Hardly tickled Wlad in the fight and won via the worst stinker seen in the ring - right up there with Pudding Stiverne
Joshua goes through the mill to beat a 41 year old fighter with 18 months of ring rust and it's a fantastic victory. Fury outboxes Klitschko on a 9 year winning streak in his own backyard and he's a fraud who was involved in a stinker. It's all a bit inconsistent isn't it.
Oh I agree, watching boxers knocking each other down is a fight I want to see. It was like a 4-3 football score which lacked technical class and was full of errors but ironically because of that, had bags of entertainment. Fury's fight was like a 1-0 win away from home in the lions den. It was Mourinho-esque. Dull to watch but a tactical masterclass in nullifying the opposition. The whole idea is to hit and not be hit and Fury is a master of that.
For years watching Fury progress, my mate and I always said he was a ko waiting to happen. As time went by though you saw improvement..fight after fight after fight. I will say one thing, he is a fighting man. In his finest hour he produced the goods to dethrone an atg champion. He was mad, entertaining and got people talking. No heavyweight in history would have an easy fight with him. A bit of an enigma was Tyson Fury. If he doesn't fight again he will go down as what N17 said, a "what if?" P.S. For those who don't know, Fury is lucky to be undefeated. Big John McDermott comfortably beat him in their first encounter and was robbed blind by referee Terry O'Connor. So it is a lucky undefeated record.
Fury has only been involved in one boring fight and I've watched most of them... and that was against Wlad. Wlad has been involved in plenty. Although that said, I really enjoyed the Fury-Wlad fight, thought it was fascinating. I agree that he probably should have lost the first McDermott fight, if memory serves me right though, he was way out of shape, think that might have been a wake up call for him.
True, but clearly Wladimir Klitschko wasn't good enough to force Fury into any sort of fierce contest. Fury was just too good, he won by barely doing a thing. It was a stinker but so was Mayweather-Pacquiao, so was Lewis-Tua, etc. On the other hand, Joshua was barely good enough to get past an even older version of Wladimir Klitschko.
Yeah, the fact that it was a huge upset, and no one really expected it to go like that, made it fascinating to me too. If I didn't know anything about the two fighters I'd feel it was a stinker, but the context made it interesting.
Styles make fights. Fury's style is often unpleasant to watch. Do I expect him to change it to please me if it means he'll pick up a load of Ls. **** no.
True. Every time he was in an exciting fight he got a load of criticism too (Cunningham the most 'recent' example).
Also, it should be noted, despite "hardly tickling" Wlad in that fight and managing only "six punches a round" or whatever, Fury somehow busted and bruised Wlad's face up noticeably, and he had Wlad's knees sagging badly at one point (which required not only Wlad's holding but the referees interference to allow Wlad to escape a potential disastrous round).
In my eyes fury will always be the guy that got lucky against big John Mcdermott and nearly ktfo by a cruiserweight.
To see the best of Fury we need to see someone who can punch push the action. It's why a fight against Joshua holds such appeal. Regardless of anything else it's a great clash of styles.
He'll be remembered but as a bit of a goon. He'll prob live out his days being a legend in the pub. Downing pints and cheering with fat sweats
