Joshua - WBO should overrule Usyk's mandatory challenge until later

https://www.dazn.com/en-IN/news/box...on-fury-unification/gf2hj9dxuqny13odowe3084gg

I agree with this.

At the end of the day, it's either going to be overruled as Joshua wants it, or Joshua is going to vacate.

If he vacates, it will be Usyk vs Joyce for the title. Usyk will be probably win this, but will anyone care?

Does he get to walk with this belt with any sort of pride? NO! Witherspoon, Chisora and Joyce? What a pathetic title run that is! No one is going to recognise him as a real champion because he's fought no-one at this level to justify him being champion.

It just means that Fury or Joshua will fight him after anyways. It's going to be the exact same scenario. Whoever wins in the big fight will face Usyk next, whether it's because he has the belt or he's the mandatory.

So why not overrule the mandatory for now and make it so the winner HAS to fight Usyk after? This way at least we get an undisputed fight between Joshua and Fury, which makes it that much better.

I personally don't agree that Usyk has done anything to deserve a mandatory anyway, but if he's going to get it fine. It's up to WBO to decide who their mandatory is, but I see no reason why Usyk cannot wait until after. I don't care if he's getting old. His last two performances suggest he's already past his prime anyway.

Regardless of what you think, most people would agree that Undisputed fights should take priority first over mandatory challenges. Only Usyk fan boys would want to see this first over an undisputed fight.

Surely Usyk would only care about being champion if he actually had to fight someone of quality to get it?

 

If the fight gets delayed any more then we risk never seeing it or only seeing it far later down the line when it matters less.

 

Are you trolling? So AJ beating top 10 fighters like Wlad, Whyte, Povetkin, Parker and Ruiz is the same as Usyk beating Chisora and Joyce for a title? Chisora is not top 10 quality, Witherspoon isn't top 30 quality, and Joyce has fought literally no one, and is arguably Chisora quality or less.

 

Doesn't matter if it's vacant or not. That was never my point. My point is who you're having to fight to get there, and if you're in a fight for a vacant belt then who cares if they already owned the belt or not? Are you seriously saying the main thing you take into consideration is whether or not a fight for a vacant belt rather than the quality of the opposition?

If anything you can argue that makes both fighters hungry rather than just the challenger! You can't say it's less of a win because it was vacant when he got it, you have to look at the opposition! That's what matters!

The only value in having a belt is that you beat the best to acquire it, and joshua has done that more than anyone else!

Your logic is complete garbage. If you cannot see the clear superiority of Wlad, Povetkin, Parker, Ruiz, Whyte run of wins vs ****ing Chisora and Joyce then I don't know what to say to you!

 

So you're going to bring attention to the above fighters and disregard the clearly superior fighters I mentioned? Oh, but they don't count because they didn't have a belt at the time! Ignore their records and their quality.

So by your logic Wilder beating ****ing Stiverne to become champion is better than Joshua beating Povetkin or Wladmir because Stiverne had a belt!??

Wladmir didn't have belts, true, but he lost them to Fury. He was still a top 3-5 fighter at least. Same with Povetkin who was rank 3 when he fought Joshua, and is currently rank 4.