Dubois is currently HW 3rd Place?

I see him as second. Losses matter of course, but how you respond to a loss is very important.

Dubois was stopped against Joyce, sure, but some of us recognised that Dubois was being badly rushed by Warren who really wanted to replicate Joshua's early climb up the rankings. Dubois who was still finding himself aged 22 was matched against a far more mature contender in Joe Joyce (who many thought deserved Olympic Gold) trying to win the British and European titles. That fight was too early for him. But he rebuilt and got himself into position to fight Usyk. Fury aged 21 was matched against John McDermott for the British title. A fight in which McDermott was robbed of the win due to the referee holding a grudge against his dad. The only problem with the loss against Joyce given how long ago it was and given this context is how he took the knee suggested he might have a lack of heart (yes, I know his eye socket was badly damaged).


Dubois second loss was against Usyk. The manner of which was concerning as it looked like he took a knee off a jab and got counted out. Especially concerning after needing the referee and timekeeper to get him over the line against Lerena one fight prior. Anyway, he lost to the best fighter in the world. That isn't really a black mark. What matters is how he has responded to that loss.

With many of us calling him Triple-Knee, how did he respond to the Usyk loss and questions about his heart?

He won a war of attrition, giving Big Baby Miller his first loss (Miller who in his next fight went on to unofficially beat Ruiz Jr). He followed that up by stopping Hrgovic (though the head was used), giving him his first loss, something that Big Bang Zhang couldn't manage. Then he followed that up by destroying Joshua, a version of which everyone thought was back to something resembling his old form.

Compare his last four fights (which include the Usyk loss) to Fury's last four fights (which include the Usyk loss):

Dubois
loss to Usyk #1 (has some success, but ultimately takes a knee)
stops Miller #top15-20 (proves his heart and takes Miller's 0)
stops Hrgovic #top10 (proves his heart and takes Hrgovic's 0)
stops Joshua #top5 (destroys a resurgent Joshua)

Fury
stops Whyte #top5 (good victory on paper over a devalued Whyte)
stops Chisora #top15-20 (dead-rubber match)
beats Ngannou #debutant (embarrasses the sport with a now infamous performance)
loss to Usyk #1 (has some success, but ultimately takes a loss)

Is it nostalgia keeping Fury at #2?

 

Fury was still lineal champion at the time. So no, even if the ref called it a knockdown Dubios wouldn't have become lineal champion.

 

Even if you ignore the loss to Joyce, Fury still has the better performance against Usyk. A split decision loss is better than a TKO loss.

Whether Fury remains at two hinges on what happens in the rematch. For now #3 is an acceptable ranking for Dubios.

 

I'm not ignoring the loss to Joyce, I'm putting it in context.

Dubois fought a younger version of Usyk as well away from home (the Klitschko argument). And has had three wins since then against good opponents in the last year. Fury has done very little recently.
A lot is being put on Fury doing marginally better against Usyk. He still lost.

For me the rematch will tell us whether or not Fury can retake #1 or falls further down the rankings.

 

He is behind Joyce

 

Whether or not Dubios fought Usyk in Poland, the UK or Ukraine would not have changed the outcome of the fight.

Fury's recent opposition hasn't been the greatest, sure. But he did just fight for undisputed in May and lost a split decision. He hasn't been beaten by anyone else and gave Usyk the hardest fight of his career. Beating AJ who ranked #3 isn't enough to take the #2 spot, and Fury losing to #1 once doesn't push him below Dubios.

Ranking Dubios #2 at this stage is premature. But hey, we can agree to disagree on this one.

 

I am not as confident as you on the outcomes if the venues change. Fury fighting on neutral soil got a split decision because the WBC judge deemed their champion winner (according to Colin Hart). Does Fury get a split decision in Poland? Heck does he see the final bell in Poland?

Anyway, I'm leaning into too many hypotheticals. My position is Dubois' competitive stoppage loss as the away fighter against a younger Usyk holds around the same value as nearly getting stopped by an older Usyk in a close fight on neutral soil. But it's the improvements Dubois has made, and what he achieved after that loss, putting him over Fury in late 2024.

But sure, we can agree to disagree.

 

yep.

 

Yet on another thread you rated fighting away as a criteria which to be fair, I didn't disagree with you.
Fury hasn't been beaten by anyone else but I think in the nearly 9 years since he won his first world title has only fought I think 4 different top 10 rated fighters in that time (not fights) and lost to one of those.
Dubois has nearly fought as many different top 10 rated opponents

I would have Dubois only 2nd to Usyk at the moment and have him above the other HWs at this time

The Ring has Fury at #1 but
Fury's last 3 fights - loss to Usyk, Ngannou on his debut, Chisora who was 1-3 in his last 4 fights
It's been over 2 years since Fury beat a top 10 rated HW

I would have Dubois at #1
Dubois in under a year has beaten undefeated Miller, undefeated Hrgovic and Joshua

How many years or fights do you think should pass before someone moves up or down?

