Tyson Fury has never defended a world heavyweight title

Remembered these comments from Wladimir on the matter of why a unification between the brothers was impossible;

"We never competed against each other in any tournaments. We sparred with each other, and those sparring sessions were not fun. It was very bloody, emotional, and we just realized after getting injured, in another sparring session against your brother, we decided not to do that.

It's something that we also promised our mother. She said you can box however you want, but promise me one thing, you will never fight each other in the ring."

 

Not to upset anybody, but:

[url]https://img.techpowerup.org/200404/worldsheavyweightchampeen.png[/url]

Joshua holds three alphabelts and has numerous defenses, yet I see no letter "C" next to his likeness. Strange. Must be an explanation for it, just can't think what.

 

No point to the thread.

Fury just unseated a "champion" who made nine successful "title defenses" against guys who were part-time fighters, and medically unfit to fight. Other recent champions have had "title defenses" against the likes of Alex Leapai, Albert Sosnowski, and Okello Peter.

Larry Holmes literally created a new title by refusing to defend against Greg Page, and instead fighting Marvis Frazier, which caused the IBF to step in and declare him their champ when Holmes threw away the WBC title. Nor did his "defenses" against Ossie Occasio, Scott Ledoux, and Lorenzo Zanon bring much glory to boxing.

There is one world, and not enough quality contenders for 2-4 "world champions."

Fury is the best because he fights, and beats, the chief rivals of his era. Wlad down, Wilder down, Joshua on deck.

 

Joshua/Pulev Fury.Wilder winners face each other winner fights Usyk or the most credible upcomer

That pretty much solves it.

Please don't let it be Fury re-fighting Wilder again and again ...

 

Probably because he's not the lineal heavyweight champion and he was knocked out by Andy Ruiz last summer.

Tyson Fury defeated two long-reigning champions in their "home" arenas. That probably coincides with The Ring's recognition as their champion, both of the times he has held the belt.

 

Here's the timeline of events beginning June 2018;

First came Hearn's "flat fee" offer, [url]which Wilder accepted around the halfway mark of June[/url].

[url]Hearn had indicated that Povetkin was next in line throughout the early part of that month, while ostensibly leaving room for the possibility of facing Wilder instead[/url] (the WBA were reportedly willing to defer the mandatory, should a deal be struck for Joshua-Wilder). The risible "flat fee" smacked of typically Hearnian lowball/PR moves rather than a genuine proposal, but, yet and still, the bluff was called. As such, [url]matters stalled in the next two weeks due to Hearn's messing around[/url] and no further progress was made, [url]ergo the WBA put their foot down with regard to Joshua's mandatory obligation to Povetkin[/url].

In light of the above, we can fairly assume it was never Hearn's intent for Joshua to meet Wilder on any date in 2018. This becomes even more clear when one considers that, immediately following the WBA's intervention, [url]he proposed a two-fight deal for Wilder to box on DAZN, with the second bout mooted to be an April 2019 encounter with Joshua[/url]. That isn't to say Hearn really wanted the fight for April 2019, either, [url]given that he was now insisting on a one-way rematch clause in favor of his client, which Wilder publically rejected for good reason[/url], [url]further stating that he was done making concessions and would only negotiate on an equal footing in future[/url].

A month later, [url]with Joshua-Povetkin having been finalized and announced in the intervening period[/url], Hearn [url]began insisting that Wilder should face Dillian Whyte on DAZN to facilitate or hype the supposed April 2019 bout with Joshua[/url]. It apparently didn't matter to Hearn that Wilder had made concessions in mid-June in an attempt to get the fight on with immediate effect and had subsequently stated that he was done conceding after having his time wasted and being insulted by an offer which included an entirely unreasonable one-way rematch clause. All that mattered to Hearn was [url]'cheeky bantz' and spinning the conceit that Wilder was the avoidant party all along.[/url]

As an aside, in August, [url]Hearn and Joshua were called out on their avoidance of Deontay Wilder by none other than Lennox Lewis[/url] and [url]Tyson Luke Fury[/url].

A day prior to Joshua-Povetkin, [url]Finkel responded to Hearn's spin on behalf of Wilder;[/url]

[url]"There was an email sent to him and his father Barry last Monday. It says very clearly what he needs to do to make a deal with us. So, for him to say this and say that, it's all bull****.[/url] [url]I've said to him clearly, instead of the stupidness he sent us earlier [referring to the one-way rematch clause in Joshua's favor], send us a real offer and we will respond. If your father wants to meet on October 6th or 7th in New York, I'd be glad to. But it's a waste of time if we don't have a real offer.[/url] [url]The truth is, they have sent me emails and I've responded each time. I even responded this week to their email on Friday. If needed, I will produce it.[/url] [url]If they really want to fight Deontay Wilder, respond to it with a real offer. Otherwise, don't keep saying you haven't heard anything, or we'll show it."[/url]

