Is Usyk h2h #1 above Lewis, Vitali, Holmes, Wladimir, Ali ?

I just rewatched Usyk vs Chisora to see what all the hoopla was about on here. You could conceivably give Chisora 3 of the first 4 rounds. Then from the 5th through the 9th Usyk easily wins the rounds and doesn’t even seem to have to switch gears. Chisora gives a better effort in the 10th and could arguably won the 11th. Usyk dominates the 12th.
I think it’s generous to give Chisora 5 rounds in the fight but 4 is fair and would be the best card in my opinion. As it was, one judge had 9-3 and two had 7-5.
Was a weird fight - the no audience Covid factor played in because when Usyk took control the fight seemed like a sparring session. Usyk vs Fury was clearly the more taxing and better fight. However I could see Usyk crediting Chisora he came out of the gate with purpose and mean intentions. Usyk had a slow start maybe still adjusting to weight gain whatever reason it’s a pretty lackluster bout and I won’t be revisiting it any time soon.

 

Not worth responding to, as you haven't addressed a single thing I said. Except to say that your comparisons are ridiculous. Holmes lost to a LHW, Vitali to a SMW, Lennox to Rahmen and McCall...of course Usyk belongs in that conversation, and losing two rounds to Chisora doesn't change that.

 

You are caught, dude. You literally don't even know what you are saying.

 

Vitali would be hard because he's high volume and moves more than Lewis. I'd pick Vitali. It's a tight call vs Lewis but I'd go Usyk. Usyk beats Wlad by stoppage. Loses to Holmes. Loses to prime ali (pre ban), probably beats post prime ali.

 

Guy, you have ben caught in a lie, and you are now humiliation yourself. I decline to continue this. I will just reference this post.

 

I have already re-posted it, so if you went back and changed it or something it still exists. You are tripping down on a lie and anyone reading through can see it.

If you have to lie, you have lost the argument.

 

Yeah, while Chisora had more success than I thought he'd have I think it gets well overstated. He started very well, but then Usyk took over. Think I had it something like 9-3 to Usyk.

To answer the OP, how could we possibly know? Things like that these are so hard to say, especially of course if you have limited data as in this case. Had he not faced Chisora, for example, I think everyone here would be in agreement that Usyk would win every round and stop him something like in rd 8-9. Since he did face him we know it didn't really work out like that. Reality has a tendency ti suprise you.

I would say he's up there, since he has everything but power and size (but only small compared to the HWs of the last 30 years), but you just never know for sure.

 

But you did anyway? Only to demonstrate you easily you go off topic again I see.

I didn't make any comparisons in my last post, so what on Earth is it that you think you're going on about this time?

Do you realize the insane level of determination needed to be as wrong as you are, as often as you are?

Not one of your replies to me has been on point, let alone correct. And the latest one above is just weird. Did you forget the title of the thread and fail to notice I was quoting the title of the thread?


Then I get to recalling how you're that Fraggle who once insisted to everyone that Foreman only beat great fighters because of the 'Lewis-Schmeling Paradox'. Until you were informed the 'Lewis-Schmeling Paradox' is an economic theory - a concept not meant to literally be applied to boxers' records.

You wouldn't accept you were wrong then, either.
I see nothing has changed. Unbelievable!

 

None of this has anything to do with anything I said, but good job being a nutter. It was still not a difficult fight for Usyk.

As for insulting me, your insecurity is showing. I'll leave it at that.

 

Now you are lying on the same thing three times.

It is a matter of public record.

 

It's already been re-posted. Lie about it all day and night. I don't care.