He had beaten two ranked contenders. On paper Braddock was a much more qualified challenger. Obviously Fury is not a finished work yet.
Corn Griffin, pretty big upset. Co-feature to Baer vs. Carnera, and Braddock was a 5/1 underdog to Griffin, then considered a serious prospect despite having ten losses (par for the course in those days where boxers fought more often and with less worry over protecting their records). Griffin, heavy-handed and Carnera's sparring partner, was younger, bigger, and was being pushed toward a title shot. He was supposed to face a ranked contender on that card to advance toward one, and Braddock was a last-minute replacement. That's a solid W. I'm not sure beating the unstable and inconsistent Chisora twice is any better.
Griffin had been beaten 10 times before facing Braddock. He only won once more in his career. Hardly the stuff of legend... but if it's repeated enough, people might believe otherwise.
I've always questioned Fury's credentials as far as being rated at the top of the contenders, but wins over Chisora and Cunningham were respectable. Cunningham was coming off a robbery-loss to Adamek, if I remember rightly. Fury beat an undefeated prospect Chisora (who Wlad had already been lined up to defend against as a voluntary), and also beat a matured Chisora who had re-established himself with some wins following the KO loss to Haye. Braddock's credentials were equally questionable. Corn Griffin, Art Lasky, those were men whose rankings were questionable too. Braddock was well-connected and in the right place at the right time.
Okay, let's play this game. Fury had close scares with MUCH WORSE guys than Griffin. Several of them. Shall we delve into the credentials of guys like Firtha, McDermott, Rogan, and Pajkic? All of them gave Fury significant "oh shit" moments, and I'd not put any of them on the level of Corn Griffin, and that isn't even speaking "relative to era", that's straight-up transplanting any of them into the same era and letting them at it.
The victory over Cunningham is extremely tainted, IMO. Very poorly officiated contest, in which a different ref might have a) given Cunningham a TKO victory and b) not allowed the rabbit punching, leaning, and other size-contingent fouls which Fury used to club his way to a very dirty W.
Most boxers are inconsistent. Chisora lost to Fury twice, Haye once and Vitali once. That's fairly consistent. All 3 men are champions or titlists of the era. (Chisora's other "loss" was a robbery against Helenius, himself a respectable contender anyway). Not sure Corn Griffin deserves a mention at all.
...and that makes three more than Fury has beaten. Cunningham is a terrific fighter and has done well for himself to scratch & peck his way to a 4-3-1 record at heavyweight (where all three losses are called into question and not held against him too harshly for various reasons) - but let's be clear, he is a cruiserweight, and his prime wound down around the same time Fury made his pro debut. Even with all that, he needed a plethora of fouls with a permissive ref to avoid being knocked out by this aging cruiser, let alone "defeat" him.
Yeah, and we don't have the privelege of seeing if Braddock's wins were tainted. This stuff happens in boxing, HWs especially. Lennox Lewis has a more tainted win over Michael Grant, if we're counting foul knockdowns. And he wore a protector cup up to his armpits against Holyfield.
Braddock was a feared LT heavyweight and brought with him that right hand power to the hwt division. I have never not have I have seen Braddock rested the worst hwt champion. He was far more skilled tha Fury.
Lasky was coming off a draw and a loss. Braddock's credentials were easily as sh!t as Fury's, let's face it. :good