I don't think they really conned the public as much as the public wanted to be conned and did most of the leg work in convincing themselves. America was desperate for a heavyweight champion, as was the British northern working class. So it all became a bit of, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. And if it was a con, it certainly wasn't subtle. They literally told everyone their plan and said they were going to freeze Joshua out. lol
In 2019/2020 they probably were. Joshua was given a beat down from Ruiz. Usyk was a cruiser weight. Parker had lost to Whyte. Whyte was going life and death with Chisora. The historic revisionism boxing fans do as soon as a fighter loses is crazy.
Right, so who was the best then? Joshua? He got TKO'd by Ruiz. Who else? Usyk was at cruiser. Once Joshua got TKO'd then avoided Wilder and Fury and played it safe for years (which he's still doing), Fury and Wilder became the fighters to beat. Of course the 'superfights' are all cons. But the reality it's ridiculous to say AJ was better than them. And he's the fallback option. Even now people are acting like AJ is somehow better than Fury based on him beating the MMA fighter. Maybe people don't realise AJ lost to Usyk twice. Fury's only lost once at this stage. Even if Fury loses twice, it's just like AJ against Usyk. And with Wilder, he's 38 and fighting the people AJ is supposed to fight and could well lose to as well at this stage, despite being younger.
This is like saying Lewis and Ruddock conned the world because Ruddock did nothing post Lewis. Truth is that other than Joshua, Fury and Wilder were legitimately the best heavies out there at that time. Just like the post Tyson Ruddock was not the same fighter as before, the post Fury Wilder has declined due to the beatings he took. Now Wilder was never great. But he certainly had more speed back then than he has now. Now i am no Fury fanboy. I hate how he avoided Usyk for a year and a half. I hate his antics. But Fury took a significant risk in fighting Wilder. And pulled it off.
I just can't believe that there's anyone who can seriously think that there was any point when Wilder was better than Joshua. When I hear the "he lost to Ruiz" thing, that just screams "casual" to me. People always moan about how these guys are nothing compared to the golden era fighters because they are too lazy, too complacent, they don't fight the other top guys and whatnot. Guess what: Ali had losses, Frazier had losses, Foreman had losses, Lewis had losses, Holyfield had losses. All these past greats people talk about had losses. And why? Because they fought other top guys. And when Joshua does it, fights anyone he possibly can—from Klitschko through Povetkin and Parker and Whyte and Pulev and Ruiz and Usyk—and he loses some along the way just like past greats because he, like them, fights anyone he can—he is instantly overhyped and robotic and s..te and even Wilder, a protected paper champion windmill beating journeymen, is suddenly better. I mean, what? Absolute madness, the mind boggles sometimes how inconsistent and fickle boxing fans are.
Fury was after beating Klitschko for a month or so, before we knew he popped dirty and ducked the rematch. After that i never rated him or Wilder in that matter as the number 1. AJ for me always was the man to beat in the division.
No conned would imply there was some underhanded design to deceive. I don't think that was the case, most sensible people knew Wilder was all smoke and mirrors and those that championed his claim to superiority wanted to be fooled because they wanted it to be true rather than truly believing it to be because Wilder's resume simply never stacked up and their belief that he was the best was based on a "feeling" not facts that could be backed up. Not surprising his hardcore fans ended up being conspiracy peddlers, after the Fury losses, no critical thinking skills just feelings and emotions. As for Fury, there were questions that had to be asked, the Wlad win and then how easily handled Whyte suggested he might be the best and at the time Joshua had lost to Ruiz and only a few believed Usyk was the best so it wasn't crazy to think Fury was the best by default. Now some of those questions have been answered, he lost to Usyk so we now know he isn't the best. Wilder has lost twice back to back against the 2 best guys he fought other than Fury. So those wins are now put into perspective. Now we just need Fury to fight Joshua to know for sure where he stands in this era. I've always favoured Fury over Joshua but not so sure now, if Usyk can hurt him that badly, Joshua can stop him.
Oh completely. AJ clearly has a superior record at the time compared to both and was unified champion. Wilder had ****ed many offers to fight AJ, even admitted he turned down more money to fight AJ to fight Fury instead. Wilder made his career KOing low level guys, Wilder got exposed as soon stepped against world level proven HWs such as Fury, Parker and Zhang.
Fury said countless times “Wilder runs through the rest of the division, clear number 2 to the Gypsy King”
No con, Wilder and Fury made the initial fight, "Bomb Squad" vs Fat Fury sold it to the public, and the rest is history. The con is when there is all the talk but no fight. See the big fights that fell through because it was all talk and no signing on dotted line, Wilder vs AJ, Fury vs AJ....