Oleksandr Usyk is clearly the best fighter of the 21st century uncontested.

Again, separate issue. You guys are acting like I'm a Fury fan. I have harshly criticized the man multiple times on this very site.

No one is denying Fury's resume lacks depth and could've fought more of his contemporaries. But the reality is, he was a huge, 6'8, 270 skilled undefeated fighter who dethroned two reigning champions (Klitschko and Wilder) and was an undefeated 2x champ when Usyk beat him. It's also reality Usyk was 2 years younger, 40 lbs lighter, and moving up from a lower weight class. It's an amazing accomplishment for Usyk no matter how you slice it.

In comparison, Floyd beat an older, shopworn (but still skilled and energetic) Pacquiao who was on his 5th weigh class and who had been beaten 4x previously, including a brutal KO loss to Marquez. Floyd's win is more exceptional in terms of name recognition and historical/p4p significance, but Pac was a lot more worn out than Fury. Usyk had to overcome significantly greater odds than Mayweather, at least physically.

For the record, I stated earlier I thought Floyd was greater than Usyk.

 

If only Fury dominated smaller fighters like Cunningham and Povetkin or didn't look like crap against Ngannou then maybe Usyk getting the best of him would be seen as a remarkable achievement. Usyks entire legacy, skillset and mindset is all time greatness, not beating Fury imo. Good win but it's not an atg win for me. It's not going to age well

 

It's an atg win because of the circumstances and stats that you keep ignoring, not because Fury himself is an atg. You aren't addressing anything I'm saying.

 

The circumstances you describe are overrated, which is why Fury has struggled in so many matches he shouldn't have despite having a thin resume. Fury doesn't dominate agile cruiserweights and he admitted they can be a serious problem

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/16342978/fury-admits-cunningham-outboxed-him/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/talksp...ight-steve-cunningham-wladimir-klitschko/amp/

 

What does Fury struggling with agile cruiserweights (all of whom he had defeated btw) have to do with the fact Usyk had to overcome a 5 inch height, 7 inch reach, and 40 pound weight difference?

Is it common or easy for fighters to overcome such vast differences?

Is it common or easy to defeat 2x undefeated champions?

 

Because in order for the feat to be all time great worthy Fury actually has to either A: be a great or B: have a track record of dominating top level cruiserweights but he ticks neither of those boxes. He said himself Cunningham was his hardest fight even after the wilder trilogy. Fury has been hurt, floored and put on skates by featherfisted cruiserweights and non punchers on several occasions, which suggests even light heavyweights could hurt them if they landed

Similar dimensional disparities have been overcome by fighters who aren't great, and diminishing returns are apparent at heavyweight

 

What are all these big wins? Fury's main claim to fame is beating an old Wlad who was kayoed in very next fight and then retired and Wider who is almost totally unproven against ranked opponents and got beaten easily when he stepped up and tried fighting better opposition.
His record doesn't inspire any confidence in him beating talented smaller men.

Kabayel, Hrgovic, Joshua, Povetkin, Parker, Zhang were all available to fight among others

 

It seems like a huge stretch to claim Hopkins wasn't prime because of one bad performance. He suffered humiliating losses to Jermain Taylor prior to scoring some of his most impressive wins. If one awful performance renders you non-prime Usyk wouldn't get credit for the Joshua and Dubois wins due to their debacles with Ruiz and Lerena

 

Having a track record of dominating top level cruisers is a manufactured criteria you made up on the spot in this debate to discredit Usyk, so I'll completely ignore that.

As for Fury needing to be great for it to be a great win, this is also nonsense. Foreman wasn't an ATG when Ali beat him, but that was an ATG win for Ali. Ali was fighting someone 8 years younger who was an undefeated gold medalist who effortlessly crushed 2 of the best fighters on the planet and was terrorizing the division with a 90% KO ratio.

Duran beating Barkley is an ATG win because Duran was a dwarf moving up from lightweight and was well past his prime.

Pacquiao vs Thurman was an ATG win because he was a smaller, older fighter moving up to defeat a prime undefeated young welterweight.

