Serious responses only, where does AJ rank if he beats Wilder?

Slightly higher than where he is now. You can't judge his ATG status until after his career (Same goes for Wilder, Parker, etc)

Look at Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko. Both derided for much of their careers (much like AJ) and yet now considered among the greats.

The fact AJ draws so much hate means he must be doing something right.

 

Exactly this. Joshua is likely only halfway through his career and has many more fights to come. Take Lewis as an example, he had a 14 year pro career, but the fights that really cemented his ATG status (Holyfield, Tyson, Klitschko) happened in his last 5 years.

LIkewise, even if Joshua loses to Wilder that doesn't bar him from becoming an ATG later, as all the other HW ATGs took losses too.

 

We haven't seen the best Anthony Joshua yet. He has to be top 20 all-time though, surely. He is beginning to answer critics now. The Parker fight showed he is working on it. Give it two or three years and AJ will have learnt a hell of a lot, then we can judge him.

He has two top level fighters on his record, in Joseph Parker and an old Wladimir Klitschko. That's not too shabby considering he's not even had 25 fights yet. Then you'd say he can also be given credit for his wins against Takam and Whyte. So 4 names in total who I would say are decent wins minimum.

AJ has lots of potential. He is top 10 p4p despite what some of the people on here say. He has just as much potential as Crawford and Garcia, who haven't beat a fly so far in their professional careers. That is something that Joshua can't be accused of, he has beaten some good fighters. He has also won multiple world titles, just like Crawford and Garcia. So why then do we have Crawford and Garcia so high up? It makes no sense to me. People just seem to be far too harsh on AJ.

His performances against those lesser guys are just as impressive as Crawford's and Garcia's, he's been smashing guys, maybe with less flair, but that's not the point. He still dominated just as impressively as them, except with an ugly, warrior-like style instead of a skilled, flashy style. It's not all about boxing people's heads off and moving around like mad. You can win just as impressively in other ways. By brute force.

In terms of physicality though, would anyone bet against him beating people on that alone? He might not have the flashy style that some have, but boy can he fight...People underrate that on here.

 

Higher than Wladimir Klitschko. He's already greater than Vitali Klitschko

 

he'd need some more valid defences. As poor as wlad was, he did manage a handful of valid defences, by hook or by crook. H2H joshua will probably be better than prime wlad though.

but vitalis not even in the runnings for as a good champion.

 

It's really daft mentioning Joshua or Windmill as anywhere near ATG. Joshua has only has 21 fights, Wilder has had many more but mainly against tomato cans (with Mr Nicholls being an obvious exception).

To get anywhere near ATG they will need many consistent victories over genuine prime top 5 contenders, including the new batch of upcoming HWs and the top CWs coming up.

 

You don't seem to be very bright.

The thread specifically asks where Joshua stands as an ATG if he beats Wilder to become an undisputed HW Champ.

The thread did not ask what Wilder needs to do to become an ATG.

 

I was providing my opinion on both fighters. It's call an expanded answer (whoosh over your head I know).

I've got a PHD in Microbiology.


The only PHD you likely have in is in being annoying.

 

Your post sucked. End of story.

 

Nowhere near an ATG. You can't fast-track longevity.

 

Agreed. Norton for example was good and by today's standards would be a contender but no way should he be on an atg list.

 

Interesting that Tyson Fury is considered an atg off one decent performance.

 

Is your question about current day pound for pound or about all time heavyweights?