Daniel Dubois is underrated

He's consistently biased. This isn't a jab at old men: every man who doesn't die early gets old, but he's an old man who doesn't like the new fighters because it reminds him of his decline, and he's nostalgic for his prime years. It's very common but it massively biases one's perception.

For instance, he claimed that Ike Ibeabuchi had a better HW resume than Usyk, post-Dubois 2. It's risible.

 

Honestly fighters should probably be taking knees more

 

I don't know how viewers can attest dubois an average chin. Moving INTO usyks mightiest punch, he walked back to his corner and looked quite ok. I assume he could have beaten the count. And even if not - fury was totally buzzed without equilibrium from a weaker punch. Dubois was right not to continue, but it was because he did four VERY fast rounds in order to knock usyk out and it didn't work and from then on he would have been beaten from pillar to post and back. He was breathing quickly and heavily. It would have been like a 1500m runner having to fight 8 rounds of boxing afterwards and being totally spent.

Dubois has an amazing chin (if this punch didn't crack it).

He lost against joyce because of his eye and the first usyk Fight because he got overwhelmed by usyk's technical and tactical dominance and ring iq.

He took a bomb from joshua and knocked him out a few moments later.

I don't know how anyone could see dubois' chin as suspect...

 

I'm confused. Are we supposed to praise his chin because he quit against Usyk twice? That seems to just reinforce he's unable to take a punch.

I won't criticize him for taking a knee against Joyce because that was a serious injury, but he also got knocked down by Lerena multiple times.

 

Try answering it in full
Again
Tell me how me how many other top 10 HWs outside of Usyk, who have had as tough a run and in the same under 3 year period
I doubt there are too many

Simple question
You have said, most of the top 10, so please specify
Simple

That's fine. We can differ on that opinion
I wrote
How was that run of 5 fights not considered somewhat successful?
Yes he lost to Usyk twice, but sandwiched between that, won a world title and beat 3 highly rated HWs. Two of which were undefeated
Doesn't sound too bad

You still haven't explained why you don't think beating 3 highly rated HWs as the underdog in each and winning a world title wasn't successful
Simple question

I haven't claimed to be right or wrong
I asked some questions and you couldn't answer and actively duck the questions

That's a very generic response and not an answer
You haven't specified who
You haven't specified how it didn't have some level of success

What answer?
You saying most of them which wasn't an answer as to who exactly
You haven't answered. You ducked the questions

That's fair enough
So please answer the questions and specify

I don't need to apply a gotcha
You ducking the question is the gotcha
I named 3 of the current Ring top 10 and you have implied that you wouldn't say they have done more
So once again, outside of Usyk, please specify

That's the point.
Probably not many if any?
Many title holders at HW often only fight 1-2 times a year, so often the contenders have to make an impact to get a shot
Dubois beat Hrgovic, Miller and Joshua for the title shot
If someone hasn't done as much they may not get the title shot over someone who had done more
So tell me who has done as much? As I said before, I doubt there are too many. Yet you seem to think at least 5 others.
So specify

In direct answer to your question
Dubois has had 2 title shots in the last 4 years
Joshua has also had 2 title shots in the last 4 years
I think everyone else during that time has only had 1.
Don't think there is anything too out of the ordinary there as it was only 2 fighters holding the belts

Don't think it is too unusual for a fighter to get more than 1 title attempts in a 4 year period if they score wins against other highly rated competition

Now I directly answered your question, so for the final time
Giving you a chance not to duck again

Tell me how me how many other top 10 HWs outside of Usyk, who have had as tough a run and in the same under 3 year period?
I doubt there are too many

Please specify the 5 HWs you were thinking of

You still haven't explained why you don't think beating 3 highly rated HWs as the underdog in each and winning a world title wasn't successful
Simple question

It's not about you not rating the wins but why you don't think that amounts to a somewhat level of success

Now if you are going to duck again, don't bother answering, but by ducking you have shown you didn't have an answer to begin with

 

I haven't ducked your questions. I have answered them, if you want more specifics, you can follow that up with more questions. That's what a debate is.

As for which top ten you'd use, that is up for debate. Do you use RING magazine? IBF (as that's the belt he actually won)? The rankings from directly after when he last had his fight? The ones today? The ones the day before his next fight?

Seeing as Dubios had his last fight in July of 2025, I would use the RING rankings of 2025, because I don't think ranks 6-10 in the 2026 list deserve to be on the list as they haven't really done a hell of a lot to earn it. Also, why would I exclude Usyk? Is he not a top ten fighter?

Fighters I would argue that had a harder run (faced harder opponents) than Miller and fouling Hrgovic (AJ fight was actually for the title):

1. Usyk
2. Fury
3. Parker
4. Kabayel
5. Zhang
6. Chisora
7. Wilder

Dubios has had 3 title shots (1 with AJ, 2 with Usyk, one of those being for undisputed) and is about to have a 4th title shot following a fight he gave up in. Why you're so hellbent on defending a fighter like that is beyond me.

As for "You still haven't explained why you don't think beating 3 highly rated HWs as the underdog in each and winning a world title wasn't successful

Simple question

It's not about you not rating the wins but why you don't think that amounts to a somewhat level of success"

I have explained it. Multiple times. With the exception of AJ (who is considered well past his prime), they aren't good wins. You can agree or disagree.

