Max Kellerman says Usyk is a historically overrated heavyweight, do you agree?

It seems Kellerman and others are making too big a play of numbers of opponents and forgetting the level. Aside from the step up against Witherspoon and arguably Chisora, Usyk's been fighting world champion level since 2016. He doesn't have a big HW resume because he was taking care of the CW division and only moved up at 32, but he also doesn't have a record stuffed with journeymen or 'learning fights', a lot of these resumes are 'never mind the quality, feel the width'.

 

I have to concur.

 

One constant that persists throughout the ages is that people get far too enthusiastic about the latest thing no matter how good it happens to be. It's safe to assume that all contemporary champions are overrated.

 

They also get misty eyed and unrealistic about the champions of the paxt. Just think about the tales of Harry Greb knocking out Godzilla or the time that Gentleman Jim Corbett knocked out the Sun. Perhaps there is a sqeet spot in time past where the overrating of the present and the past is held in perfect equilibrium.perhaps at present all of us are making unbiased assessments of fighters from 2007-9 and no otherrs?

 

The funny part of Kellerman's argument is that according to his own logic, most of the guys considered to be HW royalty would actually be overrated.

George Foreman never took out "the top 10 HWs" of his era. His early era or his old era. Out of all of George's fights, his only notable wins are Norton, Frazier, Lyle, and Moorer. Lost to Ali, lost to Young, quit for a decade, came back and fought cab drivers, lost to Holyfield, lost to Morrison, then started dropping belts to avoid tough fights after Moorer threw it away against him. Ol' George was HW champ for all of about three years across the near three decades he was a professional boxer.

Frazier is even worse! Loads of Cruiserweight and lighter level guys on his early resume including his first true title fight with five loss Jimmy Ellis. Beat Ali and then the rest of his career was getting blasted to smithereens by Foreman and losing to Ali. Only defended his belt four times with the only truly notable opponent being Ali.

There are hardly any HWs in history that took out every one of the top guys of their time. That's one of the reasons Ali is so well thought of even after all these years. He lost plenty, but he was beating all the best guys over multiple decades. And of the guys that you could argue did take out all the best guys of their era, most of them are going to be in what are considered weak eras a la Klitschko and Holmes. Even Lennox doesn't have a list of ten top/elite level guys he took out unless you really start stretching it to include the likes of Tua, Botha, etc.

Usyk is stuck in the modern boxing game where A-side guys get way too much leeway. He's been forced into rematches as the only way to get fights and the only way for him to truly make some real money. Would his record be any better if he beat AJ, Fury, and Dubois once apiece and then added on three rando guys much worse than the three he fought? Would Kellerman consider him not overrated then? And of course Usyk's career isn't over. Kellerman, who claims to be a boxing fan, seems to not give a ****, but Usyk will probably still fight and beat Parker, a former champ. He claims he wants five more fights. If he does get in 3-5 more fights against top guys in the division then will he be overrated?

 

Your argument makes sense. I had to look at it from a diffrent perspective. I used football to understand where you are coming from. The example is, running backs. People going on about a running back a few years ago breaking Barry Sanders team rushing record. Sanders record was broken on the 17th game of the season. I was like, Barry did it in 16 games. Same goes for rushing yards in a single season, over 2000. Again, OJ Sompson's record was broken, he is still the only guy to break the 2k threshold twice. But guys did it in 16 games, OJ did it in 14. If you've read my past posts about Usyk, you know I think he is nothing less than awsome. So, I get why folks say he's an ATG heavyweight.

 

USYK = GOAT

 

His resume IS a little thin at heavy. But on the other hand, what work he has done, is 24 carat gold. Adding 10 filler names won't greatly increase the value of it.

 

Purely as a Heavyweight? Yes.

As a P4P fighter? No. If anything he's actually underrated by some in this regard.

 

Usyk is an all time great. Kellerman is a moron.

Usyk is clearly the best heavyweight of his era.

Usyk is not overrrated.

But i have to disagree with the idea that bigger = higher quality. Dubois isn't a better fighter than Foreman just because he is 15-20 lbs bigger. Joshua isn't better than Witherspoon just because he is bigger.

Usyk's toughest fight (aarguably) was vs a man who is a little smaller than he is in Maris Breidis. Why? Because Breidis had the power, skill and speed and stamina to keep up with Usyk.

The bigger men are very dangerous for 6-7 rounds but they simply do not have the stamina to maintain that pace for 12 rounds. Even someone like Fury who has a good gas tank for a man of his size still has to pace himself at times.

Don't get me wrong. It is extremely impressive Usyk that Usyk can beat these much bigger more powerful men through his amazing footwork, durability, defense etc. Not every small heavyweight would even have the skill to drag the bigger men into later rounds in order to take advantage of their stamina.

Personally, i feel Usyk would have a tougher time with men his own size or slightly smaller men who have the power, skill and speed. I think Breidis showed this. I think Usyk would have a much toughter time with the likes of Holmes, Ali, Holyfield, Mike Tyson etc. than he does with Joshua or Dubois. This is not to say that Usyk couldn't beat those guys. He would have a good chance of beating them. But would he go unbeaten? Unlikely. No one is unbeatable IMO.

Usyk is clearly #1 cruiser of all time. And while he has had less than 10 heavyweight fights, he has done enough to be a top 10 all time heaavyweight (top 15 at the least). He is not overrated. But the idea that just because he beat bigger men than prior heavies did, that somehow this is a tougher or more impressive task than beating the likes of Foreman, Witherspoon, Liston etc. is something i don't agree with.