fight outcomes

They all had Joshua ahead of Dubois when Dubois knocked him out
They all had Wilder ahead of Parker when he lost to Parker.

What makes you think those rankings accurately predict how Wilder would do against Kabayel or Zhang in 2018?

 

Mate seriously, you need to first learn what a ranking system is.
A ranking system rates fighters based on past performances.
A ranking system is NOT for predicting fights.

The issue is your understanding of rankings.
im not a school teacher, so please, I’d rather not explain this when someone qualified may be more suited to you.

 

What do you mean?
Official judges are trained to score on specific criteria.

for example, none score sticking tongues out as it’s not part of the official scoring criteria. Some may like a bit of tongue action, but it’s not scoring criteria.

 

But they don't all judge the same way

That's clear to see
If they did most score cards would be incredibly similar

We hear it all the time on TV "all depends on what the judges prefer" etc

 

Post Wlad I would probably rate the following guys ahead of Wilder ability wise
Usyk
Kabayel
Fury
Hrgovic
Joyce
Dubois
Joshua
Zhang
Povetkin

Other guys like Ruiz, Hunter, Bakole might be arguable as well.

You can easily make a case for him being outside the top 5

 

They judge according to the criteria shown above. Obviously things are always subjective, however this is the criteria to follow.

Most scorecards are fairly similar.

The 3 judges sit on 3 different sides of the ring as perception can effect the judging, hence taking into account all 3 perspectives of the same human judging criteria.
when fans watch from the 4th side of the ring and criticise judges, the fans. haven’t seen what they did from their side.

judges in any sport or a court room operate in the same manner, according to the rules.

 

If you wish for your rankings to be respected, you need to earn that respect.

Go and work in boxing, start an organisation and take it from there, like Dana is doing.

until then, the official bodies will do for those serious about boxing.

I do admire your insistence on dismissing the historical and prestigious official institutions of licenced professional boxing.
Then going further and being adamant that your own personal opinions trump the institute of boxing.

kind of like Dana too lol

 

Clearly the rules need following more then

I know what they are meant to judge on as I have a fair few friends that are or have been judges

It doesn't happen though

 

There are leanings and there are biases.

The criteria is the same, but some judges will get swayed by certain things and being human means some will miss certain things (blocked punches, for example).

Then there's biases - often champions will get the benefit of the doubt for close rounds, the same often goes for whoever's the A-side... And sometimes you'll get clear and obvious favouritism for one fighter that simply can't be justified - you shouldn't, but you do (the ridiculous card that was wide for Wilder in the first Fury fight, for example).

 

Uncle Al certainly paid for that judges room service over the weekend of that fight

 

Maybe some of his fans. But I don't see how they can.
Fury was still cutting his weight under Davison until the Wallin fight, and then started rebuilding his body (with the most natural of supplementation) under Sugar Hill. This is known.

Personally, I recognize Wilder as a solid top 5 guy at the time of the fights. I think that is fair. At the end of the day though, across 3 fights, Wilder won between 6 and 8 rounds depending on generosity.

Fury out-boxes him in Fight 1
Out-powers him in Fight 2
Out-hearts him in Fight 3
Took his best power shots, got back up, and broke him physically and mentally by the end of the trilogy.

That second fights score card tells a story of its own. Wilder losing every round before the fight was stopped - spattered in his blood...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/WILDERFURY-SCORE.jpg?quality=80&strip=all

Wilder's peak was beating Ortiz and Breazeale, but he just was not on Fury's level. Fury showed Wilder the gulf between them every which way. Wilder (fans) trying to ride Fury's coat tails into greatness has just gotten a bit sad

I don't disagree, but that's for another thread