where does anthony joshua rank all time ?

P4P goat in terms of living in peoples' heads rent free. Is it just the hype around the guy that makes some people so nutty when Joshua is brought up?

I'd have him between 30 - 25 in all time hw rankings. Good title reign. The win over Wlad is actually a little underrated, people act like Wlad was shot but he was still the toughest h2h fight in the division. Beat undefeated versions of Parker and Whyte, veteran versions of Povetkin and Pulev.

Weird how much people see the Ruiz loss as damaging his standing. Yet most boxing fans rate Lewis highly despite getting taken out by McCall and Rahman. And if AJ doesn't get credit for the Ruiz rematch because Ruiz turned up fat then Lewis doesn't for the McCall rematch where McCall turned up having a mental breakdown and refused to fight. Same with Wlad: ranked highly despite the one-sided losses to Brewster and Sanders.

I'm hoping Joshy boy still has a big win or two left in him.

 

I don't think it had anything to do with age.

Dubois come out assertive and put Joshua on the backfoot and he simply caught Joshua with a shot he didn't recover from.

It's no different than when Joshua got caught by Ruiz and didn't recover.

Joshua has a suspect chin and poor recuperative powers and that's nothing to do with age.

I didn't hear anyone bringing up Joshua's age when he destroyed Ngannou, Wallin, prior to the Dubois fight either. Everyone was saying Joshua was back to his aggressive self that's why Joshua was the favourite over Dubois.

If Dubois caught any version of Joshua with that same right hand he would be seriously compromised.

 

I'll respectfully disagree. The chin doesn't get better over time, and he got surgery after instead of fighting again. That generation is on its last legs.

 

That's what I was thinking

 

If youre talking about top fighters of all weightclasses he's outside of the top 100 probably around 140. If youre talking about just HW probably top 40.

 

If there's an UNDEFEATED CHAMPION in your division who oddsmakers have you in a close fight against, and you do not fight that UNDEFEATED CHAMPION, you have not established yourself as the best.

Joshua didn't fight Wilder or Fury and he lost to Usyk twice. He was never the best of anything. The brief period he was ranked 1, the whole boxing world was clamoring for the mega fight with Wilder to see who the best was. It didn't happen. End of.

Losing to Ruiz while ranked #1 proved that such a ranking was suspect in the first place as Joshua never had the qualities to reign.

 

Alt account who calls his favorite fighter "Joshy boy" can't understand why people hold losses and against a pro boxer when assessing legacy. Weird indeed.

People hold Vlad and Lewis' losses against them. You weren't here years ago. Vlad getting stopped thrice and Lewis getting one shot KTFO twice was pretty much all anyone talked about. They respect them now because Vlad went on to forge a legacy over a decade of dominance, and Lewis was undisputed with an ATG skillset. Joshua went on to get dominated by a smaller fighter twice, then get blown out by a fighter who has been JTFO twice (curiously choosing to NOT enact his rematch clause).

Losses matter, more so when a fighter was never clearly the best in the division.

 

Really good contender; never quite became "The Man." Roughly around Ken Norton's greatness level.

 

I agree that A J is \ was past his best. We do seem to have, IMHO, a bit of a modern thought process in general that fighters - especially at HW, are still prime well into their 30s. While they tend to age better, I don't think many fighters will be anywhere near their best in their mid 30s. Most people peak physically in their 20s - and the career trajectories of boxers tends to show that. I have posted about this before.
However, I think it's more that AJ had dropped his level of competition and was stepping back up again against a young, strong, streaking fighter. I think the main factor here was DDs style and tactics, which seemed to overwhelm Joshua.

 

He was the best heavyweight in the world from April 2017 to June 2019 according to every ranking outlet, so your mental gymnastics are of no use here. Nobody who wasn't a fanboy even thought about rating Wilder on the same level as AJ - he didn't prove himself enough. AJ's resume was head and shoulders above Wilder's and that's how you rate fighters - based of resume. Neither Wilder nor AJ established themselves as THE champion, but AJ was clear number 1 during that time.

