If counting cruiserweight as heavyweight. who has better resume: Usyk or Holmes?

Both Usyk and Fury are past their primes Usyk has slowed considerably and Fury is shopworn its a good win for Usyk considering the size difference.

But I wouldn't rate a 36 year old shopworn Fury as some H2H monster and I've always thought Fury's H2H capabilities are overrated he's simply not proven enough against notable opposition.

 

The issue is with your scenario is that you're pitting an unrealistic scenario that Fury is 100 percent peak form vs all of Holmes's opposition.

This is the same Fury that has been floored almost 10 times in his career and has had many poor performances against lower level opposition.

Since Fury beat Wladimir the only real notable opposition he's beaten is a shopworn Whyte which has aged poorly as I said above. Wilder another win that has aged poorly and Fury was down 4 times in 2 fights, and then finally a trilogy vs Chisora in probably one of the most pointless trilogies of all time.

Along with the above you have an immense struggles vs the likes of Wallin in which Fury was actually in shape for so you can't use that as an excuse. And Fury’s performance against him has aged very poorly since Wallin got dismantled by Joshua and lost every round to an ancient Chisora.

Fury has only fought 4 top 10 ranked Heavyweights where as Holmes fought 18 which is 4 times as many and Fury has still looked very beatable despite a lack of real filler to his resume.

If you put Fury on Holmes's same timeline consistently fighting top 10 ranked opposition over 7 years would Fury go 20-0 with his erratic performances and not being able to consistently stay in shape ? Very unlikely.

 

For me Fury never really had a prime so it's hard to really gauge him he had single performances where he looked good I think Wilder 2 was his best performance but I still think he's too unproven overall against notable top contenders.

And me personally I prefer realistic scenarios so when people say "Fury would be the favourite vs Holmes's opposition" then I say to them people why not have Fury fighting consistently vs top 10 Heavyweights then like Holmes was ? That seems the only logical and fair assessment rather than having Fury 100 percent peak form against 20 opponents because Holmes certainly wasn't.

 

Usyk def has an edge in terms of resume Holmes never had the best resume and even his best wins were close fights against past their best or inexperienced fighters (Norton and Witherspoon). Fury, Joshua, Briedis, Gassiev are better wins then anyone Holmes beat by far so I'll give the edge to Usyk.

 

Yeah but prime Gassiev was a beast and completely dominating him is very impressive

 

And when he did move to Heavyweight he was unsuccessful and lost to Wallin which has aged very poorly as Wallin's stock has dropped immensely.

Gassiev was a big puncher but he did seem to get a bit overrated I think Briedis would've dealt with him handily.

I'd have Gassiev even below Berbick I think Berbick has better wins than Gassiev beating a prime Page, Thomas, is more impressive than any of Gassiev's wins.

 

The thing with counting CW or LHW feats at HW in other eras the fighters those guys beat at those weight classes went on to do stuff at HW. Besides Gassiev none of Usyks CW opponents even have the potential to make any noise at HW. Without that you're just adding more decorated padding to Usyks resume.

From a weight standpoint anyone can fight a HW and CW fights are technically HW fights. The first HW title fight had a 150 pound dude. But while those guys were smaller they were fighting the best HWs of their day(sort of) while CWs for whatever reason opted out of that. A lot of old LHWs and even MWs fought in multiple weight classes. How many non champ CWs are taking fights with notable HWs?

If we count Usyks CW resume as a HW resume his resume is still super short. 23 fights 200 rounds. In Usyks 14 fights since reaching the top level hes lost between 35-40 rounds. Holyfield and Haye were more dominant at CW and since reaching the title level at CW Usyks 100% KO rate has dropped 40 points. Adding Usyks CW resume doesn't really cover up any the flaws he has without it.

When someone says a fighter doesn't have enough fights its usually not just that. You can prove a lot in 5 fights hypothetically. If Usyk destroyed Fury and Joshua like Dubois and the Dubois fight didn't have "the foul" people would be much more forgiving of the 7 fights thing. It'd still be a problem don't get me wrong but people would be more understanding. We have proof of this with Beterbiev when he was undefeated. People can get around the 20 fights the lack of dominance they really can't.

 

You're ignoring that he became top dog in arguably the deepest CW division in history, obviously when you fight better competition fights will be more competitive but he has decisively beaten everyone he has faced. While his resume might not have depth it has quality which most people here seem to value more then depth.

 

"In arguably the deepest CW division in history".

This means nothing to me I only follow CW to the extent it effects HW(or LHW). Which besides the 3 champs to come out of that division it hasn't. If fighters commonly were graduating from CW and making noise at HW this would mean something. They aren't so it doesn't. Barring big fish in a small pond fighters who can succeed at HW aren't in CW. Not because of their size but because they just aren't good enough to make fighting at HW worth it. Guys like Gassiev were and could be top 10 guys at HW but they could be champs at CW so CW it is.

I'm not opposed to giving Usyk credit at HW for beating Gassiev. But like I just said Gassiev at his peak is probably a lower top 10 HW guy. How much credit do you expect Usyk to get for beating Gassiev? The Gassiev win had the most value when Usyk was making the switch were arguing whether Usyk could beat larger guys. Now we've established he can its just adding another win to a resume thats so short adding Usyks CW career still leaves it near the bottom of list.


