How one sided was Fury vs Wilder 1 to you ?

Fury was robbed, but i still think it was a competitive fight. Fury didn't dominate the whole fight, of course Fury ran him over in the rematch

 

There was a case for a draw, a few of those younds there wasnt a great deal happening

 

It wasn't one sided (Fury was put on his ass twice after all) but a clear win for Tyson imo. I gave Wilder 2 rounds except for the KD rounds, so I had it 114-112. I think that's the most you can give him.

 

Fury should have won that one.

 

It was a close fight to score because of the knockdowns.

 

I would say it was only competitive as a boxing match because of two KD punches Wilder landed. As far as a fight goes, you could argue the first Fury Wilder fight was competitive because Wilder hurt him worse, even though Fury hurt him decently in the final round.

Fury in all boxing scoring departments dominated the fight round by round, though he didn't dominate in terms of beating him up.
It was an incredible contrast of styles, boxing domination and bombs landed.

Wilder was more competitive in the third fight really, after Sugar Hill told Fury he was a destroyer and should walk down the biggest punchers in boxing. The second fight almost looked like that too, it's just Wilder missed by a fraction of an inch in the opening rounds when Fury was coming forward and didn't quite hit him clean with bombs. That's why the third fight almost had Fury KO'd again, because that strategy was insane.

People can say he almost got KO'd in the first fight by boxing defensively, so that isn't a good strat either, but the difference is he actually went off script in the final round and started exchanging and standing in front of Wilder. They acknowledged this afterwards. He wasn't hit anywhere near as much and he wasn't hurt as early in the fight.

 

Much closer than Fury v Usyk

 

Wilder was on the floor zero times and Fury was on the floor twice.
It was such a one-sided fight; for me.

 

I thought that Fury won, but the fight was not one-sided, the reason was probably that Fury had just recovered from the crisis he was going through, and mentally he was not yet at the level...

 

He apparently went off script after he got floored in the 12th, started to exchange, and find out Wilder can't handle the pressure. That's why he prepared different gameplan for the rematch and chose SugarHill to help him put it to work.

 

A draw is not the egregious robbery people portray it to be; Wilder knocked down Fury in two separate rounds, so he needed to win three of the other ten rounds to get a draw, and given there wasn't an awful lot happening in many of those rounds I have no difficulty scoring the fight a draw.

 

1 Fury
2 Wilder
3 Fury
4 Fury
5 Fury
6 Fury
7 Fury
8 Fury
9 Wilder 10-8 knockdown
10 Fury
11 Fury
12 Wilder 10-8 knockdown

Fury 115-111

I'm not a fan of Fury I thought he clearly won and was robbed and why I say robbery is because one judge had it 115-111 in favour of Wilder so even without the 2 knockdowns the judge still would've had Wilder winning and that's ridiculous.

Can I see it a bit closer ? Yeah I can see 4 rounds for Wilder I think 5 is a stretch but I don't see any argument for Wilder winning.

 

Thought it was a clear Fury win. Haven't got the score cards to hand but even with the KD's Fury should have won by at least 2 point if not 4.

 

The knockdowns made it a close fight. I scored it for Fury at the time but I could have seen a draw. I didn't think a draw was a robbery.

 

This. Wilder only really has a case for round 2 and round 4 (in addition to the KD rounds). It was competitive but Fury won pretty clearly by at least 114-112.

Scoring it a draw would mean also giving Wilder another round outside of those rounds which would be very, very questionable.