How would Anthony Joshua, Usyk and Tyson Fury have fared in the 70s?

Jimmy Young slow are you on crack ? He had quick hands on the inside. Ridiculous

 

The Fury of the second Wilder fight gives everyone big problems. Maybe Ali beats him. Maybe a young Foreman is a better finisher than Wilder and finishes him. The rest, lol. No.

AJ and Usyk are real competitive, up there with the best. But I only bet real money on Fury.

 

Fury?

He seems wildly underrated sometimes. I don't see any era in which he isn't an elite.

 

I like this assessment.

For my part, I think Joshua, Fury, Usyk, Foreman, Ali, and Frazier would be too much awesomeness, and they would have a great series of fights, throw in Norton, Lyle, Shavers and Quarry.

 

Fury and Usyk are obviously competitive but I wouldn't pick them over any of the five kings (Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Holmes.)

They definitely beat all the other contenders though. Granted, those fights could still be dangerous (Lyle, Ellis, Quarry etc.)

 

Usyk is a technical master that could compete in any era. His style is built around hitting and not getting hit, which would allow him to compete. Could he beat all of them? Maybe not, but he'd be a tough out for any of them.

Fury could maul people on size alone. He's not Primo Carnera...he has skill and ring IQ.

Joshua would get beat up.

 

Usyk would be competitive. He also would duck anybody. Id pick him to beat frazier. Maybe ali, both are boxers and i think the more modern style of usyk might be more advanced. Foreman scares me for usyk, but at least ill be sure the fight will happen.

Fury's size will be an issue for everyone, which will make every fight competitive. But i cant see him beating more skilled guys with the power punch level near wilder. Wilder-fury 3 makes his chin questionable against the cream of the crop.

AJ. well it depends. I think he may be able to nick a win if he boxes like he did against ruiz 2. But thats the only fight we've seen him have a tactical match. And that was against a ruiz who partied so hard he might as well just have given the belts back. His chin is questionable.

Wilder... well, frazier and foreman will cut him in half.

 

Norton is definitely an all-time great in my book and would be lineal with a little more luck (closing a single round so that there can be no dispute as to the decision; Ali not running from the 4th fight.)

Regarded as a genuine great by Eddie Futch. Inducted to the IBHF on the third year of it's existence along the likes of Eder Jofre. Beat Ali and might as well beat him twice or thrice unofficialy given the razor thin, close decisions. Gave the very same Holmes, who in his previous bout deconstructed and demolished Shavers losing only a single round on a one, singular judge's scorecard, a living hell and one of, if not the, toughest fight of his career, barely losing a split decision by one point (142-143 times two.)

I'd rate Norton as more than just a good boxer based solely on his most recognizable achievements. He is less skilled than Usyk, agreed, but heavies more technical than him are a rare if not mythical breed. Ken is still strong, fast, and can pack a dynamite punch. An astounding athlete all around with great genetics.

 

Fury and Usyk can be competitive in any era.

Bodybuilder gets killed sadly.

 

Being not as fast as Tyson means you are slow???? WTF??