You said Fury only lost by SD
Is your criteria for keeping Fury ahead? A fight a year later?
Chisora beat Joyce who beat Dubois but I doubt you would have him rated above.
You didn't think Joshua should be rated above Fury but didn't use the same criteria of common opponents in those scenarios.

Are you just basing your ratings on being a fan?

That is not a dig btw, just asking

 

I feel like I've explained my criteria clearly enough in this thread, but I'll address your points below:

I'd consider Saudi to be neutral territory which is where the majority of major fights have happened in the past few years, and Dubios recently won his only title (that was vacated) on home soil. Fury won all of his titles on foreign soil, in his opponents backyards.

I don't purely based rankings on their last 3 or 4 fights, otherwise I wouldn't have had AJ ranked 3 prior to Dubios (a major argument people had for him there was old wins, so it's fair to be consistent). Their last few fights are a factor yes, but one of many.

My main criteria for keeping Fury at #2 until the rematch with Usyk is that he only just lost an SD for the first time of his career against the current undisputed HW champ. Dubios lost to Usyk by TKO. Fury also holds superior wins during his career and won every belt including being lineal champion, and remains Usyks best win who fought both (and rated Fury as his hardest opponent).

So as I've said multiple times, rating Dubios number 2 TODAY is premature. Depending on how the rematch for Usyk Fury goes, I will revisit the rankings.

 

Yes Fury won world titles away. No doubt impressive and very good at the time, but you are going back over 4 and a half years ago.
The fight before Dubois was awarded his title was against Hrgovic also in Saudi so you are not correct there
Dubois defended against Joshua where both were considered at home

So once again your criteria for Fury goes back a fair period of time
Over 4 and a half years on your first example compared to under a year

I get that, but with that it really becomes how you feel as a fighter could have one great win and then only fight once a year for 2 years against lesser known or rated fighters and you could argue they had a great win 3 fights ago but that was 3 years ago etc

Yet you quoted above about neutral and home territory and Dubois was more the away fighter than Usyk was when they fought.

So because Fury only lost by SD you would rate him higher even though he hasn't beaten any top 10 rated fighters in over 2 years?

Had you been consistent with that thought of comparing like for like, why would you not have recently had Joshua above Fury in that Fury beat Wladimir and Wallin on points whilst Joshua stopped them?

So you are going back years to suit your argument
So this is the same question that you are not answering
How many years should a good win stand?

well I'm guessing with the above that if Fury loses by SD you would still have him rated higher?
Which would be interesting

 

I feel like you're deliberately splintering the argument to suit your narrative at this point. I don't simply base my ratings on the last three fights someone has. You do. Fair enough, I just don't think it's the only metric worth rating someone on.

Dubios and Hrgovic was for the title fight, not the actual title itself. That was vacated by Usyk later on, and Dubios only technically held it until he solidified his claim against AJ.

When rating fighters I take everything into account, including past wins and achievements. It's well known here that I don't like AJ yet I treat him the same and give him a higher rating based on past victories.

You're only argument for Dubios being rated #2 is only taking into account his last three fights while ignoring everything else. It's disingenuous imo.

 

That's what I felt with you.
I don't have a narrative.
I rate Fury very highly. Possibly the 2nd best HW imo but that doesn't mean I would have him at #2 when I try to be balanced and fair

I didn't say I base my ratings on last 3 fights alone. Please do not try and say I am doing something I haven't claimed to do. What I did do is site last 3 fights but also the timescales
I pointed out 3 fights in under a year to 3 fights in over 2 years combining resume and timelines

I know that but Dubois was awarded the title before he faced Joshua, so as said before, the fight he had before he was awarded the title was against Hrgovic

I think you completely misunderstand or trying to make out something different to avoid answering my previous questions, that you didn't answer this time

I have said previously that overall I think Fury (Fury) Dubois) is the greater fighter, with the greater resume. Not in question at all.
What I have also said is though that Fury hasn't beaten a top 10 rated fighter in over 2 years as well as having lost his last fight and that Dubois in under a year has beaten undefeated Miller, undefeated Hrgovic and Joshua all in under a year.

On another note I would guess that if Fury had the same wins over Miller, Hrgovic and Joshua that those wins would be in Fury's top 10 wins and in some cases his top 5 and that is Dubois last 3 fights and in under a year.
Fury's wins within a year are Ngannou who was making his debut
Go within 2 years and then you would add Chisora who was 1-3 in his previous 4 fights
Now I am not rating them by the last 3 fights but over the last few years

 

We might have a misunderstanding then, what questions do you feel I have not answered? Ask them plainly and I'll answer.

 

Rather than me post all the posts I will try and keep it short for you

How many years or fights do you think should pass before someone doing more should be rated above (not historically overall, but on a monthly basis)?

I pointed out Fury had not beaten a top 10 rated fighter in over 2 years and pointed to his last 3 opponents compared to Dubois last 3 and what he has done in under a year.
When you site your reasons for Fury you are going back several years which I think you seem to do more when discussing him.

The same thing I said previously that if Fury had the same wins over Miller, Hrgovic and Joshua that those wins would be in Fury's top 10 wins and in some cases his top 5
Do you agree or disagree with that?