Where do you Draw the Line of what are reasonable arguments between eras?

I think people basically see, what they want to see. Everybody wants to see something, that they feel confirms/backs up their agenda.

If your mission here is to put down the present - then you'll see moden fighters who have lost the oldtime skills, and therefore are inferior to boxers from decades ago.

On the other hand, if you feel boxing is evolving with time, and today is the best time ever - then you might argue, that most of the oldtimers were so primitive, that they shouldn't even be allowed to share a ring with their modern counterparts!

And of course all of this takes place only in our fantasy... so there's obviously no "right" or "wrong" in these discussions!

 

if he can beat him him. he is better.
that is how the ' who is better?' question is answered.

 

Yes, the winner of a fight is obviously the better man. So Fury is probably a better HW than charles. When I say "better", I mean that Charles was (imo) the more skillful and technically superior of the two... which, however, likely wouldn't be enough to overcome Fury's enormous size advantage (again, imo!).