Should The Records Of Past Heavies Be Scrutinized & Reassessed Using The Modern Cruiser Standard?

That's all great Serge, but amateurs are not pros, and we are turning to one-man's sparring stories now?


On the eye test, I am more than happy to view Hunter as a wasted talent, but

for one reason or another the boxing journalists (TBRB, Ring, ...), despite all this background and being an American heavyweight, weren't ranking him until the Povetkin draw at neither cruiserweight nor heavyweight. Even at cruiserweight he only got a #9 ranking by the WBO while holding one of their belts for the Usyk fight.

How do we square that circle?


This idea that he "could have easily won a title at cruiserweight" if not for Usyk, is possibly true given how dominant Okolie was (maybe CW is a weak division)... But on the record, Hunter got beat up by Usyk then left the division, and didn't stick around to get that easy title at CW. He then with A-side backing fluffed his lines against Povetkin (who some with the pro-Usyk viewpoint are already saying was shot by that point)

In the future that is going to be a lot of prevaricating and extra context to explain why Hunter was a name to be included on Usyk's heavyweight ledger, as Hunter just doesn't have the resume at pro CW or HW to support it.


I think Usyk fans will have an uphill battle on that one. And it's not even like I don't recognize his CW wins as part of his resume. I am more malleable to the idea than some, I just refuse to give them equal weight based on stretching hypotheticals, when the record books will show quite the opposite


Tbh, I'm not sure how any of this really matches the OP. You lot are really going off the deep end trying to big up Hunter to the levels you are

 

Bakole is a very good win for Hunter stepping up to heavyweight. Your posts do not make sense. Bakole stopped a still live Wach in his next fight. He'd been in the camps of many champs (as had Hunter).

You say "Hunter managed to scrape into the top 10" and follow it with "none of this suggests anything close to top 10". I really don't know how to help you out with this.

Hunter made it into the top 10 after moving to HW within a reasonable time frame; whether you want to call it fast or not doesn't matter. He was ranked top 10 by multiple organizations. He was a seasoned fighter at 28 when Usyk beat him and did not magically become a totally different fighter at heavyweight as you were previously trying to argue. Hunter not being officially top 10 at CW, if anything, gives more strength to the argument that CW wins should count toward overall HW greatness as he seems to have had greater success north while maintaining the same skillset, physique, style.

I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make. I'm not sure you're sure either. This has become tedious and you seem legitimately slow. That's all for this topic.

 

I think this is a case of we just have very different ways of looking at things.

I don't think the record books in 50 years time will consider Hunter a particularly good win. Even off the eye test, we know Usyk is a renowned slow starter and Hunter got beat up as Usyk went through the gears. That doesn't propell anyone from #9 WBO CW to top 10 HW.
However, you seemingly prefer the eye test on subsequent fights at heavyweight, and hold the position that him being ranked later in time can be retroactively applied to 2.5 years prior.

I don't think that is how sport in general has ever really worked. But I understand on fan sites people like to talk about resumes aging well or depreciating over time.

I disagree that that is really a thing. It is a little, but taken to extremes on here. So I prefer to look at at the time rankings. And at the time rankings (Ring, TBRB) didn't place Hunter at all in CW or HW. Sure he got better, maybe, you know, gaining experience against Usyk. But as I say, that is something different entirely. I don't think things remain static even at 28 (Usyk was his 13th pro fight, Povetkin was his 20th - calling a 13 fight pro "seasoned" seems a stretch)

2.5 years after Usyk, Hunter gets a fortuitous draw against Povetkin which ranks him low in the top 10 HW
3.5 years after Usyk he is inactive and looking pretty bad against Logherty (who knows where he was ranked)
4.5 years after Usyk, he is drawing with Jerry Forrest
There were 7 fights between Usyk and Povetkin, and only 3 between Povetkin and Forrest.

Maybe his career just went off a cliff, but I haven't seen a convincing argument that he was anywhere near top 10 heavyweight standard when he fought Usyk. As I say, I don't think history will think much of him unless he turns his career around in the coming years (and at that point it will be going on a decade since the Usyk fight).

Or perhaps, I am being pig headed on this one.