Do you consider Usyk's amateur and/or WSB accomplishments to contribute to his legacy?

I think American fans like to downplay or dismiss the amateurs these days because they don't do so well.
That's all it is, everyone who knows boxing knows it is the same sport and the achievements in it bring a lot to the pro game. It's the same reason why you see people criticise the resume of Lomachenko, Beterbiev or Usyk for not having enough win numbers on their pro record. If there were still Ali, SRL, Pernell, DLH or Ward coming with an Olympic gold you could bet it would be a different story.
Maybe it's newer fans who don't understand the history of the sport, trying to rewrite history and pretend that the amateurs don't exist to build up their favourite recent US fighters.

 

Of course his amateur career adds to his legacy. I’d argue that his WSB record should add to his professional record

 

It took Usyk 300+ fights to win Olympic Gold. It took Foreman less than 30 fights to win Olympic Gold. Therefore Foreman is the better fighter. And definitely the better amateur.

That’s the logic you guys use when it comes to Usyk’s pro career right?

 

I feel like if my favourite Murican fighter has a successful amateur record I like to include it, but with an EE what I like to do is put an asterisk on that little excursion. Problem is that the EE's are taking the safe road being on the ams circuit instead of fighting 15 cans on ESPN to develop their brand. And then we have the stiff robot style that couldn't crack a philly shell.

As for Olympic results specifically, the Olympics are not the best way to judge athlete performance. It's one tournament every four years with quotas by country and draws in some sports. It's like judging the best tennis player on one Grand Slam every four years. What you need to do is look at the results over many tournaments across many years.

 

On second thought they probably should contribute to an extent its similar to pro boxing but not pro boxing as we know it. It was early on, they go for 5 rounds and Usyk was unanimously never seen as a great until after his official professional achievements. The value of his world series boxing accomplishments pale in comparison. Beterbiev and Usyk literally had a trilogy, how much higher on the great list does this place Usyk ? It's a rhetorical question

 

Amateur boxing record has ZERO impact on rating a fighters legacy.

They are two different sports with different rules.

If we were on an amateur boxing forum and purely based on amateur achievements then it’s relevant.

 

It does contribute to Usyk's legacy that he mostly fought elite opponents at pro and didn't pad his record with journeymen.
It also contributes to Foreman's legacy that he won Olympics only 1.5 years after he started competing at Amateur level.

So, what's your point?

 

Americans don't value the Olympics more generally compared to the East. Its not just boxing and I don't think success has much to do with it.

In the US amateurism is dominated by college and college boxing has been gone for a very very long time.

 

The point is Usyk doesn’t fight enough and he is sitting on the belts.

 

No, because Foreman won by brute strength. His opponent in the final was a 6ft 200 pound fighter. Usyk fought guys his size and needed to beat better competition to get there in the first place. There are no build record fights in the amateurs, that's why they're fully formed when they turn pro and don't need 20 soft touches.
There is also the World Championships in the amateurs, considered almost as prestigious as the Olympic Games. Usyk achieved that, Foreman didn't.


Interestingly, and a sentiment shared by many gold medal winners from the US:

'Foreman maintained that earning the Olympic gold medal was the achievement he was most proud of in his boxing career, more so than either of his world titles'

The amateurs matter, they always have. And Usyk was a more accomplished amateur than Foreman.

 

He’s 40 ffs, he’s on his way out. The younger up and coming should be the ones doing the rounds. No need to manufacture controversy. Forman was a great end of story. Usyk will likely end up as one after all said and done. What is the point of these kind of arguments?

 

Usyk did fight with headgear, Foreman didn’t.

Usyk isn’t an elite finisher, Foreman is.