Joshua's decline is due to a lack of skill, not chin

1. Fury wasn't going for a KO punch first and foremost, he wanted rounds and he got them

2. Even at 46, Wach has a better chin than AJ, probably a much better chin

 

Your obsessed

 

Joshuas decline is due to his age and long career in boxing, not his skills or his chin. He is 36, that age is typically a turning point for the worst for boxers. Only recently have fighters really pushed the limit with age because they fight much less frequently per year thus not absorbing as much punishment over time, but traditionally that has never been the case.

Just take a look at heavyweight boxing history, Lewis retired at 37 after looking terrible against Vitali, Wilder shot by 37, Mike Tyson was shot after 30, Riddick Bowe done by 29, Michael Moore done after 30, Larry Holmes done by 36, Ali done by 36.

Fighting past the age of 36 at a high level is an anomaly in boxing, and quite frankly very few have ever managed to do it, Wladimir and Vitali are one, Usyk is the other, and you can make an argument for George Foreman although that was clearly a way past his prime Foreman.

In Joshuas case, especially when he was young, undefeated, packed a punch, and had an Olympic gold pedigree, before any of his losses, he was feared, and he came into the ring with a confident aura, and his opponents feared him. Once you get knocked out, and the impossible becomes possible the dynamics change against everyone you face, and getting old does not help.

 

I would not say Lewis looked terrible vs Vitali; he won the fight against a future HoF. He had a slow start against a Byrd-victim who he underestimated, but came back into it in round 3 and won after 6. Prior to the Vitali fight, he'd shut down Tyson and destroyed Rahman in the rematch, both at 36.

Wlad, Vitali and Usyk were elite HW's at 36 or older. Possibly throw in Povetkin, who one-shotted Whyte on the cusp of 41. Holyfield was 37 in the Lewis rematch. Foreman and Holmes beat Moorer and Mercer at 45 and 42 respectively. Zhang had his best career performances at 39/40. Luis Ortiz was officially 36, possibly a couple years older, when he destroyed Jennings in his best career win. Chisora seemed to still be at his best at 36/37 when he won rounds off Usyk and should have got the W over Parker. Joyce was on the cusp of 37 when he steamrolled Parker. Pulev was 37 when he schooled Hughie. Throw Helenius and Lucas Browne in there. Sanders demolished Wlad at 37, Thompson was at his best for Wlad 1 at 36.

Especially in more recent years, many HW's have been in or around their prime at the age AJ is now, or older. It also can't be doubted that AJ has "lived the life" of an elite athlete, and his size + power punching style has good longevity in theory, which suggests it's not age first and foremost.

 

The account might be new, but I'm not. I've been here since the days that Rumsfeld fan boyed for Golota, and Widdow Maker was an active poster, thats about 6-7 years before you joined the forum.

 

Out of curiosity, why not just use your old account?

 

Majority of the guys you mentioned are not elite, and neither was most of their competition. Foreman, who was elite, was also way past his best when he beat Moore on a lucky punch after losing every round. Holmes was done by the time he lost to Spinks, and then annihilated by Tyson, he was 36. Sanders like Foreman, too caught Wladimir early with a lucky punch, and then was destroyed in the following fight against Vitali, in a fight were he was gassed by round 3. Holyfield was past his best against Lewis, many claimed Holyfield was past his best against Tyson as well.

The other guys like Pulev, Ortiz, Chisora, and Zhang these guys are not elite, they could be fighting for the next 10 years. We just seen Marius Wach fight Fury at 45.

 

My old account I was locked out of for unknown reasons, and I couldn't log back in, and then I guess after a certain amount of time ESB (East Side Boxing) as it was known back then deleted it. I migrated to ******* thereafter, but ******* forums were abolished a month or so back, so I migrated back here.

 

Fair enough. Welcome back!

 

Joshua's career was a bubble from the start as much as his chin was bad(graded on a curve) from the start. His rating was inflated throughout his career. The credit beating Wallin and Ngannou was because Fury struggled with them not because they were otherwise special. The reason he gets credit for beating Parker was because he shutout Wilder. Fury, Wilder and AJ(then Usyk) had everyone operating under the assumption they were the best 3 HWs. Whenever they struggled against an opponent people lifted that opponent up instead of questioning the hierarchy.

Given that AJ came back from a 10-7 to finish the fight in one round I don't see this fight as negative for AJ. The only time AJ had previously recovered from a KD was the Wlad fight where he had a sizeable lead against a 41 year old opponent to sit back on. Whatever AJ was in the HW division I don't really see proof AJ's declining. AJ's 36 not claiming he's in his physical prime but this is an old division.

 

Why are people so obsessed with dragging Joshua down? I'm not even a fan of his and it's so blatant. No matter how much **** gets thrown at him someone will still go "actually, he's even worse than that.".

 

Your second point is hard to argue against, he was lucky vs Prenga.

 

Its a fair take.

He was never a highly skilled boxer. The first thing that comes to mind when describing him for me is workmanlike. He wasn't a natural boxing talent or lifelong fighter, he was a good athlete with pretty good power that complimented a solid basic skillset.

I think people are a little harsh on him though. I will always maintain that he was a better fighter than Frank Bruno for example.