So by all means, tell me about these other cruisers/heavies who beat championship level opponents dozens of lbs heavier, younger, and undefeated. It must happen all the time apparently according to you since this is no big deal.

 

Wladmir had been dominating the division for 10 years. His loss to Joshua a year later is irrelevant, Fury was the one who dethroned him. It's a great win.

Wilder wasn't beaten easily when he stepped up, he beat Stiverne (champion), Ortiz 2x (top 10 opponent) and took Fury to a draw the first time knocking him down twice. Fury was the first one to dethrone him in the rematch and it was a great win.

For the 4th time, no one is saying Fury couldn't have fought more opponents. That's not the point. I'm not replying anymore until you actually address what I said. You do this every single time with everyone you talk to.

 

Sorry Wilder was not s great win
Wlad yes of course, but Wilder was a fraud and protected paper title holder. I would even put the whyte win and first 2 chisora wins over Wilder

 

He's five or six imo. Pac, Floyd, B-Hop and Morales are definitely above him. You could make an argument for him being below Wlad and Marquez too, but he could be above them.

 

I think anything from 2-4 is appropriate for Morales this century. He was at one point like 50-2, a 3 weight champion and had victories over prime versions of Barrera and Pacquiao.

So many people bring up Marquez's success against Pacquiao and I always point out that Marquez never actually comprehensively beat Pacquiao when Pac was in his prime. Morales fought a prime version of Pacquiao and then thoroughly beat him. That's not a joke. Pacquiao was 26 years old and lightning fast and powerful and Morales actually made it look easy.

 

Yes avoid the logical deductions. If you want to take it that far literally every circumstance you decribe to raise the stocks on any win is manufactured criteria, its exactly why you're debating against 2 guys who disagree with your position. The entire premise of Usyks "atg" win is Fury is an "elite" boxer, and a giant SHW. Except out of Furys own mouth he struggles with mobile cruiserweights and called Cunningham his hardest fight, still reiterating the statement post Klitschko and wilder trillogy. This and more is why Usyk beating him is very impressive, not atg worthy to me, Fury doesn't dominate cruiserweights, yet in hypothetical match ups he gets plenty of leeway against atg level guys which shows the warped perception of Furys invulnerablility against smaller guys

Is this the same guy calling Wilder a great win ? No skills trash resume wilder ? Is that right ?Wasnt wilder also way smaller than Fury ? By your logic that should diminsh some value
Foreman even then had a better resume than Fury, was a KO puncher, and the win has grown in value since. Fury's not an all time great, Foreman is. Ali was already an all time great heavyweight, were they calling the win all time great or Ali an all time great and the best heavyweight ever ? Consider heavyweight boxing have moved up and many more feats have been accomplished raising the expectations. People were already calling Ali the best ever after Liston because they were using the eye test, not because Liston was the greatest win ever, and Liston has a way longer reign than Fury, considering Fury arguably wasn't even reigning and beating top guys at all when he had the belt.

Duran was a natural light weight, the underdog and old as hell. Name 2 more natural lightweights who could pull it off at 175. You can't, False equivalence. I can name several smaller heavyweights and natural cruiserweights who could beat Fury and my assertions aren't baseless considering little Cunningham almost got it done, which is the whole point, beating Fury as a small man is not all time great worthy to me when Fury is verbatim vulnerable to mobile cruiserweights and his resume stinks post Klitschko, we never saw that version of Fury again. Ajagba just drew with someone who had a 60 pounds advantage, a disparity which would be absolutely overkill below cruiserweight, need Iist more examples to prove diminishing returns ? Fury got beat up by a 37 year old UFC fighter and dropped prior to Usyk but its swept under the rug. Usyk was actually the favorite to beat Fury both times unlike virtually all the examples you listed, go ahead and google it if you can't remember. Pacquiao was way older than Usyk, a natural junior flyweight at 108 pounds and Thurman was actually in his prime, nor coming off a questionable performance against a journeyman level opponent. Keep the false equivalences coming