Days after Joshua-Povetkin, [url]Finkel reiterated;[/url]

[url]"I have sent three separate emails to Barry saying that I have no desire to meet unless I have a real offer for Wilder to meet Joshua. He and I have been in the business long enough to know what that offer would look like.[/url] [url]Team Joshua does not care what fight the public that supports them wants. If they did, they would follow the poll they created to determine who the public wants Joshua to fight next.[/url] [url]The public spoke and Joshua hid. Where is the new offer? Nowhere to be found."[/url]

[url]Tyson Luke Fury, meanwhile, stepped into the breach and did what Hearn and Joshua had lacked the nerve to do[/url], [url]creating one of the most indelible images in heavyweight history in the 12th round[/url].

[url]In early 2019, Wilder and his business handlers held talks with DAZN's John Skipper, discussions which Hearn was expressly excluded from[/url]. Ultimately, instead of committing to a reportedly lucrative multi-fight deal with a 2020 Joshua double mooted as the endgame, [url]Team Wilder decided to resume their established TV network relationships and their unfinished business with Tyson Luke Fury[/url] — this was not just entirely understandable, in light of the changes in the heavyweight landscape over the preceding nine months (specifically, Fury's resurrection and the considerable buzz their December 2018 bout had created), but also prescient, given that Joshua's status would be endangered by defeat to Andy Ruiz three months after the Skipper talks.

Within a year of those talks, with each man having fought twice in 2019, Wilder and Fury would rematch as planned, [url]Wilder being guaranteed in excess of $25,000,000 for the bout[/url] in addition to [url]the combined $40,000,000 he made in 2019 from Breazeale and Ortiz II[/url].


Now, if we go way back to April 2018, we can remind ourselves that Team Joshua had rebuffed [url]an offer of $50,000,000 base[/url], made soon after Joshua had blurted this;

This content is protected

[url]Joshua would later rationalize the rejection of that offer with vague talk of protecting "certain partnerships"[/url], presumably an allusion to the rumored notion that Wilder's business handlers were attempting to assign UK broadcast rights to BT Sport. Soon after, [url]Showtime's Stephen Espinoza would explicitly debunk that rumor, pulling up the relevant receipt and utterly humiliating Hearn, while Hearn hid behind the knowledge that Espinoza wouldn't be so unprofessional as to reproduce an entire contract on Twitter[/url].

Right on, Deontay. Right on.


Hearn's negotiational fudging wriggled Joshua out of that bout in April-June of 2018 when Wilder was ready and willing to fight, and there's no way around that. No amount of references to DAZN multi-fight offers can deconstruct it.

It was the slimeball's intention, of course. His modus operandi is all too transparent by now.


Whatever Wilder's character flaws are, he certainly had no issue with honorably agreeing to a two-way rematch clause for his return bout with Tyson Fury.

 

Just a reminder that any and all claims to the effect of Fury forfeiting the lineage in 2016 are unsound. It is a status that cannot be lost outside the ring unless you renounce the throne by way of formal retirement. And Fury never did renounce his throne. Here he is, affirming his incumbency throughout 2017.

January 2017 (14 months inactive)

This content is protected

June 2017 (19 months inactive)

This content is protected

October 2017 (23 months inactive)

This content is protected

November 2017 (24 months inactive)

This content is protected

December 2017 (25 months inactive)

This content is protected

Even if, just for argument's sake, we say that he dropped it in 2016; he's now renewed his claim in the eyes of the sport's industry and the vast majority of its dedicated fanbase. The Ring's crown is also over his shoulder. There's no way to argue that he isn't the division's champion. It's widely acknowledged.


Anthony Joshua, meanwhile, is a very credible top contender who has to face and defeat Fury to become the division's champion.


So I'll just leave this here;

[url]https://1284474717.rsc.cdn77.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/fury-lineal.jpg[/url]

Ah, the man with the ultimate overruling authority has arrived. The lineal title has just been written out of history.

In bowing to your veto power, we also concede that Bowe is greater than Clay/Ali and that Fury had amassed four years of professional experience at the time of facing John McDermott.

A triumph for the age of subjective truth.

Did you not just state, in your previous paragraph, that the lineal title does not exist?

Now that you've admitted its existence, I should clarify that The Ring's title is not synonymous with the lineage. If we are to talk about titles that don't exist, The Ring withdrew theirs for over a decade while the lineage kept on truckin'. The Ring's title quite literally wasn't a thing for twelve (that's 12) years. The Ring's title is quite happy to ignore the lineage where it suits the publication to do so – one may refer to the inconsistency at LHW when the publication reintroduced its title in 2002, bestowing it upon Roy Jones instead of Dariusz Michalczewski – though the two may often coincide, as is currently the case at HW.

