Personally, I am Usyk of Oleksandr threads so I can't believe I am starting one. Also, this is not a bash Usyk post, this is a serious question. The measure of any fighter's greatness is achievements and quality wins. Usyk's achievements are already fantastic and don't need to be regurgitated here. My questions is about his quality wins. When I joined this website I was so surprised to find out that his big cruiserweight wins are considered to be special. It's great that they were all done on the road but other than his majority decision win over Briedis I think of them as wins by a great fighter over good fighters. This is very much akin to Ali's world tour in the mid 1960s. Like I said, they are good wins but can someone explain why they are often written about as if they were the stuff of legend?
There are different ways to look at it. Great fighters do not often exist at the same weights at the same time, and when they do, it involves either a young buck taking out an old lion, or the "Schmeling paradox," where fighters became great by beating each other, and paradoxically, losing one. Usyk's wins are great because they involve taking out good young guns who alternatively could have gone on to be great, and might yet. Gassiev has wins over Dorticos, Wlodaczck and Lebedev, Briedis over Dorticos, Glowacki, Huck, Charr, and Perez, Glowacki over Huck and Cunningham. The guys are as legit as they come. Two of three could still go on to be the big man in the limelight. Hunter made some serious noise at heavy. Throw in Bellew, Huck and Mchunu, and that is pretty special to me. For comparisons, some people have Larry Holmes as even the second best heavy ever. Who the hell did he beat? A literally crippled Ali? Oft-knocked out Ken Norton? Tim Witherspoon? And some of these were either-way affairs. I am pretty comfortable supporting Usyk in what he accomplished.