If we stick to your line of thinking, Roy Jones was never the best light heavyweight in the world. There was an UNDEFEATED CHAMPION (lineal champion at that, the best in the division) who he didn't fight. And the situation was similar - Michalczewski wasn't eager to fight him just like Wilder was ducking AJ.

AJ losing to Usyk in 2021 has nothing to do with his rankings between 2017 and 2019. According to that logic Fury was never the best heavyweight in the world either - he didn't beat the undefeated champion before he got caught on PEDs in 2016, never beaten a holder of 3 belts between 2020 and 2024 (AJ who avenged his loss and undefeated Usyk) and ultimately he clearly lost to Usyk twice.

Losing in a shocker doesn't erase what you did before losing. Especially if the loss is avanged and seen as a slip up. Losing to Buster Douglas doesn't erase Mike dominance between 86 and 90 even tho he never was the best heavyweight in the world again after that and never avenged it. Losing to Hasim Rahman doesn't erase Lennox' reign before it.

You can be the best heavyweight in the world at certain stage and then just lose it and not be considered as such. Since AJ was the best between 2017 and 2019, he never got that status back. And it's completely ok. You can't look at the past restrospectively. Some people, even on this forum, are trying to act like Fury vs Wilder match up in Feb 2020 wasn't no. 1 and no. 2 just because Wilder got exposed after. But the reality was, they were universally viewed as no. 1 and no. 2 at the time, despite the minority saying AJ was Top 2 because he held 3 belts. Minority might have said that Wilder was at AJ's elvel between 2017-2019, but he really wasn't. AJ was the star with the better resume and more belts, he was universally considered the best out there.

 

At the time there was a 3 way debate to who was really the best in the world between AJ/Fury/Wilder.

Not saying this was right or wrong but still.

 

Just for heavyweights? I'm sure he's outside the top 30. I voted top 50. Across all weight classes combined, he's ranked outside the top 150

Are you really going to tell me that the heavyweight division has not produced more than 30 fighters in its entire history capable of surviving an upset against 'Fat Beluga' Andy Ruiz? ^^

 

This is fair up to a point... There was more than it was possible to achieve in what wasn't the best era.

At the same time... It's a bit iffy to hold some of this against him - it's not his fault Wilder wouldn't fight him (regardless of whether you blame Wilder or his management in the end, it's clear which side the roadblock was on), it's not his fault that Fury wouldn't fight him, and it's not fault lineal was off the table (Fury holding it hostage whilst pissing dirty, retiring and then coming back to fight B-grade fighters up until Usyk).

Granted, you can't give him credit for these things as if they were certs - Wilder would've had a punchers chance at minimum, and a Fury fight would've been interesting...

What I'm getting at here is this isn't something you can really knock points off for - but it's also a spot where more points should've been available (but just weren't).

 

The not implausible defence for that one is, ironically, more money...

That is, the idea that (as many at the time thought) Fury was high profile but basically shot and incapable of performing at a serious level anymore... So an easy win there would boost Wilders profile and enable him to demand a bigger cut.

Rather sensible really - on the one hand was a bumfighter with a pretty poor resume and on the other was a unified champion who'd beaten an old ATG in Wlad and a couple of contenders Wilder had swerved... It was very clear who was the A-side - what better way to try and drag things towards parity than to beat the other guy who'd beaten old Wlad?


Looks silly in hindsight (birds in hands and birds in bushes, as it were) - but at the time it's not quite as obviously silly...
(You could say the same for Ortiz ducking Joshua to rematch Wilder for much less - he arguably should've won the first and obviously figured he'd be able to finish the job second time, then he could get the undisputed match for much bigger money).

 

To be fair both men singed to fight each other in 2021, but Wilder won the arbitration and all the plans went to hell.

AJ wanted to be great and fought everybody he could have fought. He just wasn't as good as he and some poeple thought. Nothing wrong about that.