Do you consider Tyson Fury and Anthony Joshua to be all time greats ?

Nah probably not. Top fighters yes. Guys who could beat ATGs on their night, certainly. But longevity wise, no, and you need longevity.

ALTHOUGH you could make an argument based H2H and based on the paper thin resumes of other boxers considered ATGs like Liston.

 

Can someone define all time great to me?

I think Fury's story was pretty inpiring with him being depressed and blowing up in weight and coming back after such a long layoff to win against wilder (yes win).

These stories make up an important part of boxing. And he has also been a great talker and entertainer and had an entertaining career.

Personally, I would definitely put him in the top 20 all time heavies and I only see ali ticking those boxes off better. I even laughed more at fury's slanderous jokes for his opponents ("came here to do demolition jobs on cruiserweights" vs "gorilla in manila"/"foreman the zombie")

So if the fighters story factors in - he is an all time great

 

No, I made about 8 points all pertaining to the 1st fight. Wlad was desperate to beat Fury (who Steward had told him was the heir apparent) but wasn't so bothered about losing to "little bro" Joshua.

When Fury hasn't felt a threat he's often performed poorly. When he's taken things seriously he's shown far better defence than Joshua. The version who fought Wlad wasn't the version who fought McDermott, Pajkic, Ngannou etc., and not much more than the Usyk who fought Fury and Joshua was the one who fought Shawn Porter.

 

@Redbeard7 dishing out some lessons in this thread. Impressive. The usual suspects fall flat.

 

Wlad wasn't motivated for the Fury fight. He admitted it himself. Plus people from his camp confirmed that he half assed the camp, which was unlike him, but understandable looking at his personal issues at the time.

Well, that's Fury's fault he's inconsistent. He even got lit up by Usyk, when he was supposed to be highly motivated for the first time in years. And when we're on the subject, Fury beat probably the worst version of Klitschko ever, so it goes both ways.

 

In short no.

I don't think either did anything so remarkable that it makes me think they deserve that label.

It's possible for there to be more than one ATG in one era, but it usually means you did enough to beat one of the other greats in their prime or did something truly outstanding. Evander beat Tyson and Bowe, Lewis beat Tyson, Holyfield and made Bowe run away. Frazier beat Ali, Foreman beat Frazier and made one of the greatest comebacks of all time.

Fury and Joshua beat an old Wlad. Neither of them were good enough to earn a win over Usyk and never faced each other and neither ever became undisputed.