AJ definitely wants Fury's resume

Who is going to remember Joshua's bouts against these no-hopers in 20 years? Not many. Nobody will give a damn about Molina, Takam, Pulev, Parker, Breazeale, Martin, Povetkin, Rice Pudding Jr et al. Everyone will remember this epic trilogy, and for good reason.

 

I don't even think "ranking" matters much, but which of AJ's opponents were legitimate top 10 when he faced them?

Whyte wasn't.
Martin was borderline top 10, based only on a crap win over the forgotten Glazkov, and an IBF belt, not on results of real substance.
Breazeale wasn't.
Molina wasn't.
Wlad was top 5 still, arguably top 2, but coming off a loss and a lay-off. At 41, on his way down. Had not won a fight in 2 years.
Takam wasn't quite top 10, was he? Maybe top 15.
Parker was top 10, maybe top 5 or 3, based on his WBO belt, not really on his performances or results. Evidence suggests he was never much above Chisora-level, if at all.
Povetkin was legitimate top 10, top 5. At 39, he was heading downhill too.
Ruiz, a decent fighter, but wasn't in many top 10s going in against AJ. Beat the **** out of AJ.
Ruiz, was top 3 in rematch, but only because AJ had gone and lost to him.
Pulev, maybe some had him hanging in the lower end of the top 10 somehow, depending on who you ask, another borderline case. Another 39 year old.
Usyk, with a win over Chisora and former undisputed cruiserweight honours, was afforded top 10 status by most. Boxed AJ's ears off.


It's a fine record. No one can say AJ hasn't faced worthy opponents. 2 of them were actually good enough to beat him and proved it.
But people really exaggerate the quality and ranking of some of these opponents.

 

Would Joshua come out the other end of a trilogy against even a prime Povetkin?

 

Yet they are both active heavyweights in the same era and Fury is currently held in much higher regard than the AJ.

Fury has won every title there is to win (doing so in his opponents back yard) whilst still remaining undefeated.

Not arguing against AJ fighting a deep talent pool.... but when it's all said and done he went round picking up vacant titles (thanks to Fury) and has lost 2 fights that in reality he shouldn't have (e.g. "the fat Mexican" and "the blown up cruiser").

 

Why is it that so many people put stock into "top 10"? Even some of the stronger names on Joshua's record like Pulev and Parker are no-hopers. Who cares if they were "top 10"? Nobody is going to remember those stinkers. Not a single soul will go back and rewatch them - no entertainment and certainly no historical value or drama. Crap!

 

I agree. Often, any top 10 is padded with some mediocre contenders or old guys who are hanging in the top 10 based on long-past achievements. It doesn't mean much.
But, even for those who think it does, it is worth noting that many of AJ's "world title" wins were against guys who very few people would have had inside their top 10s anyway!

 

Only if Fury fights Usyk and Ruiz and beats them.

 

Joseph Parker is one of AJ's best wins. Big win at the time.
And I really like Parker as a man, and as a boxer, he has some skills.
But, in the cold light of day, he was never as good as we wanted him to be. We ignored his poor showings against Ruiz, Cojanu and Hughie Fury, and hoped he'd raise his game for the AJ fight. The division was quite empty at the time, with Fury gone AWOL, and Wlad gone for good. Parker was a young guy with a WBO belt.
But, as of now, his level has never been much above Chisora-level, if that. Even if he stops Chisora in the rematch, and I hope he does, he's not above prime Chisora level.

And to this day, the dull points win over Parker stands out as one of AJ's best. At least Parker wasn't 40 years old.

 

You forgot Cunningham who was a legitimately good win and he beat Kevin Johnson when it was worth something to do so.

 

Johnson was a never-was when Tyson beat him.

A tough sparring partner with a good nickname, but next to no output & posed no risk at all to anyone in the top 10. Fact.

Cunningham was a blown up CW. Shocking choice of opponent.

 

On paper I think most would take AJs resume.

But if you dig a little deeper and actually look at when opponents were fought, where they were fought and their age.. it gets interesting.

Would I rather win my world titles in Germany and US against two champions on their own soil, one unbeaten for a decade and one 40 fights unbeaten or beat Charles Martin for the IBf title on home soil?

Know what I mean?

So it could be a case of AJs resume is "deeper" but Fury has the best couple of wins.

 

AJ has the better wins by quite a bit. He might want the no losses part though.

 

Joshua has 1 great name on his resume, and 3 good names on his resume. The rest are dross. Pulev, Brezeale, Charles Martin etc. Who cares.

Fury has 3 great names on his resume (Klit, Wilder, Wilder) and 1 good name. Potentially 2 good names if Wallin beats Whyte.

 

Half of AJ's best wins are the AARP club. He struggled more in those fights more than a rising/current star should each time. He's 2-2 since he hasn't been fighting as many of them.