do they automatically have a greater legacy than Wlad whoever gets it first -usyk, joshua, fury, wilder?
It's not how many belts you have. It's who you took them off of and how well you defend them. Belts are worthless trinkets. It's only people who matter. You can be the baddest mother****er on the planet and only have a pair of suspenders holding your britches up.
No…. Especially when an old version of Wlad went life and death with one of them, and the other (commonly regarded as the best of the recent crop of heavyweights) beat him via Segio Mora level spoiling tactics… and again… an old and mentally awful version of Wlad.
In al fairness though, this works against Wlad to some extent. I respect Byrd as an ATG, and Haye, Sultan, Chag, and Povetkin were damn good fighterss. All were diminutive in comparison, and it is hard to find even one big, strapping, hard-hitting quality heavy on Wlad's record. I think you could honestly make the argument that cruiser Usyk coming up and beating AJ, or Fury dealing with big boys like Wilder and Wlad himself, impresses people more that Wladdy's 17 wins against overmatched fighters. Not arguing it too strongly. I like Wlad, and he has his place in history. Just saying.
Wlad actually beat 23, but I do see your point. HWs will keep getting bigger. This new breed- Fury, Zhang, Bakole, Joyce, 270-280 pound HWs will become more and more common.
Yeah, and I have argued myself that if Wilder's reign against sick guys and bums counts, then so does Wlad's WBO reign, which is comparable. But his big, epic reign was the 17 of the unified crown.
I thought it was 18 defenses for 19 overall, it might have been 17 defenses with 18 overall, but I am feeling a strong attachment to that 18..