We've just had the third best heavyweight era in history

i don't doubt hes in the top 6, just cause he held a major title for so long. but i agree with his point that given his obvious limitations, it does speak to the weakness of the division. hes like the rhonda roussey of mens hw boxing.

 

You had guys like Moorer and Rahman becoming lineal champs. That's not what I would expect in a strong era. Tyson scored all his best wins in the 1980s and did virtually nothing in the 1990s.

Moreover the top guys kept getting destroyed by massive underdogs in huge upsets which again seems like a poor reflection on the era. Imagine Usyk getting kayoed by Chisora for the lineal title. That sort of stuff happened multiple times in the 1990s

 

Moorer was a very good fighter, what the hell are you talking about? He beat a prime Holyfield to become unified HW champion. Rahman scored an upset win.

 

The fact the top guys lost shows what a strong era it was. It had depth, that's the point of a strong era. If Usyk had more than a handful of fights at HW he could most definitely get knocked out by an underdog, that is HW boxing.

Using your logic Lennox was overrated because he got knocked out twice by B level opponents.

 

I think he's the Ernie Shavers of the era.

 

shavers was a more complete fighter. he could do more. he also had to face competition that was twice as talented as what wilder faced. wilder had a shotgun right, and that was it. like roussy with her arm bar and weak comp. both looked silly against competent fighters.

 

Imagine Joshua getting KOed by Andy "Fat Beluga" Ruiz.

 

Fury weighed exactly the same against Wilder the 3rd time as he did vs Ngannou. It's just Wilder is not physically strong where he could deal with Fury up close in the clinches like Ngannou could.

Fury was also in shape vs the likes of Wallin infact he was lighter against Wallin than he was vs Usyk and still struggled immensely. Which looks even worse in hindsight since Joshua and an old shot Chisora dominated Wallin from start to finish.

Fury has always been overrated in a H2H sense he's struggled too much against lesser fighters and hasn't got enough depth to his resume.

Yes he beat an old Wladimir in one of the worst Heavyweight title fights in history.

Had 1 good performance vs Wilder but struggled immensely in the other 2 fights.

Whyte was already shopworn from all the tough fights and being brutally KO'ed twice previously. Which is evident as Whyte has done nothing notable since losing to Fury except for arguably losing to Franklin who's a fringe top 20 Heavyweight.

 

Fury and Usyk fought competitive fights. Fury beat Wlad toward end of his reign. Fury beat Wilder 3x (in different ways) as well as Chisora 3x. He beat Wallin and Whyte.

Fury wouldve competed in any era. He has an awkward style and is huge. He can fight outside and inside and is evasive w good mobility. His chin is suspect but his heart and recovery are A-/B+. Even in Usyk 1, he recovered after a round...that he took more punishment in.

I wouldnt pick Tyson Fury to beat most ATG HWs but he would be in those fights and would probably surprise most observers.

 

Just watch the videos of the weigh-in, with the disgusting belly. He may have weighed the same, but more of it was in the belly for Ngannou. Repulsive shape.

 

McCall and Rahman were not great fighters by any stretch of the imagination. McCall couldn't even beat Bruno and a shot Tucker, he barely scraped by a 45 year old Holmes. Rahman lost to Oleg Maskaev of all people, the same Maskaev who was kayoed by Corey Sanders. There's no way to explain those fights away on the basis of era depth. If Bruno can beat McCall obviously Lewis should too.

 

Lewis got up from the knockdown and was unfortunately waved off, when fighters have been able to continue in worse condition. That particular loss is just a matter of circumstance to me. Lewis lost to Rahman, then dominated and obliterated him, so perhaps he really was unfocused first time. The version of Lewis that beat Rahman is the best super heavyweight I've ever seen in my whole life.

There were simply more powerpunchers then compared to today, that to me is always a sign of good depth and listing all the contenders and champions side by side it's pretty clear the 90s had more talent. The 1970s has Foreman and Ali, etc so it had some great talent, but it wasn't as deep as the 90s, or even today. Today we have more power punchers

 

Nobody said they were great but they were solid fighters with dangerous 1 punch power. Fans go nuts over wilder knocking out bums but those guys could do it to high level fighters.

 

The problem is, yes there is plenty you can take away from his fights against all three of those - and plenty on here probably would do, if he were a racist Olympian...

Wlad - it was an ugly performance and a razor thin win, in a fight Fury himself admits he was uncharacteristically error free (had to be perfect and was)... And whilst there's a question mark about Wlads mental state in that fight, there's zero question marks over how desperate Wlad was to take the rematch - the fact it didn't happen absolutely takes away from the legacy of Fury's win over him... How much? That's up to the individual to decide.

Wilder - no questions the second fight was an absolute demolition, fighting with an aggression Fury wasn't known for and hadn't shown ever before... Equally, that itself shows how serious Wilder wasn't - even ATG's couldn't switch styles to a polar opposite style they'd never used before and beat supposedly serious legit contenders in good shape (and there's little question that Wilder was in excellent shape)... Then you have the first and third fights where Fury himself was in "disgusting shape" and still won clearly... None of this points to Wilder being remotely close to as good as he was hyped up to be.

Then you have Whyte... In many ways a better win than Wilder - less hyped, but with a fat better resume and undeniably wasn't the habitual duck that Deontay was... But... He was absolutely destroyed by Povetkin the fight before and never quite looked the same again - was he already washed at that point, or did Fury ruin him? We'll probably never know.



This is the thing with Fury - he's an enigma because there's question marks around everything... In his awful performances there are credible explanations for why he looked so bad, and in his best wins there are credible explanations for why he looked quite so good... And it all adds up to a fighter who's difficult to place - but bloody entertaining purely because you never quite knew what to expect.