Tyson Fury says "1 day left" still no sign of Hearnz coming up with worthy venues and dates

Fact = Tyson Fury has never made a defence of his title.

 

Half would still be twice what Fury would get for fighting anyone else.

 

,

I'd lay money he's banking on having them all unified by 2021's end.

Hello again, @GALVATRON. I believe [url]we've been through this one before[/url].

It's a moot point. In Fury's absence, Wilder was widely considered 1a or 1b alongside Joshua. That's not my subjective view, but the contemporaneous consensus. At the very least, he was Joshua's chief doubter and a bout between them would've constituted a pick'em matchup.

Wilder was a top boy, which is why demand for Joshua-Wilder was cresting in the springtime of 2018.

As of the current time, I'm cool with that. What he has done > mundane title defences against the shopworn Takams and faded Pulevs of the world. You'd be pressed to find a coherent, informed observer who disagrees with that position.

 

And he won't defend them, he's said this before.

 

He's also said he'll be fighting on for years to come.

Defending all four belts wouldn't be the easiest endeavour, logistically speaking, given the glut of mandatory commitments. Ultimately, I could care less how many he defences he makes if he's facing and beating the best of his era.


Joshua soon come, assuming Hearn's on the level.

 

Unless he drops the WBC belt, he's defending it in his next fight, so it's a pointless discussion.

Unless you're suggesting he's about to relinquish the belt or retire, which is possible but I think unlikely.

 

Really isn't.

Tyson doesn't handle being "the man" well at all. If he wins, he will retire. He's said as much.

 

But to even face ONE top contender as the reigning and unified champ would be something, but he won't and doesn't.

 

He meant, "Unless you're suggesting he's about to relinquish the belt or retire" without facing Joshua.

If (after beating Joshua) he fights on and defends, what will the new gripe be?

 

Yeah, maybe.
But if he puts his WBC on the line, he's defending anyway.

I agree, Fury has yet to prove himself as someone who can handle being the 'favourite' in the really big fight. But he proves us all wrong before, so I wouldn't say one way or the other.

 

None, as long as it's against an elite guy like Usyk and not some no-mark.

 

Of course you wouldn't, wouldn't expect anything different from you.

 

Fair enough.

But would it really matter if Usyk, for whatever reason, was the nominal titlist and Fury was beltlessly challenging for the Ukrainian's strap o' crap? All that should count for anything is that the guy's picking off the best of his era.

 

First aydamn now galvatron lmao. The truth is it doesn't matter how boxing fans see Wilder. What matters is reality. Wilders resume is trash besides the 2 Ortiz wins

 

What exactly is your problem ?
You want me to hate Fury and pre-judge his actions, like you do. Your hatred of Fury is very strange, mate.