Usyk has lost 32 of his last 85 rounds.

This is low iq. What if Khan won 100 rounds and lost 10 rounds by getting knocked out in the 11th, does this mean he’s better than Usyk?

 

Bivol's best win is his razor close MD against Beterbiev. His second best win is his 115-113 over Canelo. Both of those wins are less lopsided by your metric than Usyk-Joshua 1, Usyk-Fury 2 and both Dubois fights.

"Dubois, Fury, AJ are not the three best fighters he could have beaten. They are the three most accomplished"

There is no distinction: they had/have the biggest wins and the belts. On no planet were Kabayel, Hrgovic, Sanchez, Ajagba, Joyce, Parker, Wardley, Zhang, Miller, Bakole etc. better opponents to beat. Barring Kabayel, who wasn't in serious contention until recently, they've all fallen by the wayside anyway.

You have a bizarre obsession with rounds as an end in themselves. Usyk isn't fighting to win every single round, that is not the objective of a boxing match, nor is it the safest or most efficient way to fight. The objective is winning the fight, ideally without taking too much damage and no one does a better job of that. Opponents usually have 12 rounds (then usually another 12 to make adjustments) but they never even scrape a draw, and never stop him. That is supreme boxing dominance.

 

By the guy's metric, winning every round then getting KO'd in the 12th is vastly better and more "dominant" than losing every round before scoring a 12th round KO...

In fact, even winning a 10-2 decision or 9-2 before a 12th round KO win is worse, because you lost twice as many rounds!

 

Not to be pedantic but given the inherent autism of the thread, isn't it 31 rounds to Usyk's 54?

Chisora won 5, Joshua 9, Dubois 2, Fury 10, Rico 5

 

"Ali beat more than 30 individual elite HW's"

Name them.

Also, don't Patterson, Holyfield, old Foreman and Haye (to start) have worse rounds won ratios than Usyk by your own admission? So how does James Jeffries come into it?

 

Is this according to the judges scorecards? Just wondering cause giving Joshua and Fury 9 and 10 is generous.

 

Henry Cooper, no way Usyk would beat that uncoordinated slow oaf.

 

Yes, he is apparently strictly going by the judges scorecards. Which until the Verhoeven fight were less favourable for Usyk than the public consensus, fwiw. If Boxrec members were scoring, Chisora would have got 3, AJ 7, Fury 9, Dubois 0, but Rico 8.

 

I suppose in part that is why they are more highly regarded than their era would suggest. Wlad Klitschko took some losses but his reign was long, winning many (including some of his biggest) fights in dominant fashion.

It is fair to say the current era is not as strong as many hoped (2015~): the Heavyweight #1 Joshua losing in a massive upset to Snickers Ruiz + Heavyweight #1 Fury going life and death with MMA Ngannou + Heavyweight #1 Usyk going very close with Kickboxer Rico...does not speak to a strong era. So you would hope the dominant champion would, well, dominate.

Usyk is without a doubt the #1 of this era, though. No argument from me on that.

 

I don't long for the "halcyon days" of Wlad backhumping his opponents to death.

If Usyk, Fury and Joshua are overrated then that reflects badly on Wlad, who is 0-2 against silver and bronze. It's lucky the other guys who beat Wlad are cast-iron ATG's...

 

Fair. Granted Wlad's style was effective albeit very ugly. But Wlad had been on top for nearly a decade when Fury and Joshua came along.

The young lion defeating the old is the natural order of things. Heck, Wlad got his Olympic Gold when Fury was just turning 8 years old.

Yet these wins are both still arguably the pinnacle of Joshua's and Fury's careers. Only Usyk has topped those fights by claiming undisputed (by collecting the belts off those two)

 

He' lost a lot of British rounds.

 

So who is the Round for Round lineal champion at the moment? Floyd Mayweather?