Is Usyk a top 10 HW of all time...?

Both Fury and Joshua are at the end of their careers and that likely means more losses. That is going to tarnish their legacy further, and over time maybe not now that will hurt Usyk. But this happened to every fighter that came before Usyk. You can't live in the moment

 

The Hunter fight? Briedis never fought Hunter. And I don't care how you dress it up Briedis is just not a big guy. I don't know what point you're making by bringing up Hunter but all it tells me is that it was the little guys that did better against Usyk than these big modern day super heavyweights who I was told were supposed to be the best heavyweights ever. How can that possibly be true if they couldn't even manage to do better against Usyk than cruiserweights did? So what you're telling me is they have all these advantages and it doesn't matter, right? Even the fact that Derek Chisora could do so well against Usyk tells me that AJ and Fury were overrated even for their own era. You're calling these guys "ATG heavyweights" or "H2H greats" or whatever then I'm expecting you to be able to do better than 13 loss Derek Chisora...

 

I meant Perez. I think you’re thinking too hard. Fury schooled Chisora.

 

Toney—Jirov, Usyk—Briedis, Cunningham—Hernandez.

 

I think Chisora doing so well against Usyk is what actually lead people to believe AJ and Fury would obviously therefore smash Usyk. That they didn't tells me that peoples perception of AJ and Fury were just way too high and they weren't a whole lot better than the other guys even in their own era. Derek Chisora has 13 losses I expect a level of separation from what he can do if you're supposed to be so great.

 

Lots of atgs have struggled with or lost to journeyman types. AJ and Fury clearly proved they were a level above Derek, and Usyk proved he was a level above them.

 

That doesn't apply to Joshua and Fury they had 48 rounds to do something with Usyk and did squat. I'm not completely sure that Fury's performance against Usyk was really that much better than Michael Hunter's performance against Usyk who was 8 inches shorter and 60-80 pounds lighter. With all those advantages I'm expecting you to do a lot more than just a little better than Michael Hunter. Or if thats asking too much then maybe you need to be reassessed a little bit.

 

Because it's cherry-picked. Why does it have to be five and why should it hold some special significance? Also, do people genuinely think Usyk's five-fight run is "easily" better than, say, Ali's from Frazier II to Bugner? Is it "easily" better than a few of Harry Wills' streaks, like when he beat Langford (3x), Clark, and Jennette?

 

Interesting, I assume you entirely disregard his CW contests from that estimated ranking?

 

Yes, I'm asking if his CW wins contribute towards how you rank/will rank him at HW.

I know having read your top 50's in the original divisions from Fly to LHW, you were clear that only fights contested in the weight divison at which you were ranking each fighter, contributed to how you ranked them at that divison.

 

It’s either top five or top ten. I chose five.

And no, beating Langford and Bugner isn’t at the same level.

 

cw belts should not matter to hw achievements.

but if i am comparing two guys by historical standards then fights between 190lb men count.