Is Usyk a Top 10 Heavyweight of all time?

There is a basic definitional issue here & no obvious way to decide the right one to choose.

First off, in terms of how great a boxer Usyk is, even though there are FAR MORE divisions than just weighing the HWs, it is possible very Usyk is top 10.Especially when you do not disqualify his amateur career, AND give more credit for advances in sports/science/training/international pool/nutrition, so that we consider someone this century ikely faced much better competition than say mid 20th-thus factoring that in H2H...

Methinks he makes that very rarefied air, amongst ALL boxers.
But if you go by *literally* what HW is, then he is not likely not near top 10, given how many he fought & how good they were as HWs.

BUT: & it is a big ole But(t)...
Do we give him credit for fighting & beating & not losing against soooo many excellent CWs-whose rehydrated/ring weights tended to exceed what good & great HWs weighed until about the late 20th century?

Let us also have less hostility & reflexive denigration between the modernists & traditionalists.
Although the extremes on either side can get absurd.

 

Nobody is buying you pretending to like Usyk lad

 

Why would people rate Usyk below guys like Crawford and Mayweather based on nostalgia though? These are guys that competed very recently

 

LMAO 107 replies already

 

Usyk is officially a locked-in Top 10 All-Time Heavyweight.

He isn't just a modern great - he is a mathematical certainty for the Top 10. There is no legitimate argument to keep him out.

 

Oh for heavens sake, Uysk has fought in the weakest era of heavyweight history. No where near top 10

 

How long have you been following boxing? Everyone says that every era is weak.

 

Since the 1960's, anyone with two functioning eye sockets can see heavyweight boxing is in the gutter. Todays heavyweights are trash, Joshua has been on his back more than Madonna and Fury is an obese slob.

 

The problem here is that all comparison of eras is speculation. We all do it, sure, but it is speculation. And I think that anyone has to objectively admit that if you are talking about head to head fighters, this era is pretty good. These 6'6"-6'7" athletic giants would trounce most eras, or at least be competitive.

2010s- Wladdy and his brother teaming up to beat a bunch of guys who were talented, but comparatively midgets? Haye, Povetkin. Sultan, Byrd, Ibragimov? This was a great era of some sort?

2000- Lewis beating on an ever declining talent poll, and then giving over the division to Ruiz, Byrd, Brewster, Toney....this was a great division?

1990s- yes, or course. No arguments.

1980s- Half Holmes and a bunch of fat drug addicts not fighting each other, Holmes gets beat by a LHW coming up two division, and then Tyson squashing the fat drug addicts? This is a great division?

1970s- yes, of course. Very high quality, but it is worth mentioning that Usyk has a higher fighting weight at heavy than prime Ali or Foreman. This is a better division, but there is some comparative advantage.

1960- Started with Patterson continuing to duck anybody any good. Liston looks like he is going to restore some order, but loses in humiliating fashion to Ali, who squashed retreads before being stripped. Frazier begins his march, but can't fight Ali until the 70s. This is a magical era?

1950- fighters are diminutive by today's standards...not even on par with the cruisers Usyk beat.

etc.

All subjective. I think we all agree that the 70s and 90s were pretty special...the rest...meh.

 

Has to be close at least.

 

It is extremely difficult to call, as this discussion covers ~100 years of the sport where different eras have seen peaks and troughs in the talent pool. For instance I would argue things are quiet in the HW division at the moment prior to a frantic scramble by up and comers for ascendency as the aged champions cash up prior to retirement.

Undoubtedly Olexsandr would have held his own at HW in any era, but he would likely have lost the zero in the losses column in some of them. Ali, Tyson, and a couple of others would have tested him more than he has been by his contemporaries.

 

I would favour prime Fury over anyone Klitschko beat, the Joshua that Usyk beat over most (Thompson, Povetkin, Pulev etc) & Dubois is at least 50/50 with most too.. its also noteworthy how Usyk handled his opposition wheras WK used questionable tactics despite a size advantage & having all the deck stacked in his favour.

He never fought his main rival either wheras Usyk has.. so although K2 was a longer more consistent era it was duller & less challenging than Usyks.. who is a natural CW.