Usyk is only behind Floyd Mayweather in the last 20 years, surpassing Manny Pacquiao

I missed your last paragraph yesterday.


Submit a name better than RJJ?

Absolutely ANY of Usyk’s best wins at CW and HW, are a level above Joe’s win over Roy.


Any of them.

Glawacki, Breidis, Hunter, AJ and Fury etc.

Any of them.


Why?

Because they were world level fighters at the top of their game, whereas Roy Jones was about to turn 40, where he’d literally not had a world level win in 5 years.


We’re not comparing a PRIME Roy Jones to Breidis, AJ and Fury etc.

We’re simply looking at the specific version of Roy Jones that Joe fought.


You don’t think that Usyk moving up to HW and beating AJ and Fury, whilst being outsized in weight, reach and height, was better than a LHW win over a shot Roy Jones??

If not, why??

 

It’s like, how long have some of these guys even been a fan of boxing, probably one of the dumbest posts I’ve read on here.

 

Usyk is a great, best fighter of his generation. That being said, lot of people are simply ranking him because they like him. If Canelo was as liked as Usyk was to hardcore boxing fans, everyone here would be on his dick 24/7. Usyk gets two close wins vs a fat tub of lard Fury…. Omg, this guys an all time great, the GOAT!!! Canelo gets two close wins vs GGG.. he’s a bum, a cheater and doesn’t deserve it!!!

The hypocrisy is through the roof.

 

How about the guy claiming that Usyk doesn’t have a win as great as Calzaghe’s win over Roy?

 

Pacquiao’s wins over P4P fighters at the time were Cotto, a catch weight. Marquez at 130 and a catch weight at welterweight. Bradley at welterweight twice. Barrera at 126.

Calzaghe has a P4P win over Hopkins. That’s it. I don’t see how there is any point in this discussion worth debating in Calzaghes favor?

 

We can only assume that he’s thinking that Roy was awesome in his prime, and better than Cotto etc.

But like I’ve said to him, we can obviously only rate the wins against the specific versions that these guys fought.

Not many people give Terry Norris credit for beating Leonard etc.

 

Right. If I were to rank Delahoya on names only, his wins over Whitaker and Chavez would have made him even farther up the rankings.

 

He has to rank higher than Andre.

 

Usyk is behind to Pac but can be argued he is above to Floyd.

 

This is an interesting take.

 

This content is protected

 

GlaukosTheHammer,

This content is protected

Now you could say that in your opinion, Usyk doesn’t have any win better than Joe’s win over Hopkins.

Now I wouldn’t agree with that, but you’re certainly entitled to holding that opinion. It has merit. You could make an argument for it.

However, if I look objectively, where I rate under traditional ranking criteria, then even if I agreed with you, it wouldn’t make any difference.


I would always rank Usyk higher than Calzaghe, simply because:

1. He has more ability than what Joe had.

2. Despite the great win over Hopkins, Usyk has a superior overall resume in every possible way.

3. He has achieved more, against a better group of opposition.

This content is protected

I rate Floyd and Manny extremely highly. And I rate Floyd higher.

Regarding the leftovers, again, all you have to do is objectively follow their timelines.

They both had different opportunities, because for years, they were in different divisions.

Now I don’t believe for a second that Manny made calculated decisions to avoid certain fighters, or to let Floyd fight them first.

There is zero evidence of such a thing.

It was just circumstances.

Manny came up through the lower divisions, and when he got to WW, Floyd had already been established there.


Now, yes, we can say that Floyd fought Mosley, Oscar and Hatton first.

But then we can also say, that Manny fought Marquez and Cotto first.

So again, it’s just circumstances.


Regarding Manny as a fighter, even if you think that he was overrated and a lesser fighter than Floyd, you still have to be objective and recognise that he was a great fighter.

His resume and accomplishments were much better than Calzaghe’s.

They’re not even comparable.

Then take into account his size, and the risks and challenges that he took on.


Now you have previously noted, that Calzaghe had a win over a top 10, P4P fighter in Hopkins.

However, Cotto was on the top 10 P4P list in 2009, when Manny beat him.

Also, between 2002-2008, both Marquez and Morales were also on there at various points.

So you’re simply not being fair here.


On ability, resume and accomplishments etc, Manny is absolutely one of the greatest fighters of the last 20 years. By any metic.

He is absolutely a modern day great.


Great debate.

Thanks.

 

I know right so dismantling an ATG like Barrera who was close to his prime who was also top 3 P4P fighter. Somehow isn't better than having 2 competitive fights vs Fury who's historically not even close to great.

Baffling comment.

 

I'll go in reverse order because the Manny stuff is fresh in my mind.

To be very clear on that subject, I simply do not trust myself to be objective.

I'm a dirty fence sitter who has no value to either side. If I rate him highly his haters come out and make great points. If I rate him lowly his lovers come out and make great points. I have no problem being told where Pac sits but have a hard time telling other folks.

In my opinion he lost to JMM but has 3 wins over him. Should I take a stand for what I think is right in my own personal ratings? Or should I respect the authorities and trust they saw things differently for good reason and give full credit? This is just one example and not at all the crux of the entire situation but a decent example. I don't mean to deny Pac his greatness. I'll tell you he's a great fighter all day but I won't rate him on my own lists because then I would have to justify it to other people and I don't think I can. I am not prepared for that debate. Very much how I am simply not very well prepared for this. I'd love to argue with you or agree with you outright but the most I can muster is you ain't wrong but the jabronis calling Pac bupkis ain't entirely either.

Back to the ratings, I am a little bit confused. Let's drop the comparisons and just get into rating philosophy.

Yes, I would agree we don't rate based on what happened prior or after but rather in that time.

In my opinion Marius is one of the best CWs who ever lived, ATG CW. In my opinion. In reality he was rated 6th when Usyk fought him. Glowacki was rated 5th. Personally as former Usyk opponents I'd rate Briedis over Glownacki. Any sane person should given the fight that happened after the Usyk fights.

However, if I'm not including the time before or after then Glow was rated 5th and Marius was rated 6th. A 5th rank is a better win than a 6th rank. Wouldn't me claiming Marius is a better win during the time Usyk fought him than Krystof when Usyk fought him just be my own bias brought on by hindesight? At the time of the fights Glownacki was more highly rated there for the better win, no?

 

GlaukosTheHammer,

This made me laugh.

I’m sure that you could be objective if you tried.

It appears as though you’ve had many arguments/debates about him before.

Yes, I understand if he was awarded wins that you don’t agree with. But even so, he still has to be one of the modern greats.

Yes, I understand what you’re saying. You could rate that win higher.

Personally, I’ve never rated any of Usyk’s wins in any sort of an order.

To be honest with you, it’s not important to me where they rank.

Simply because I just rate them collectively.

All together.

I just do an overall comparison of their entire body of work.


So:

It doesn’t matter if Joe’s win over Hopkins was the best.

Or if Glawacki was a better win than Breidis etc.

It’s not important.

I just compare overall resumes.


So to me, Usyk just has a better overall resume than a guy like Calzaghe, irrespective of where they rank.

Usyk just has a better body of work.

He fought the better group of fighters.

He has the better wins and resume.