Aj v Fury

I answered that already.
Joshua can win, if Joshua improves, and I do think Joshua has improved and can continue to improve.

 

I get the impression it's a promotion issue (ie whether a fight vs Takam or Kabayel justifies one of the fights on his ESPN deal). I think if it was simply for the sake of a tuneup (ignoring the obligations of his contract) Fury would've fought for free or at a financial loss if Joshua was lined up next.

 

I think both of them are good, it's just that there isn't a particularly competitive chasing pack around them which adds to the competitiveness of the given 'era'. Both Fury and Joshua, IMO, are substantially better than the rest of the top 10. The only question mark is Usyk but he's still a bit of an unknown.

IMO Joshua's athleticism and Fury's natural ability/physical attributes would make either competitive throughout history.

 

If AJ doesn’t learn to slip the jab. He will be going backwards all night, never shown he can punch of the backfoot. Will expend so much nervous energy dancing to fury’s feints till he blows up. Gets mauled and stopped. The biggest misconception is AJ is better inside. If fury closes the gap avoiding the uppercut he mauls him

 

The Joshua record myth is one of the most bemusing things that is consistently parroted on this forum. Most concede that Fury has 3 top level wins. Those who side with Joshua have to admit that his best victory is one of Fury's sloppy seconds. They are caught in a sticky situation because many of these same people argue that Klitschko was old and past it versus Fury, and rejuvinated versus Joshua despite having being 41 and not 39, 18 months inactivity, coming off a loss and competing in England. It was fairly evident during the Joshua bout that although Klitschko was in good shape, he was gassing badly mid way through and leading with lunging, desperate and predictable left hooks.

Then there's the rest. Joshua essentially had his IBF belt bought off of Charles Martin, who won the title against an opponent who blew out his knee in the second round. Farcical.

Then he fought absolute puddings in Molina, Breazeale and Takam. I've yet to come across a single person who propagates the Joshua strong record myth that has explained how these are record strengthening bouts. They are absolute gutter bouts. All on home Matchroom turf and the unspoken benefits which come with it.

Then there's Paint Dry Parker who once looked like a good prospect, who had razor close bouts with Ruiz, who hadn't beaten anybody decent, and Takam who is a Euro level boxer. I had Ruiz beating Parker, but could see it go either way. Parker looked hellish against Cojanu and has since been beaten by Whyte and has looked awful in every other outing. Yet Joshua laboured to a 12 round tickling snoozefest helped along by a Matchroom referee. Is that a record strengthening bout?

Then there's old Povetkin who was knocked down by... David Price and has never held a world title in his career, built up by Sky as some sort of legend. He's old, short and has serious stamina issues. Povetkin was still a top 10 guy, but that's hardly saying much. It's a "good" win.

Then he got absolutely spanked by little fat Andy Ruiz who couldn't even trouble the ghost of Liakhovich, who took the fight on short notice and hadn't experienced anything like it. When you evaluate a record, you have to weigh it up, and that includes the bad. This was bad. Wins against Molina, Breazeale, Takam, Parker and Povetkin hardly compromise this embarrassment.

Joshua then ran from a Ruiz who was even fatter than he had been prior. Nearly 300lbs. I mean, come on.

Then there's Pudding Pulev who was 39 years old and his best wins are Chisora, Ustinov and Hughie Fury.

Three questions
Can someone please tell me how this apparent "depth" overrides Fury's superior 3 wins?
Can someone please tell me how beating Molina, Martin, Parker, Takam, Breazeale, Paint Dry Parker, Povetkin, and Pulev is significantly better than beating Chisora x2 (when Chisora was undefeated and at that point even money with Fury), Cunningham, Hammer and Wallin?
Would those versions of John McDermott have given the likes of IBF World Champion Martin or Molina a tough night? Absolutely, that's how big of a joke these bouts are.

 

Joshua hater.

 

Just because Fury has defeated Wilder doesn't mean that he's out of the mix. How does anybody know Joshua would beat Wilder, just because Fury has?

Joshua has done many a funny dance from far less than Wilder is able to dish out.

 

To go ad-hominem is to admit that you have no argument.

Weak.

 

Actually i don't need an argument because i'm a big fan of both

 

AJ has just tweeted, looks like the fight is done!

 

Just saw that

Fingers crossed

 

I actually agree - just couldn’t be bothered with the predictable ‘but Wilder is really bad’ responses that I’ve already debated with people many times.

 

What did hesay?

 

Nothing too optimistic. He’s been presented with the offers now.

But if 1 party (or both) don’t like the offers then it’s not gona happen is it. Still a few HUGE obstacles to overcome.

 

Joshua said "1 OFFICIAL offer".
That's after Hearn said 4 offers.
And Fury seemed to list more than 4 offers.