There was no lineal HW champion between February 6 2004 and June 20 2009.

The Ring title is not what is referred to as the lineal title. I have clearly demonstrated this fact for you, i.e. the above example of Michalczewski/Jones. You cannot circumvent it, no matter how disjointedly and breathlessly argumentative you become (you may recall that I have encountered your methods on a prior occasion).

Now, with that established, Vitaly was never lineal. The lineage isn't necessarily bestowed when #1 beats #2 in The Ring's ratings (although it can be the case). It isn't necessarily bestowed upon the winner of a unification fight (although it can be the case). It is bestowed as a matter of widespread consensus between boxing's media and fanbase.

Byrd held a win over Vitaly, however it was achieved. Byrd was a current titleholder when Vitaly beat Sanders. That was a piece of business that still had to be cleared up. Vitaly had lost to Byrd, Wladimir had beaten Byrd, Wladimir had lost to Sanders, Vitaly had beaten Sanders. The division was still up in the air.

Vitaly wasn't long for the division when he beat up Sanders – dipping out of sight a year later after failing to keep four seperates dates for a bout with Hasim Rahman – and the landscape was very different when he returned three years later. Wladimir had done a lot of cleaning up and built a body of work superior to that of his elder brother, who was no more interested in boxing Wladimir than Wladimir was interested in boxing him. Nine months after the lineal and The Ring titles were bestowed upon Wladimir, Vitaly made these comments at a presser for his Sosnowski bout;

"I have just one belt, my brother has three of them. He's much younger, he's the best, he has the skills. He's a great boxer and a great champion. The only fighter who can beat me is my brother. In my personal opinion, he's better than me."

^ That is not conclusive proof that Wladimir would have bettered Vitaly H2H. But it is conclusive proof that Vitaly was happy to ride shotgun on his younger brother's championship tour. Wlad's superior claim to the lineage could not be contested by a man who did not wish to contest it.

All the above accounts for why W. Klitschko vs. #3 rated Chagaev was deemed the bout to establish a new lineage after Lewis.

And, just for good measure, if you want to go by The Ring's ratings, Wladimir generally faced higher rated men than Vitaly after Vitaly returned to the sport, ranking up four Top 5 guys to Vitaly's two;

-Vitaly's rated opposition after returning
Peter (#2), Gomez (#9), Arreola (#6), Johnson (#10), Solis (#10), Adamek (#4)

-Wladimir's rated opposition in the same timeframe
Chagaev (#3), Chambers (#4), Haye (#2), Thompson (#10), Povetkin (#2)

Vitaly officially retires on December 15, 2013. Wladimir Klitschko concedes the lineal crown to Tyson Luke Fury on November 28, 2015.


You may protest, naturally, but I have to advise that I am unlikely to give more than a cursory scan to those remonstrations, nor will I legitimize them by going back and forth with you and deconstructing them. You do not deal from a straight deck, and this has been established already; [url]https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/the-world-according-to-ras-al-ghul-aka-the-5-golden-rules.640558/[/url]

 

What good does it do to have the lineal or ABC -with a resume of 32 fights? If it isn't about the belt , but the resume, he lacks. We'd have to raise Wilder to a credible champ in order to think the Lineal was defended against a worthy competitor and as stated previous posts- we'd have to excuse his failure on drug tests for losing any belt he got from Klitschko.
He's one of the 2 best of this era, nothing more. 3rd Wilder 1/2 TBD Fury or AJ.

 

Bono Vox, the finest to ever raise a microphone to his lips and croon out a melody;

This content is protected

 

def a goat of united kingdumb

 

This doesn't follow. You need to have fought more than 31 bouts (the actual number he's fought) to be the king of a division?

Dethroned the previous lineal king (who had reigned for at least six years, feel free to call it nine if you think he was the best from 2006 onward). He then ruined the #1 contender in the division (#2 at worst). These are the most significant heavyweight feats registered by any fighter currently in the division.

I don't call Wilder a champ any more than I call Joshua one. He was a contender to the throne. One of the two chief contenders. And the one that the other chief contender wasn't in a rush to face.

Already addressed;

I pray that you never sign a credit hire agreement after a road traffic accident. That penchant for misrepresentation could end up costly.

Tyson Luke Fury is the world's heavyweight champeen. The rest are contenders. Point. Blank. Period.

Joshua has to beat the man if he wants to (or if you want him to) change that reality. Don't hold your breath, friend.

 

Fury won the world title twice without losing it in the ring. Joshua has also won it twice but the second time was because he got KO'd. How is that better?

I don't think I've read anyone say he's surpassed the Klitschkos, until you wrote it. And that would be nonsense too...

 

Sanders place no.2 by WBC. Place no.3 by Ring

This content is protected

 

he will do once he beats joshua.