Oleksandr Usyk in the 70s

I'm not missing any point, you are. I complained about it in a general sense, not in regards to Usyk. I know you replied that way to confront the other guy, that doesn't change the fact that basing Usyk's Heavyweight ability is disingeneuous at best, which is what I commented at.

 

So the Cruiserweights Usyk beat were on the same level as Foreman ? Holmes ? Ali ? Frazier ? he also didn't dominate Breidis who was the best opponent he fought at that weightclass which was a razor thin decision that he barely won. And he also had trouble with Hunter early on and lost 4 rounds in that fight from memory.

Usyk beat good opponents at Cruiserweight not fighters that are considered great, i would say fighting the likes of Breidis to fighting the likes of the 4 names i mentioned above is a considerable step up.

Ok you're saying Usyk's Heavyweight exploits can't really be used as a measuring stick because Heavyweights are bigger now fair enough. But then why is the other poster speculating that Usyk does dominate the 70s division then ? bigger doesn't always necessarily mean better. Of course Heavyweights now have some advantages in height, reach, etc. But i tend to think smaller Heavyweights are faster, better conditioned, and bring other skill sets aswell. Here's an example for you a Cruiserweight sized Steve Cunningham who did nothing really notable at Heavyweight put Fury on the seat of his pants and was ahead on points.

A 210 pound David Haye destroyed Dereck Chisora with ease.

He'd also be fighting fighters of 6'3 on average Norton, Holmes, Ali, Foreman, who were the best of that era apart from Frazier who was smaller in height. But still possess a very challenging style because he's a swarmer and a boxer like Usyk with average power at Heavyweight would struggle against relentless swarmer like Frazier.

The Heavyweight Usyk struggled with in Chisora has never been a top 10 ranked Heavyweight, and whilst Chisora is bigger than alot of Heavyweights of past i would say Chisora has alot of fat on him aswell. Norton for example was a chiseled 220 pounds with not an ounce of fat on him.

The point is it shows Usyk had difficulty with a fringe contender hence he's not unbeatable.

Why are you using Floyd Patterson for an example ? he was at the end of his career with he reached the 70s and retired in 1972. I don't really consider him part of that golden era of 70s, i'm more thinking along the lines of Norton, Holmes, Foreman, Ali, who are near are enough the same size.

 

That's the point i'm making though people are claiming alot when there's little evidence of Usyk at Heavyweight, all im saying is that i think it's ludicrous to suggest Usyk dominates the best Heavyweight era of all time when he's only had 5 fights at that weightclass. And we only have the Chisora, Joshua, fights to gauge it on in reality.

As i've said above i do think Usyk could compete in 70s Heavyweight era, he's a reasonably sized Heavyweight with good skillsets. And from what i've seen a pretty solid chin not to mention being an elite Southpaw which is pretty rare for Heavyweight division.

But the other poster is putting Usyk on a pedestal with other ATG Heavyweights and i don't think he warrants that yet especially not at Heavyweight.

 

Resume wise sure he doesn't skillwise he absolutely does, none of them have as much experience fighting bigger stronger fighters as Usyk does which is not something an average heavyweight is capable of doing, as shown how almost all of them struggled when facing someone bigger then them i.e Norton and Frasier with Foreman. I don't see how any of them would be a favorite over Usyk just based on one mediocre performance Usyk had over someone with a huge size advantage which none of them would be able to replicate since they are all either smaller or around the same size as Usyk.

 

@Hotep Kemba

I've read a few of your posts before and you're a knowledgeable poster, and i don't want to argue with on this matter so if can say one last thing because i don't want to keep going back and forth.

I wasn't trying to have a dig at Usyk i'm just pointing out he's not unbeatable, and i don't think we have enough evidence of Usyk at Heavyweight to make such bold claims that he dominates ATG Heavyweights.

The fairest point i can make is that yes i think Usyk would be competitive in the 70s based on his skill set and durability, but i don't think he would be dominating the likes of Ali, Holmes, Foreman, Norton, i think such claims is just ridiculous to be quite honest.

 

Neither was I nor my parents.

 

I would favor him against all of them with only Holmes being competitive considering during this era they all had difficult fights or even lost to much worse opponents then Usyk and he had the skillset to give them all a difficult fight

 

Frazier may be the most difficult. With his style, he would be a nightmare for slick boxers without concussive heavyweight power. Since he's a southpaw, that may help but maybe not.

 

I don't think he would struggle with Frazier tbh Usyk has the power and size to keep Frazier off of him plus this is after the FOTC when Fraizer started to decline

 

Yeah Holmes would be an interesting fight but Holmes has never fought a southpaw who could shut down his jab so that's one main reason I would favor Usyk but still would be a competitive fight.

 

Usyk would be good in any era. I think he has the base goods to be able to beat anybody on his best night. The 70s would be interesting because there are several dudes with some special stuff themselves. How does he deal with Ali's speed? Foreman's aggression? Norton's overall boxing package? I think he could, but would he?

 

I agree with this. Let's not forget little Usyk is actually the size of "big" George Foreman back in the 70s except for that he's really a boxer at heart. Frazier will be chasing him around like a bus.

 

100% gets folded by Frazier

This content is protected