What would Usyk need to do to get inside your top 10 all time heavyweight list?

Honestly, if he can't beat Parker, he drops out of the top 50. Maybe even top 100. That being said, I doubt he loses to Parker.

 

Even then, using results achieved in a different division is extremely dubious.
It begs the question, what kind of a HW resume would need to be built - by a former CW and scalp of Usyk's - for it to count towards Usyk's HW ledger?

 

That's a good question. For example, if Michael Spinks had beaten Mike Tyson after beating Larry Holmes, where would he rank? His accomplishments at Light Heavy should carry some weight.

 

Naturally, it changes the historical landscape of the Heavyweight division, for sure, and further enhances Spinks' Pound-for-Pound rating.

Not as far as his Heavyweight rating is concerned.

But his Light Heavyweight and Heavyweight credentials combined would influence his Pound-for-Pound rating, of course.

 

The weight limit would not have been an issue because in prior eras 220 plus men were genertally a non factor and one didnt have to face them at elite level

 

lol this is rich. In a previous reply to me, you stated Wilder VS Joshua can't happen anymore because Wilder is a shot fighter (in an excerpt you've since deleted).

It's clear as day to me Wilder isn't the same fighter he was five years ago, due to not only being 38 years old, with age diminishing those fast twitch fibers, that he relied on his knock out power for, but also taking two hellascious drawn out beatings, and suffering two brutal knock outs.

 

Usyk is the most well ranked active fighter in the classic forum ever, I´ve never seen a current fighter getting so much praise here ever before (only Golovkin comes close maybe). If you tried to say Floyd Mayweather was a top 10 WW back then, or that he would beat Duran, you would face hard criticism.

 

And I like Mayweather and agree is is great, but there was some cherry picking going on, there.

Usyk is a really special fighter. Hence the well-ranking.

 

Okay. Fine by me. I was just quoting a guy that was, somehow, saying Usyk is not getting his props, gee, what else can anybody say ?
He is being ranked while still active, with only 22 fights, with no knockouts in big fights nothing, only decisions, into the top 10 of all time by guys that do know something about boxing history. That is unheard of, in my lifetime at least.

 

Knockouts are not an indicator of greatness. This is boxing, not barfighting. Usyk has clearly shown power against both Joshua and Fury, but he is a technician first and fights conservatively, as great boxers do.

The 22 fights is why he is great. He has never faltered. He needed no more than 22 fight to become the first undisputed heavy in 25 years and cruiser in a similar time frame, the first of either in the four-belt era. I may literally never be done again.

 

Knockouts are no indicator of greatness, but generally speaking it is the most decisive way to get a win, since it is not as subjetive as a decision. and it is what generates hype most of the time... just the reality.
So, to see a guy that wins his main fights by decision, being this well ranked, by guys that know their boxing history, has been amazing to me. When did that ever happened before by the way ? With prime Tyson maybe ? But again, it was all about the way Tyson beat the opponents...

Yes, being a two division champion with only 22 pro fights is indeed great... the number of belts stuff I generally don´t care, him beating Fury is all that matter to me. (and beating whoever was the main guy in the CW at the time, that latvian guy that is good).

 

His blowout of Helenius was post Fury and was among his best performances. Nobody was saying he was shot and many were still confident he could beat Joshua and even Usyk at the time.

Even if we say he was past it for the sake of argument Zhang is actually older than Wilder and likely past his best in addition to being out of shape. And Parker has taken a lot of punishment including a kayo loss to Joyce so he's probably not prime either based on all his tough fights.
Either way those fights have absolutely badly dented consensus on Wilder being a top 4 lock. People are also reevaluating whether he was better than Povetkin like many once assumed.

 

Let's just sneak our way around Rahman's 3 KO losses in his prime.

Holyfield was clearly past prime when he fought Ruiz.

Young was only down on the cards in his prime against Norton (which many including the man closest to the action scored for Young) and against Ali where the vast majority thought he was robbed.

 

Like clockwork, his “prime” miraculously ended with Norton and didn’t include the three loses in four fights that followed immediately after.