Apologies if there is a similar thread already. There are a lot of threads! I'll get straight to the point. There are lineal champions and Tyson Fury is the current champion. What makes a 'Real Champion'? Very straight forward. It's a boxer who will fight anyone, anywhere, any time. Muhammad Ali was one, as was George Foreman, Larry Holmes, Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis, etc. They have no fear and don't dodge fights by pricing themselves out, and using Boxing Politics, etc. I.e. they don't make excuses to avoid fights that they might lose for the sake of money and prestige. To date, Joshua priced himself out of a Deontay Wilder fight last year by demanding 60 / 40, when it's clear to any genuine boxing fan that it's a 50 / 50 split fight. When offered a Fury fight, he offered Fury 30%. That to me is not a real champion. That's a fighter who wants to keep his belts at all costs, by fighting fighters he thinks he will win against, and avoiding fighters he might lose against. That's a nonsense boxer with nonsense, meaningless belts. The two best heavyweights in the world, Fury and Wilder will fight in February. If Joshua fights any of those two next year, he will get my respect, and will lose in my opinion. Until then, his belts and titles mean virtually nothing. On the Ruiz fight, I agree with Frank Warren that Ruiz is a disgrace by turning up overweight. If he'd slimmed down a bit, and gone into the ring leaner, faster and more powerful by transferring fat to muscle and power, he would have won again. Instead he behaved like a lottery winner and blew his chance to cement a legacy. Honest opinions please:
Joshua real multi beltholder Wilder real beltholder Fury mythical invisible beltholder Whyte secondary beltholder Charr secondary ridiculous beltholder
So you describe what a real fighter is in your opinion and then go on to hold Wilder in higher regard than AJ. AJ’s resume beats Wilders and Fury’s easily. That’s the first time your argument fails. Second is assuming that it’s AJ’s fault alone that Wilder fight didn’t happen. Regardless of which side of the story you choose to believe about that whole 100mil situation, both were messing with each other and Wilders side, in my opinion, was the worse one. Third is assuming that it’s AJ deciding who he will fight next but this ones muddier than the other two so I’ll leave it. I don’t even like any of the three fighters, but you have a real trouble drawing a line where your standards are.
Joshua is a dodger, most boxing fans know it, and until he steps up, that's what he will always be known as.
Check the facts. Quote (Eddie Hearn re' Wilder and Fury opponents): 'They're not getting 50/50.' What genuine boxing fan thinks that joshua should get a 60 / 40 split? It's running scared, as Joshua did against a very fat Ruiz.
Nonsense. Joshua has always fought the best opponents who were willing to face him. He's avoided no one. Wilder has avoided MANY boxers who he (or his management) perceived as a potential threat. He even avoided Kevin Johnson earlier in his career, preferring to fight chinny old journeymen like Matthew Greer and shot boxers like Lyakhovich. And since winning the WBC belt from old Stiverne, he's avoided all unification fights and even his mandatory challengers like Whyte.
Joshua hater making a thread alert, or in other words, another load of complete and utter bollocks without an ounce of reasoning, logic or rationality. Wilder knob rider alert and obvious Alt account alert. We could also add troll while we're at it
Like Stiverne was only beltholder because Vitali vacated the belt. Like Lennox was only beltholder because Bowe vacated the belt. Like Patterson only became champion because Marciano vacated the championship. That doesn't hold water.
He is just an alphabet champion, same as John Ruiz, Chris Byrd, Herbie Hide, chagaev, Haye and on and on. Wilder won the real belt which follows from Lewis's retiral and the cornation of his successor and Ring champion in the Vitali Vs Sanders fight. Joshua belts have less lineage and were passed out like confetti when Fury got fat. Wilder was champ at the time and is still champ.
The truth, imo is somewhere in between these posts Boxing is a business, and any one of these guys know fighting each other carries risk. Losing most likely means lower paydays in the future. It is more profitable for all 3 of them to be "champ" in one way or another. imo multiple belts are a bunch of bs. There should be one Championship belt that represents everything, but as I alluded to, there is more money to be made from multiple belts.
You can't call someone a dodger when they fought Wlad in their 19th pro fight. He's also fought Whyte, Povetkin, and Parker. He has the best resume in the heavyweight division right now.