" obviously when you fight better competition fights will be more competitive". Theres level to how good the competition is and how much a champ struggles. Most of the ATGs are usually dominant at a high level thats why they are ATGs. To the extent "fights will be more competitive" its not every fight. Usyk hasn't won a controversial fight but hes lost 25 rounds in his 6 fights with HW contenders(4 individuals) and almost 40 in his 14 fight since becoming a champion. That is not just the norm for an ATG he might be the least dominant long reigning HW champ ever. Marciano probably held that title before Usyk and he won all his fights against top opponents by knockout except one. Usyk is the inverse of that with only the Dubois knockout. So no this is not " obviously when you fight better competition fights will be more competitive" this is what happens when you are a little better than everyone you're fighting but are vulnerable.

Ali lost a lot of rounds in the late 70s but that is considered the best era and if theres nowhere higher to go then it doesn't matter but thats an excuse for when you fight Frazier, Norton, Lyle and Young not Fury, Joshua and Chisora. Ali had also already been dominant over a less respected era which is part of why that era is considered the best one. Usyk has consistantly lost 4 rounds or been almost knocked out by the only 4 HW contenders hes fought. What conclusion are people supposed to reach from that besides him not being tested enough? Ali fought Chisora level guys from his era in Dunn and Coopman when people thought he was otherwise washed he went back to looking like prime Ali.

This is not bringing the whole rematch and only fighting the British thing. People talk about the many reasons people sleep on Tommy Burns. One of them is fighting Squires 3 times. A big problem with Marcianos resume? Jeffries resume? Rematches with older fighters. Usyk seems determined never to fight a new opponent again. After Usyk he wants Chisora. Dominant champs don't have rematches often because they don't need them. Every one of the 4 HW contenders Usyk has fought could argue for a 2nd fight after the 1st one. Rematches are supposed to be because the other guy did unusually well against you so they are doing it over. With Usyk theres nothing unusual about it.

 

They should be ranked at HW based on how they did against their opposition, in the context of the quality and standing of that opposition at HW in the time they fought them, regardless of how each compared in size with that opposition. Imo, Holmes clearly ranks higher. Whilst their top 5 HW wins are comparable, after that the strength in depth of Holmes resume destroys Usyk's.

P4P they should be ranked based on their entire career fights, regardless of weight division, and their size relative to opponents should be factored in. I.e. Fury and Joshua being much bigger than Usyk is immaterial to the latter's standing at HW, but very much mattertial to his P4P ranking. On this basis, I think I'd have Usyk ranked higher, P4P.

 

I think you’re missing the mark on a few fronts, and your take doesn’t fully hold up.

A. Resume Scope: This thread was about total resumes, not just Usyk’s HW run vs. Holmes’ HW run. If we’re talking pound-for-pound (P4P), Usyk’s case is stronger than you admit. He unified cruiserweight (CW) against killers like Gassiev, Briedis, and Glowacki—arguably the deepest CW era ever—then beat HW elites like Joshua and Fury. Holmes has Norton, Shavers, and Cooney, but he never unified a division or faced a gauntlet like Usyk’s CW slate. P4P, Usyk’s beaten higher-quality fighters across two divisions; Holmes’ HW resume is great but narrower.

B. Rematches: The rematch critique is off-base. Immediate rematch clauses are standard when the A-side (Joshua, Fury) loses, and Usyk, moving up as the smaller guy, was never in the driver’s seat contractually. Plus, dominant champs do have rematches—Holmes Shavers twice, Ali had 2 trilogies and fought several opponents twice. Usyk’s fights being close doesn’t mean he’s not elite; it means he’s taking on the best, not padding his record with Dunn-level scrubs like Ali did when “washed.”

C. Ali Tangent: The Ali stuff is a distraction. We’re comparing Usyk to Holmes, not Ali. Holmes lost rounds and nearly got stopped by Shavers not exactly an ATG. Usyk’s losing rounds to Fury and Joshua don’t diminish him; they show he’s fighting the division’s best, not coasting by fighting easy opponents.

D. Rounds and Dominance: Counting rounds is pedantic and misses the point. Holmes dropped at least 6-7 rounds to Norton, got rocked and knocked down by Shavers, Weave and Snipes, and squeaked by Witherspoon and Williams. Usyk’s lost ~25 rounds in 6 HW fights? So what, Fury and Joshua are ATG-level foes and way bigger and stronger then him, and he still won clearly. Briedis was his only close CW fight, and he aced that too. You underplay his opponents: Fury’s a lineal champ, Joshua’s a two-time unified titlist, Dubois is a rising threat, none of them are “Chisora-level” pushovers. Dominance isn’t just KOs, Usyk’s technical mastery mirrors Holmes’ jab-heavy decisions, not Marciano’s slugfests. If anything, Usyk’s HW run is more impressive than Holmes’ early title defenses against middling competition

You’re right that Usyk’s HW resume is short, but that’s because he’s cleaned out CW and jumped straight to the sharks at HW. Holmes had 20 defenses, sure, but plenty were against overmatched guys like Scott Frank. Usyk’s “vulnerability” is just him facing stiffer tests—and winning every time.