Were does Usyk rank P4P all time?

No one ranks their amateur achievements in regards to where they're ranked in professional ranks in regards to their all time P4P rankings.

Show me a single post or article where someone brings up any of their amateur achievements when assessing their all time P4P rankings i'll wait.

 

Whenever those legendary names are mentioned it is part of their story. Same with Ward, same with Roy being robbed of Gold. Speak for yourself, the Olympics matters to boxers and historians of the sport. When you talk about a fighter being fast tracked or a hyped prospect it's often based off Olympic success. You can pretend it doesn't matter but you'd be wrong.

 

No i wouldn't be wrong you are.

Amateur achievements have no barring on how a fighter is rated in professional ranks in regards to their all time P4P rankings.

Each of those fights are rated extremely highly based on their incredible resumes in the professional ranks.

Ali is ranked the number 1 Heavyweight of all time based on having the best resume at the weightclass and fighting in the strongest Heavyweight era of all time.

And Ali would still be ranked number 1 whether or not he won a gold medal in the Olympics which has no barring on his all time P4P ranking.

 

Exactly
I have manny just ahead of Floyd or on par and did he have an amateur background?

Duran is another. The amateur stuff is more of an afterthought and doesn't mean much when ranking pro careers. Unless everything was dead even? Then it mat come in to play, but even then it doesn't. For me it is even a greater level of success to be so great without the amateur background. Going pro at 15/16 and becoming the level of Duran, pacquiao or canelo is just as good as being amateur. It's actually more gritty

 

Yet on a thread with andre ward vs Calzaghe, joe is well ahead and nobody mentions his gold medal, because it means little in the pro game

Audley Harrison has more Olympic golds than Mike Tyson or Tyson Fury. Or how about David Haye who embarrsed him

It's nice, but doesn't matter when comparing pro records. Different games really

 

What have I walked into.

 

I was thinking ten best at the time. That's somewhat subjective of course but with Fury I think we have a pretty good idea.

With Joseph Parker we have a lot of wins where it's not clear where the guy rates. I think Zhang is clearly top 10 when he faced Parker but other wins like Wilder, Bakole, and Ruiz are all subjective. Wilder would have been a great win a few years earlier but may have been shot.

I have difficulty giving Fury much credit for Wallin and Cunningham because fighters typically get little credit for beating guys at that level. I can't recall Tyson ever getting credit for beating Lou Savarese for example and id put him around the same level as these guys

 

The problem is that history is not judged strictly that way, nor does Ring magazine exactly capture that, nor is that always known or agreed upon with hindsight. Chisora, or example, may not have been in the ten best any time Fury fought him but its turned out to be a hell of a win better than a lot of guys who drifted in and out of the "ten best." The fans know that Cunningham was screwed in a couple of fights, and the win against a former cruiserweight champ who should have had a much better heavyweight career is worth much more than on paper.

It's a good legacy--not a great one unless he comes back and does a bit more, but a real good one, and Ring magazine's opinion does not change that.

 

Fury doesn't deserve to be in the top 30 heavyweights after that Ngannou fight. Top 20 is a massive stretch, always was. We rarely give past fighters praise over fringe contenders equivalent to Wallin.

 

That's debatable, but not even relevant. According to Boxrec, 35,540 men have competed in the heavyweight division under Queensbury rules, and countless others have done so unrecorded. If Fury were number 31, it would be a very good career.

 

He isn't a great, and the praise over his fringe wins are being overrated to compensate for his resume

 

I have said several times over that I don't believe that he qualifies as great. Not to be sarcastic but I am having a lot of problems lately with people arguing against things that I never said.

 

Nah you're just wrong sorry.

 

Why? He got the W against Ngannou. Do you also fault Floyd for looking shaky against McGregor? Floyd didn't take him seriously. What's the difference with Fury not taking him seriously?
If Fury retired with his 0, didn't fight for the glory against Usyk, instead fought and beat Joshua for the money as Floyd would have done.. you'd be talking about Floyd Mayweather again.
That's why Usyk is greater than Floyd. Fury stepped up and he lost, okay. Floyd never stepped up to that level and that type of fight.

 

He isn't even bordering to me. He gets compared to Bowe a lot due to having a thin resume after a single elite win, but his Wilder wins are already overrated imo, objectively Wilders incredibly limited by sheer ability and didn't test himself enough to be elite. Would peak Wilder even beat Hrgovic. I see guys like Donald dominating Wilder and Whyte due to his agility and chin. Would Chisora beat Larry ??? Can't say. I think the Ngannou fight was worse on the legacy than Golota. I think Hide is better than Cunningham and Wallin on paper and in the ring. Is Christan Hammer better than Bruce Seldon and Gonzalez ? I just can't see it