Usyk vs Fury 3 has to happen theres still unfinished business there

Um, either he injured the ankle or he didn't. BCS8 suggested that he faked the injury due to "mental health issues" when in reality there's very clear evidence that he did in fact injure the ankle and that's why the rematch was cancelled.

As far as why the rematch didn't happen on the rescheduled date, that was indeed due to Fury supposedly being declared "medically unfit", which was months after the ankle injury.

 

You said he dominated for the first half of the fight, which he didn't, as Usyk won 2-3 rounds out of 7. The more appropriate way to say this is, Usyk won the first 2, third was close and then Fury dominated 4-5-6, with the 7th being again close. Gives a totally different view. It wasn't a tale of 2 halfs, it was a tale of Fury having 3 very good rounds out of the first 7. He didn't win a round after that, was bullied and dropped.

You said he "arguably did enough to win". He didn't. Not even close.

 

When you're mentally unstable like Fury was, it's not a far fetch to think he could training to injure himself on purpose. Accoridng to him he didn't want that Wlad fight.

 

It is indeed far fetched to suggest that he didn't actually suffer an injury when he very clearly did.

 

It was very clearly seen as a "tale of two halves". In fact that was the main talking point following the match. All you gotta do is google search "Fury Usyk "tale of two halves"" and you'll find endless results of boxing media and fans describing it as such.

To your point, the first 2-3 rounds were largely seen as closer and more competitive than the next 3-4 when Fury appeared to start to pull away. That's what was meant by "arguably" dominating. As in after the first 6 rounds, at that specific point Fury appeared to be in full control and appeared to be on hi way to winning a decision at that point. That doesn't mean he dominated every round out of the first half or that it was one-sided. It means that Fury was clearly "winning" at that point and had some of his best rounds as the match reached the mid-way stage.

You're trying hard to twist what I said about it. I said HE as in Fury has every right to believe that he did enough to win. While it was certainly debatable as to how close it was, to suggest that it wasn't competitive is in my view not accurate. Fury fought very well in the rematch, though I didn't have any problem with Usyk getting the decision.

 

This content is protected

"Within a year of his greatest triumph he was taking drugs, binge drinking and going to sleep hoping he wouldn't wake up. The 29-year-old has not fought since reaching his 'Everest' by claiming the IBF, WBA and WBO titles from Wladimir Klitschko in November 2015.

Rather than build on that success, he confessed to "hating boxing" and using cocaine. He relinquished his titles and tested positive for a banned steroid - something he blamed on eating uncastrated wild boar."

https://www.bbc.com/sport/boxing/44340029

 

And yet he still very clearly injured his ankle which postponed the Klitschko rematch. No one's denying that he then went on to use drugs and fall into depression. And that drug use and depression could well have been largely a result of the ankle injury, having to postpone and being ridiculed for that by the public.

 

Only in Shadow's world of "bicep bombs" does an ankle injury last 3 years

 

No. Kabayel Dubois and Parker are the fights to make

 

3 years? How about 5 years. Did you miss the part where he re-aggravated it 5 years later against Wilder?

The drug use and depression started after he suffered the injury and had to pull out against Wlad. The drug use and depression was surely a combination of factors, stemming from the injury and recovery. Fans like you who accused him of faking the injury may well have led Fury down a dark path that he was unable to recover from. The ankle injury may have healed to some extent, but with him nearly snapping it against Wilder 5 years later, that suggests that it was still a worry and a problem many years later.

What you're doing here is what you usually do. You say something stupid, then you realize what happened but won't just man up and take the L. Instead you try to throw it back at me some how. Just admit it. You denied that he actually suffered an injury. You mocked that whole idea. But I showed you evidence that the injury was in fact real. Just take the L and admit you were wrong. But no, you can't do that, can you?

 

Fury tried to fight aggressively but couldn’t execute on it. He tried to at points in the first fight and couldn’t execute on it. Usyk’s slipperiness at avoiding fighting in situations he doesn’t like is underrated. It’s one of his greatest skills.

Fury’s first fight performance was better, until he got caught. What was it, rounds 4-7, he was clearly and cleanly out boxing Usyk, straight up beating him at his own game. Then he had to slow the pace, got caught, and that was it.

If they did fight again (they won’t), Fury should come in even lighter with the aim being to reproduce what he was doing in that stretch in the first fight and keep it up the entire fight. He clearly doesn’t ever skimp on cardio training, and he’s always got a great gas tank for his size, but has he ever gone balls out with that training? My guess is no because I’d bet he’s got a genetic gift to where he just does the standard stuff and gets good results so calls it a day. But what if he dropped to 250 and went nuts on cardio? Could he maybe be able to keep up the pace he’d need to?

 

wow you are kinda dim

 

Dim was you claiming Fury was not injured, that according to you he pulled out of the Wlad fight merely because his "brain broke" and that was that. But some of us pay attention and know the facts involved. You on the other hand don't and put out your own fantastical story.

 

The link is there, dummy.