Overall, Dubios is massively overrated. He has a good jab, decent power and a weak chin with no plan B when 1-2 stops working, resorting to taking a knee and giving up instead. I hope Wardley knocks him out and that he'd retire, but no doubt Frank will find a way to give him another undeserved title shot.

 

Yes, when his knee was badly hurt and it was a wonder he was staying in the fight anyways. The referee took the first chance to end it in favor of dubois for a reason if i remember correctly.

I understand chin as ability to take a punch. Dubois gave up because he was mentally overwhelmed. In all of these situations it was the correct thing to do. He saved himself from unnecessary punishment. He is not a madman from the 80s that has to go life and death, he wants to win and this way he has a better chance to come back and also to not regret getting into boxing. I would have done the same thing, if I had ever gotten remotely as far.

I am not a particular dubois fan (also not a hater) but he can surely take massive punches and walk through fire if his opponent doesn't dominate him with ring iq.

That's why I say he has a great chin. And i expect him to show it against wardley, if wardley can test it

 

There's going life and death and quitting at the first sign of adversity, which is what he did in both Usyk fights.

People criticize AJ for his lack of mental fortitude, but you didn't see him giving up against Usyk despite the fact he was outclassed. If anything, he came back and gave a stronger accounting of himself the second time around. Dubios, on the other hand, quit in half the time.

Idk, I get your point about the chin, but does it matter if the punch knocks you out when the alternative is just giving up?

 

Itauma is one of my favourite new fighters. So is Bam, who is much younger than Dubois. Considering you think someone in their early 30s is an old man, I'm going to chalk this pseudo-psychological analysis up to immaturity, but next time you try to cut someone down and get personal for no reason, at least have the courage to tag them so they're actually aware of it. It's not a good look.

Ike obliterating Chris Byrd and outboxing David Tua are very good wins, big stiff British bums like Joshua and Dubois would've had an absolute nightmare trying to deal with both of them, never mind Ike. The only Usyk win that is better is the Fury win, and Fury was lucky to get the win against Ngannou in the fight before, after getting dropped and going 10 rounds with a guy who has never boxed pro before.

Just because I think this HW era is a pile of shite doesn't mean I am wrong; it means we have different opinions. Nice to know what I said about Ike isn't playing on your mind too much.

 

Haha well I am picky when it comes to definitions. Speaking about heart is different from speaking about chin and I was impressed multiple times by dubois' chin including usyk's second ko of dubois.

Also it matters for the wardley fight. Since I believe it is possible that wardley hits dubois pretty hard, but very unlikely that wardley can put up intelligent pressure like usyk does or constantly batter dubois' eyes. Wardley usually loses the boxing match before finding his rescue shot. This is nothing that makes dubois quit. There will be no situation where dubois lies on the floor and thinks there is nothing he can do. He will he already winning on the cards and only have to survive if it comes to that.

It is why i believe dubois is a really bad matchup for wardley. I can only assume warren wants dubois as a world champion somehow

 

"Nice to know what I said about Ike isn't playing on your mind too much."

That one quote, which you're still defending ("Ibeabuchi has a better resume than Usyk") discredits all of your opinions about boxing for me. There are reasonable opinions and then there are absurd claims driven by systemic bias.

 

The question was outside of Usyk because I think he has had a tougher run
Not too hard to understand
I don't care what ratings you use, just saying who and why

agree

In 4 years Fury has fought usyk twice. (Thats no different to Dubois, as he has fought him twice)
Whyte, Chisora and Ngannou
None of them were rated as highly as Hrgovic or Joshua and I doubt any would be picked to beat Miller.
You said earlier who has Miller beat. Well tell me, who has Ngannou beat?
This will be good
Whyte was beaten by AJ and only 2 fights before by Povetkin who AJ beat
Chisora was on 1-3 in his previous 4 fights
How do you feel Chisora, Whyte and Ngannou was a tougher run?

Funny how you comment about Dubois losing to Joyce as if it is a slur but have now listed Parker.
You make little sense
Parker, I agree has a debate in that I could potentially see an argument, but his big win was Zhang who lost to Hrgovic who Dubois beat, so not sure, but wouldn't try and argue too much

Based on beating Zhang coming off a loss?
Or Wilder?
Can't see how that was tougher

Based on?

Based on? What wins exactly in the last 4 years?
Same question as above

Which fights in the last 4 years and how was his 4 year run more successful?

Explain the wins/losses in the 4 years and why you think it was a tougher run and more successful, because I can't see you getting to the 5 you claim based on the above

Do you feel Whyte and Chisora were prime when Fury fought them
Do answer

 

Pretty much everyone has him rated top 5,

including apparently you "In my opinion, Dubois beats everyone else in the division except Usyk, Kabyel, Zhang (50/50), and Hrgovic (if they took the rematch)" .........................how is he underrated?

 

I don't think they are better runs either.
Usyk is the only one who I think has had a better run
Yes I think an argument could be made for kabayel, but even then, I don't think it would be too convincing during that time period and think Dubois run during that time was better.
The debate with other poster I was having is really based on him not giving a sound argument for his opinions