How would you ATG rank Fury, AJ, and Wilder RIGHT NOW?

Maybe in the 15-20 range.

 

I wouldn’t bother.

 

They don't make the top 20, the revisionism has to stop

 

Dang that's harsh.

 

AJ and Fury are close together for me. I have AJ around 30 and Fury in the 17-25 range. Wilder would be lucky to crack my top 100. I have him around the 9th best heavy of the last 10 years so going by that logic he would probably fall somewhere in the 90s if I did a 100 list of last 100 years. His title run was disgraceful.

The pros for Fury are - He defeated Wlad who was hadn't lost in 11 years and was going for his 19th consecutive title win. It's a big win. Then he came back when most people felt he was finished and dominated the hard punching Wilder in an exciting trilogy. Then he beat Whyte who was a top rated contender. In additon he has 0 bad losses. Never knocked out and in his two losses against a great fighter he was competitive.
The Cons- He really missed a lot of top competition. His resume is extremely light. Wlad deserved a rematch. Fury wasted too much time on his comeback with bad opponents.

AJ- the Pros - he actually went out and tried to fight the best available competition. His resume has depth. Wlad, Povetkin, Pulev, Parker, Whyte, Ruiz.
The cons- The Dubois blow out hurts. The Ruiz fight hurts and a relatively low win total. 28 wins and 4 losses.

Wilder- Dangerous puncher that was steered away from top level oppostion. Made 10 defenses of the wbc strap but was deemed trivial because the opposition was dismal choices. Best wins Ortiz 2x and Stiverne. Lost to every prime top fighter he faced Fury 2x, Parker, Zhang.

 

Fury's legacy will be dethroning 10-year unbeaten Klitschko in Germany, destroying Wilder in America, and giving Usyk his toughest fight. The one punch KO of Whyte is good, and the total domination of Chisora has aged very, very well given what hell he's given to everyone else. Fury's highs are very high in terms of boxing legacy. The circumstances around his wins will prove great over time.

I do not think Joshua's resume will be viewed favorably in 10 years. There is too much strategic match making. The lot of it was calculated and it still blew up in his face over and over. The "achievements" mean so much less when you have billions of dollars behind you. Usyk is making the resume building style of "wait until a name is old" look comical. For Joshua, losing in so many different ways to so many different styles hurts his legacy greatly.

Wilder will be rightfully dumped on for the duds during his reign, and underappreciated for the times he stepped up. He was a true force in his prime and will be remembered for incredible power, but also heart. In 2017 when Wilder-Joshua was the fight to make, we knew nothing of the intangibles of these fighters. We've seen that it is Wilder, not Joshua who is willing to die in there. It is Wilder, not Joshua who doesn't have quit in him. The recent losses are an easy mark for folks to say Wilder was never good, but the truth is he was beaten down by a great in Fury TWICE. That changes you.

 

Fury and Joshua won their first world titles Nov 2015 and Apr 2016
So within 6 months of each other
Come the end of 2018

Fury made 0 defences and was 1-0-1 in world title fights

Joshua made 6 defences won 2 unification bouts was 7-0-0 in world title fights

Even now in title defences

Fury - Wilder, Whyte, Chisora

Joshua - Wladimir, Parker, Povetkin, Pulev, Breazeale, Takam, Molina

--------------

It's a question that I'm not qualified enough to answer
I think all 3 - Joshua, Fury and Wilder have done well

Looking at defences Joshua possibly has the best resume, and won unification bouts and had 3 separate fights to win the titles Fury didn't defend, but there are lots of other factors.
I really couldn't say
Rate all 3 highly

 

Fury and Joshua anywhere between 20 - 30
Wilder 30 - 50

 

I have AJ and Fury in a similar bracket, maybe around 30. Wilder below that again, perhaps around 50.

 

Fury i'd have around the top 20-25. Ended Wlad's reign and beat Wilder. Two time champion, only has losses to Usyk. Has some decent wins over Whyte and Chisora. He's lacking in title defenses and depth though. Missed out on way too many names in his era in favour of fighting soft touches. Povetkin, Parker, Dubois, Zhang, Kabayel, Ruiz, Ortiz, etc basically every top contender except Whyte. I'd have him around the same place as guys like Norton.

Joshua I'd have a bit higher in around the 15-20 range, which may seem too high but I don't think it's as crazy if you think about it. guys who i'd rank just above him are Tyson, Liston, Charles, Johnson and maybe Jeffries. Joshua has as many defenses as Johnson and Jeffries, and him and Tyson were the only two time champs here. The best name on his record is an old Wlad not unlike Tyson's win over Holmes and Charles' over Louis (only counting his heavyweight resume here). Him and Tyson both suffered major upsets and then went on to lose twice to a former cruiser champ, but Joshua managed to avenge his upset loss unlike Tyson. Other than that he has a decent resume of wins over Povetkin, Parker, Ruiz, Takam and Whyte.

Wilder is an interesting one. His resume is terrible. One notable win over a guy who also has a terrible resume. But he did still hold the belt for a while and get to 10 title defenses. If it weren't for his title run I genuinely might not even have him in the top 100, but 10 title defenses has to count for something, even if they mostly came against fringe contender level opposition. I haven't thought much about my heavyweight ranking past the top 30 or so but I'd assume Wilder would be around top 40. I wouldn't even have him as the fourth best of this era, I'd rank atleast Parker above him.

 

Tysons resume is far above ajs, Even Norton ranks above joshua bro, dude has Ali, Young, Quarry, Bobick and Cobb on his record