Is Usyk a top 10 HW of all time...?

I'd say he's borderline top10. If/when he gets the Dubois/Parker winner and becomes two time undisputed HW champion, I'll feel much more comfortable with it.

 

So, Addie just gets to come and go with no heads up now? Like, none?

 

Merry Christmas mate!

 

And to ye as well, my man. We have had many moons witnessed betwixt us and shall have many more. A fortune cookie is telling me that and it does mention you by name.

 

Holyfield beats Usyk at cruiserweight for me. He'd also struggle with Qawi.

 

Top 15 heavy for me, though I don't think rating him just inside the top 10 is outrageous by any means. Clearly a case of "quality over quantity".

Of the short-term heavyweights (e.g. Spinks and Tunney), he's easily the greatest.

 

Through no fault of his own, there is a dearth of quality scalps barring him from a top 5 spot (he fought and beat the best there was available in his time - I just tend not to view those men in esteem commensurate with their hype) - but under the right circumstances, I'm not sure he wouldn't be able to crack it, on talent. Even with being a tad undersized by modern standards.

 

Neither Spinks nor Tunney are anywhere near the Top-10, though - So, what is the case for Usyk making Top-15 or 'not outrageously' inside the Top-10?

 

Top 15 HW to me. I can easily come up with 5 or six HW champs that I believe he eclipses. In the Top 2 or 3 CW.

So if you do the math, surely in the Top 20 all time. If he had 10-12 wins at HW he'd be a lock for almost everyone, even Tim Bradley.

I don't count his amateur career but it should be considered for the BHOF.

 

I presume most have Dempsey and Marciano as their locks for top 10.

Why?

Just why?

Educate me because nothing on film or
resume impresses me at all.

Bert 'the bull****" Sugar may have brainwashed so many with his crap but not me.

Usyk would kick their arses easily.

 

Ten doesn't make sense in the context of Usyk and either way, five feels arbitrarily picked to suit Usyk.

And it's not about Bugner himself, but the collective of Frazier, Foreman, Wepner, Lyle, and Bugner not being "easily" worse than Usyk's run. I don't think Bugner, who was a perennial contender from 1971-1976, pales in comparison to Dubois, either.

 

How many great past heavyweights do you think would beat Joshua in such a way that he’d have a mic-stealing, belt-stealing psychotic, post-fight, cringe-inducing breakdown?

 

Why would Usyk nabbing a belt unfairly taken from him from potentially a guy he already outboxed and finished with a jab in Dubois, be that historical? I like Usyk a lot, but he's the Champ with or without the trinkets. When you boil it down, these would be defenses against solid contenders. I don't think a heavy coat of gloss is necessary here.

 

When Lyle is the third best one, it means your position is inarguable.

 

How about his WSB fights? That is a pro league.