Better win: Fury-Klitschko or Joshua-Klitschko

I think the Wlad of the Joshua fight had regained some of his risk-taking attitude which had pretty much departed during his tenure as champion. Look at the Mormeck fight and how he constantly clinches and locks up Mormeck after every punch thrown. Pitiful stuff. Are we saying that version was superior to the Wlad that got up from a knockdown and nearly took Joshua's head off?

This content is protected

Or the version that fought Alex Leapai. Quicker of hand and foot perhaps, but not really willing to get stuck in.

This content is protected

 

It's not "proof", no... But point is that the performances are so different that it's difficult to tell.

It also doesn't help that Fury didn't fight as much a single other legit contender at his peak (or ever, arguably), so we don't really know quite how good he was - as in, whether he was good enough that it wouldn't need to be a bad version of Wlad to lose to him... Plenty of possibilities exist.

This is one of those things it's just not really possible to know.

 

Quite relevant to your contention that common consensus (or in this case two thirds consensus) is automatically correct because it's in the majority.

 

False Correlation. I never ruled that majority opinion = True Opinion. Go back and reread.

I stated here "good thing 2/3 of the forum still have common sense." This is actually quite the opposite in context. The majority here still has common sense to vote Fury's win as the better one and i was simply glad as such. It was an observation, not a contention that consensus means True. No notion of me pushing democracy as correct

You jumped the gun bro

 

Wlad was younger, Wlad had belts, Fury barely struggled, Fury didn't get dropped, Fury beat Wlad on his own lawn, Fury was never down on the cards, Wlad didn't retire right after. Vitali gave Wlad a bad gameplan against aj which also counts. Wlad doing better against aj doesn't mean he was better, for obvious reasons

The evidence is simply in Fury's court. I am trying to understand, but I just can't. Even being kind to aj, their wins are the same, but ajs win can't be better. No way

 

Could the simple reason that Wlad did better be that Fury was better than Aj? Is that even possible for some to comprehend?

I know manny had his shoulder excuse, but maybe the reason he threw half the amount vs Floyd was because he was pretty good?

Fury in 2015 was better than any Version of Aj, let's be real. If Aj took 3 years out of the ring to abuse drugs, Alcohol and gain 10 stone, I can guarantee he would never come back to beat some of the guys Fury beat

People forget that Fury abused his body and many laughed at him for stating he could be champ again, considering the mess he was in. I personally didn't think he could do it. It's not easy to take 3 years off anything and be as good, especially when you are living terrible lifestyle

I don't think Aj is better than Fury now and I certainly don't think he was better then.

 

Fury's really trashed his own career. It's disappointing

 

Fury ducked the rematch, Joshua didn't... Which also counts.

It doesn't automatically mean he was better.

At the same time...
If you set aside Wlad, Joshua has done a lot more than Fury - so Wlad doing much better against Joshua might be seen as evidence that he was better for that fight.

If you assume Fury is better than Joshua, then for obvious reasons you'd assume that Wlad wasn't better against Joshua.

This is difficult to judge because Wlad is the defining fight of both mens careers... Assessing their resumes without including that is missing something significant - but Joshua's is clearly much stronger if you do.

I don't think I'm being kind to AJ at all in considering their wins to be about the same.

That said, I've always been clear that I don't like making assumptions of things that fighters refused to prove - and Fury not fighting any other contenders during his prime makes it very difficult to guage exactly where his level actually was... Which makes me reluctant to give him the benefit of the doubt about whether he fought Wlad at anywhere near the best he could've been that night (and again, the avoidance of the rematch casts further doubt).

 

That's just resume. Frankly ajs resume is overrated, but I guess all things considered its better, although losses always count. Never forget

Fury at his peak was beyond ajs paygrade as a fighter. Wlad doing better is because aj is more stiff, less movement, less boxing iq. It's just a massive discrepancy when you actually see what Fury was doing

Wlad let aj off the Hook. Fury was never on the hook

 

It could be... IF Fury was better than AJ - and that's a huge IF.

Let's look at the evidence of what prime Fury was capable of...
Oh, it's just Wlad. Not a single other legit contender.

Okay, so the only evidence that Fury was better so his win over Wlad is better is... His win over Wlad?
That's circular logic.

Maybe he was better than AJ, but we'll never really know that because we don't have any real supporting evidence.

Probably not... It's not something anyone had done before, or is likely to again.

At the same time, he's come back and beaten the most protected champion of the 21st century, the broken shell of a fringe contender and a few bums... And along the way should've lost on cuts and very nearly lost to a 0 fight novice.

All things in perspective - yes, it's impressive he could come back at all, but it's also true there's a lot of hype going on since the return.

But again, where's the evidence?

The only shared opponent during that period went to the cards with Fury (and was unlucky not to win on cuts) and lost no-mas to Joshua.

The only other interesting shared opponent is Whyte - but those fights were 7 years apart, they don't compare easily.

Honestly, I do think AJ is better now - whether he was ever better than prime Fury I'm not convinced but there's limited evidence to the contrary.

 

He had not been in the ring for 17 months. Not two years.

Arreola had gone inactive for longer than that, but still turned back the clock against Ruiz.

Also Fury-Nganno is not a good example if you want to make this point, since Ngannaou was older and been inactive longer than Fury. He hadn't had a fight in 21 months and of course never in boxing. So it wasn't activity that was on Ngannou's side, but guess what was? Motivation and preparation.

Sure, Fury had the easier time and you could argue he had the better win for that reason. But the 17 months older thing I don't think is at all iron clad.

 

It's just resume, but resume is context - the eye test is worthless without a solid resume to back it up.

And yes, Joshua's resume is nothing incredible in historic terms - it's still clearly better than Fury's.

And losses count - but when you're fighting a higher calibre of opponents, it only counts for so much.
If Fury loses to Usyk it becomes inarguable - but then the goalposts will shift to how old and shot Fury was and how the mythical prime Fury would've won...

Will your analysis of the two change if Joshua stops Ngannou early? Or at all?

But is that because Wlad was worse?

Or because Joshua was less cowardly and didn't just cuddle and potshot?

There's different ways to frame things... And to be clear, my general view is more balanced - but I'm arguing the case for AJ just to restore balance to the overall conversation.

 

Nah, resume is resume. His resume is deeper. That doesn't change the variables presented for those single fights. Furys still has the better win

Fury ended the unbeaten streak, Fury fought Wlad on his own turf, Fury beat Klitschko without much difficulty, Wlad still had the belts, and you can even argue Wlad pushing aj makes this win look better.

Wlad was almost 2 years older against aj. aj got dropped, gassed, tagged more, down on the cards for most. Wlad had no belts, Wlad retired after. And Vitali told Wlad NOT to go for the knockout. At this point it's almost an asterisk.
[url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/s/xsfyofbt5q[/url]
The only thing he did was get the KO, and if he didn't, he probably would've lost on points

 

How close to an asterisk does Fury's PED use get, in your view of things?

It could be seen that (and appearances can be deceptive) you're looking for every excuse to play down Joshua's win and every reason to boost the significance of Fury's...

 

I could care less. The majority of them are probably on PEDs. Its a valid assumption. Look at my post history I've expressed this opinion. You think Klitschko wasn't on PEDs ? This is why I don't hate Connor Benn like the entire forum. I just don't care anymore. It's been a problem for decades.