Does Anthony Joshua have the best resume of any active heavyweight?

Resume and best opponents faced are 2 different things. Chisora has faced the best opponents but he lost to all of them so his resume isn't great. All time standings are also different from current rankings so AJs win over Wlad means little for his current ranking.

 

Including loses on a resume is like putting job interviews you were unsuccessful at on your CV

 

I wasn't suggesting Wilder DID have quality defences for the record. I was making two different points

 

Haha. I'd say getting the fight in the first place is a good interview, losing the fight, is losing the job!

 

I don't agree with the "losses don't make your record worse" mantra. Losses frequently sabotage records and legacies.

 

Yes but a resume is something you present

Loses and how they occurred don't come in to it

 

Agreed. AJs resume would look a lot better had he never faced Usyk.

 

According to you but I don't agree. The "CV" analogy doesn't translate, fights and records are public.

People often say "resume" to mean "who you fought". If it's that then Chisora has the best resume by far. If it's about results/winning/not losing then it's still obviously not Joshua.

 

Using that logic I'm sure there's a journeyman out there with a similar resume

 

These boxing fans are disgusting hypocrites. It's just the reality.

There's a thread on whether natural LHW Byrd should be in the HoF, most say no. And most of their arguments are based on him performing badly post-Holyfield. Had Byrd managed his career better, poaching some belts at lower weights rather than fighting the big boys immediately and retiring at the optimal point prior to the Klitschko era (36-2 after schooling Holyfield, ducked by Lewis), then he'd not just be a HoF HW rn, he'd be a P4P ATG. Boxing fans don't give him credit for being too brave for his own good.

 

Im not a joshua fan but 1-3 in his biggest fights is simply untrue. Ruiz was a late notice replacement that nobody thought had a chance, not a big fight.

Thats like people retroactively counting Tyson Douglas as one of his biggest fights and Tyson Spinks as an irrelevant blowout simply because of how it turned out.

Joshuas biggest fights were Klitschko, Ruiz 2 and Usyk 1 and 2 so hes 2-2

 

Off the top of my head I'd say Kevin Johnson. I can't think of anyone else who is worth mentioning.

 

"Thats like people retroactively counting Tyson Douglas as one of his biggest fights and Tyson Spinks as an irrelevant blowout"

Tyson-Douglas was Tyson's biggest fight. People didn't know it before it happened but that's how it turned out.

Tyson-Spinks was one of Tyson's biggest wins. I don't think many claim otherwise.

Ruiz 1 will live long into the memory, Ruiz 2 will not for obvious reasons.

 

Thats ridiculous. You cant pick the fights that someone struggled in or lost and then say it was his biggest fight just because it was a big upset.

Do you count Duran vs Dejesus 1 as a big fight?
Duran vs Laing and Simms?

Mayweather lost his biggest fight vs Castillo right?

Hopkins and JMM lost in their pro debut does that count to losing their biggest fight?

If you retroactively pick a loss that was not a big anticipated fight at the time as a fighters "biggest moment" then youre just trying to misportray him and his legacy.

Now i dont think Joshua is a HOF or even close but the Ruiz loss was not a big fight and thats probably a big reason why he lost it in the first place, because he tried to run over somebody he thought was a tomato can to equal what Wilder did with Breazale

 

That’s what I believe as well.

Sometimes just sometimes a fighter loses and it actually raises their legacy and that loss looks good on their resume.

Like Frazier losing to Ali in their third fight, or Micky Ward losing twice to Gatti in their trilogy. Or Nagannou losing to Fury just recently.