If you've only seen youtube clips of Foreman than I would expect this to be your opinion as it's the common fan/casual perception. Foreman was actually a very clever fighter wirh instincts/toughness who accomplished way more than fury ever will
Which part of my comment was nonsense? Wilder cannot box and is dwarfed by fury. Easy to look great when there's no one out there with the proper combination of skills/balls to compete with. And yeah, wlad lacked balls - I said it
Yeah I agree with this largely. Even if I don’t know how I’d rank him when you factor in things like resume (especially if he retires soon or loses),H2H his size, awkwardness and ability make him a challenging fight to anyone in history, I think even fights he loses he gives a great fight.
I think motivated Fury would be a nightmare for any HW in history. Not saying he would beat anybody, but he would have had good chances of beating anybody: - Joe Louis beat some very tall guys, but none of them was as quick, fluid and skilled as Tyson Fury - Rocky Marciano would be incredibly undersized - Sonny Liston would have had a lot of trubles had Fury chose to box him, the same goes to George Foreman - Fraizer would be massively undersized - Ali would hold advantages in speed and probably even ring IQ, but Fury's length would present him a lot of problems, the same goes to Holmes - Evander Holyfied would be massivelt undersized - Mike Tyson's speed and power would give him pretty good chance, but Tyson never could overcome clinches (Green, Smith, Tucker, Lewis fights, Holyfield, Ruddock and Douglas to the lesser extent) and Tyson Fury is great at holding - Lennox Lewis fought only one really good fighter that was taller than him - Vitali Klitschko. Yes, he won, but he went through hell in that fight. Fury is taller than Vitali, has much longer reach, is much quicker and versatile, more fluid boxer with fantastic stamina - Vitali himself would be outboxed by Fury - he always had problems with slick boxers - Wlad... Well, he was clearly past his prime when he fought Tyson, prime Wlad was quicker than 2015 version of course. But I think Fury's feints would always make him think too much Once again, I'm not saying Fury would definitely beat every heavyweight in history. Some would have had more chances against him, others would be huge underdogs. But I can't see Tyson Fury being a big underdog against any HW in history. I actually think prime Riddick Bowe would be the toughest opponent for him since Bowe was big, skilled, aggressive, had very good chin, but, most importantly, could match Fury's work rate and stamina
You seem to avoid my questions. Like when I asked how would Roy jones do vs. the 4 who beat or drew with Hagler. You could not give a clear answer. Why? Because your biased to the max. Now, do you think Fury was a drug cheat or not. Yes or no? We can have a debate from there, okay? A duck of this black and white question will tell the readers and me everything, which is to say you can't seem to admit the truth when it does not coincide with your agenda.
I thibk people are getting a bit carried away with Fury. To early to fully gauge him. I think he loses to Frazier, Ali, Louis, Liston, Holmes, Foreman among others.
Head to head Fury has a lot to prove. Beating Wilder who is a pretty poor boxer, and a 39 year old Klitschko when testing positive just months before and wasn't caught until post Wlad for PED abuse proves exactly what? I really hope Wilder fight contenders in their prime, he'll get stopped and people will view him more like Shavers. Wilder by the way has yet to beat stop a Ring Magazine opponent in his prime. He's 0-3 here. Fury can box well, but he's got a to to prove. Beat Joshua, with a clean drug test and he'll have proven something. IF he can do this, I'll have no issues putting him in my top 25. But Fury might not ever get there, he says he wants to retire. If this happens, he'll have a tainted legacy with a drug test, and calling it quits in his absolute prime. Gene Tunney did that, but only after 80+ fights several of which were vs hall of fame opponents, none of whom were close to age 39.
You've had my answer (I have to assume you can, at least, read a little). I've provided information, which spells out that answer, in fact. But, as always, you are not interested in actual facts or a reasonable debate about them. It's just the same, boring little games; you trying to impose your opinions, regardless of how **** your case is. Though, I have to say, your post above^ is terrible, even by your standards. This will be hard for you to compute but, just to be clear - the information I have provided proves that you are wrong. The debate depends on whether you can find fault in the evidence provided. I don't anticipate a sensible response, anytime soon.
6'8" 270 pounds and moves better than most welterweights Fury is the first of a kind at heavyweight. NEVER BEEN SEEN BEFORE. Dismantled ALL of his "toughest" opponents. Obliterated them
You don't know squat about boxing. Frazier & Louis ARE WAY TOO SMALL to even touch Fury. LOL I would put money on Fury to beat Ali, Foreman, Liston etc etc etc. Too big Too skilled. He'll stop AJ in 2021 without issue. Vitali and Lennox are lucky Fury wasn't around to shut them down. FUNDEMENTAL LAWS IN BOXING 1. The bigger man wins - Fury is basically 60 pounds bigger and 5 inches taller than all of these old school heavies. A welterweight will lose to a middleweight. "Big" George Foreman IS NOT BIG next to Fury. He's painfully average, 6'3" 220 pounds. 2. The smarter more skilled fighter NORMALLY WINS - Fury has these assets. His ring intelligence is off the charts.
You can't predict fights to save your life. You probably think AJ has more than a punchers chance at beating Fury.
