That's a straw man fallacy. When did I claim that Wallin had won a title? What does that have to do with anything? "Let's not kid ourselves", in a post where you are literally kidding yourself. Fury has beaten Joshua's best win, in more convincing fashion, against a better, more active version, away from home, when Klitschko had not lost in a decade. He then beat the man who was supposed to be part of a mega bout with Joshua, and did not happen for whatever reason. He beat him away from home, while far from his best and was robbed. He then schooled him in the rematch and is due to face him again. Klitschko, a diluted version, is the best name on Joshua's record. The other would have been either the best name or the second best name on Joshua's record. Definitely scraping it with the trademark one-liners.
FFS not every former Joshua opponent has to be world class mate. Anyone who gets knocked out by Chisora is garbage.
He's one of 3 things (or a combination of all) - MR employee, on the spectrum or troll. I can't imagine someone who's not one (or all) of those 3 would stick so relentlessly to the agenda he does otherwise.
It's not about a strawman argument. Wallin hasn't won Jack, Ruiz won the lot because he's able and good enough to do so. Lol @ Wlad being better when Fury beat him@ Wlad barely threw a punch, and when he stepped it up in the last two rounds he nearly stopped Tyson.
Fighting man? He's rematching a guy he just pummelled. He hasn't beaten a top fighter NOT named Deontay Wilder in over 6 years.
Pulev was and still is top 10 fighter in terms of resumes. Takam should of been consider a top 10 fighter once (for the reasons I mentioned int he last post) and is now probably still in the top 20 (gave Joyce a tough fight). I personally think viewing Wilder as a top 5 fighter , Ortiz as a top 10 fighter is a bit much.
"Resumes" only mean so much and don't show the full context. Pulev is in the twilight of his career - whether his "resume" indicates that 8 years ago he was a top fighter is pretty irrelevant to his current ability.
You have to ask why he didn't throw enough, is it because he wouldn't or couldn't? If it's the latter then that's credit to the winner who didn't allow him to set his feet through footwork, switching stances and jab. Added to that, he got inside his head and won the mind games as well. I rate Joshua's win over Klitschko. When you consider the context, in front of that huge crowd, the pressure would have been massive on Joshua. He deserves credit for getting up off his backside, hanging in there and eventually finding a great finish. Both great wins. However, fighting in Klitschko's backyard with all the usual things in his favour with being the A-side, champ and unbeaten for a decade...that is some feat that.
Wlad, Whyte, Parker, Povetkin, Pulev, Ruiz... Are you saying that there's only three good HW's around?
People keep pushing this narrative of Tyson going to Germany like he's a road warrior. Business 101: if you can't pack out arenas on a consistent basis, YOU HAVE TO TRAVEL. No ifs or buts about it. Please, Tyson is no Froch in that regard. It was either face Wlad or have a trilogy with Chisora/McMuffin.
Stop reaching, please. NOBODY counts RJJ for anything past 2003 and you know it. You're a very pretty poster.
I agree with your point of quality resumes doesn't always indicate current quality. E.g. I would back Hrgovic to beat Pulev who has weaker resume as he hasn't been able to get a fight against a big name through no fault of his own. That said when Pulev resume in the last 5 years has been better than Wilders and styliscally Pulev is bad match up for Wilder (e.g. Washington caused Wilder all sorts of problems with an average jab, imagine him against the guy with arguably the best jab in the divison).
But even when Tyson scalped him, got the limelight, it's the same. Even now he has to travel. Makes you wonder why you have to travel if you're supposed to be the man in the division...