How does the trio of Joshua, Wilder and Fury compare against the greats of yesteryear?

Well it's 2 Brits and 1 American so anyone from America will say the current crop don't even come close.

Problem is they may be right.......

Watching Wilder makes me laugh. Joshua is like Frank Bruno but 15% better in every department than Bruno was, which still doesn't make AJ comparable to the greats.

And Fury? Well he's the most frustrating. He's got slick skills that have somehow been forced into a slob body as if God almighty himself was trolling the hard-core boxing community!

 

They are the great of today and every era has its greats

 

Put it this way, all 3 would have a chance with any fighter they got put in the ring with.

 

Still too soon to say. Fury looked like the goods 3 years ago, but I need to see them all fight each other before I could really start comparing them to the old timers. Even though I had Fury narrowly winning the fight I was underwhelmed by his performance. It’s amazing how much slower both his foot speed and hand speed got.

He might need to tweak his style a little bit, so he doesn’t need to rely on moving around the ring as much, since it doesn’t look like he can sustain that mobility throughout a whole fight anymore.

As far as the other two Joshua is still green and Wilder despite his power is very one dimensional. That said In think All three still have the time and ability to become greater fighters.

 

They don't stack up, imo. Needs more time, more proving.

I will say this. Out of AJ, Usyk, Fury and Wilder, one ATG will most likely pop up.

That being said, stop comparing them to Marciano, Louis, Holmes, Foreman, Ali, etc.

 

Though I rank Holmes the lowest of that list, he is still a great fighter in his own right. Loud-mouthed and boring, but 20 title defenses and wins over Ken Norton and Earnie Shavers are legitimate

 

All 3 have those qualities that makes great fighters great, heart, determination and the self belief of a champion.

Each and every fighter has flaws but it's the strength of character that can take you places that sets you apart.

 

They don't compare in my opinion, but the 3 they may be able to defeat because of their sheer size advantages, (but certainly not on skill level) are the trio of Walcott, Patterson, and Charles who usually fought under 200lbs and didn't have great chins.

 

Ok ill clarify what I meant

You shouldn't compare fighters who's careers are still happening, and quite frankly haven't done anything of note, to fighters who's careers have already ended