where does anthony joshua rank all time ?

Not an 'alt account'.

Called him 'Joshy boy' as a joke. It's not that deep.

Joshua has good wins and a good title reign too so the loss to Ruiz shouldn't just offset all that, as people here were saying.

 

All true...

Yes, to be fair, Fury did sign it - it would've been interesting to see how that would've gone, and how it might've affected their respective legacies... At the same time, plenty of time since it could've been made and hasn't.

It depends how great you think he thought he was, or could be, and how others viewed him... I don't think his standing was as far beyond his resume as certain others have been - equally, he certainly wasn't an ATG H2H fighter (but then neither was Fury, who had that claim made for him much more often).

 

Why can't people have been wrong regarding Wilders status? It's not like it hasn't happened before.

It's also not as if Wider had a great resume and then fell apart. Even at his best he was largely unproven.

 

p4p wise? not in the top 1000

HW wise? probably top 100

As a draw? top 25ish.

 

To me it's clear a lot of people were wrong about Wilder's status...
As you say, it's not like it hasn't happened before (or since, for that matter) - hype narratives are the norm in boxing and a lot of people get caught up in them. Not being judgemental, it's just how it goes - nothing new here.

You're spot on with the resume point - and if you didn't know their achievements (in terms of belts and defences) and had to guess them based the levels of the guys on the resume, you'd know straight away Joshua was a champion, whilst you wouldn't with Wilder (I dare say that the educated guess would be that he wasn't, personally?).

Don't get me wrong, I still think Wilder would've had a punchers chance with many guys objectively better than him... But I don't think he'd have beaten many, if any, legit contenders if he'd fought them in his prime - in my book, he's textbook fringe contender with a punchers chance (but then a lot of people see dozens of contenders at any given moment where I only see a handful).

 

You've made my points for me. You're so close to understanding:

"Neither Wilder nor AJ established themselves as THE champion" - this is exactly it. From 2017-2019 there was #1 and #2 and a gap between the rest of the bunch. Wilder and Joshua were positioning themselves for a mega fight showdown to determine who the best was. Imagine a champions league final, but the final doesn't occur. Was one team the favorite to win? Of course. If the match doesn't happen, can you still say they were the best? No. You can say, at best, they were higher ranked, a slight favorite, etc. but didn't defeat their main rivals.

This is a far different situation than when Fury and Wilder were a clear #1 and #2 in 2020 (Joshua obviously not in contention for #2 as he lost to Andy, then decisioned fat Andy in that time). Fury took the rematch in Wilder's back yard and beat the clear #2 in emphatic fashion. He clearly established, in that moment, that he was the best.

You naively say that "Wilder ducked Joshua" which is such a simple way to view the world. You think the guy who signed to fight Povetkin in Russia (a far better version than the old one Joshua beat), who fought undefeated Luis Ortiz twice when no one was calling up Ortiz, the guy who showed he's willing to die in the ring and wants to be taken out on a stretcher, you think THIS guy ducked 10x his highest career earnings? If life is that black and white to your eyes, I'm happy for you.

Regarding Ruiz: losing doesn't erase wins, it adds losses. It's not complicated. If you lose and show vulnerability, that changes perception of your ability. If it happens AGAIN (getting blown out by Dubois, making the same mistakes), this becomes part of your legacy. This is true in all sports, it's just that Joshua is your favorite fighter so it's harder for you to accept.

 

I think its worth noting that he still has some time on the clock. If he beats Wilder (low hanging fruit) and Fury or Dubois (significantly harder) his stock goes way up.

 

Something salient to remember about Joshua, when viewing him through the prism of this particular forum is:

Many on this forum said that immediately rematching Ruiz was “suicide” and that Ruiz “will always have his number”. Now Ruiz is “a fat blob”

Many said that Wallin was “all wrong” for Joshua, and would outbox and possibly stop(!) him. Now he’s a nobody, a bum with no power.

There was a school of thought that said the now (rightfully) highly regarded WBO champ at the time Parker was going to expose and turn Joshua into a pile of chop Suey or something. Then post-fight he’s a bum who got a gift against Ruiz.

Same thing happened with Dubois who was a quitter with no chin and no heart after the losses to Joyce and Usyk, and troubles with Lerena. Same with Parker as mentioned earlier.

Point being is that any fighter with a profile at heavyweight is cristicised mercilessly on here, in a division where unpredictability and upsets are part of the appeal. I remember it back in the day with Lewis. Tin man with no heart and no chin apparently, according to a lot of UK fans in the 90’s….

 

To add context to this long PR post, here are the actual odds for the fights described, (which offer a lot more than "many said"):

Joshua vs. Ruiz II: 3-1, Joshua favorite
Joshua vs. Wallin: 13-1, Joshua favorite
Joshua vs. Parker: 8-1, Joshua favorite
Joshua vs. Dubois: 6-1, Joshua favorite

Ruiz was a fat blob. The same posters who deride Luiz Ortiz because Wilder beat him want you think Ruiz is somehow underrated.

Otto Wallin sucked and was never good.

Parker is what he is; a solid fighter who can hang with but probably not beat the very best, and will win more than he loses against typical top 10 guys.

Dubois being stopped by a jab twice will always be a point of discussion. He's on a strong run now.

Joshua's criticism is due in large part to corporate media hype and the trickle down effect on simpler minded fans, resulting in a massively overrated fighter. It is well earned. He is simply not the fighter that many people were sold and they can't understand it, which causes conflict.

 

And nobody ever predicted it'd be a Ukrainian former cruiser who'd end up being the best HW of the era in the end.

 

this is based on a silly premise. It was not a “PR post” - it was merely context. This conversation is happening on this forum, therefore the context offered is appropriate. This forum is extraordinarily critical to any high profile heavyweight who comes up short - even in a division which is rightfully popular for its unpredictability. I have defended Fury, Wilder, Dubois and Joyce on here also.

Yes, Joshua was a healthy favourite in those fights with the oddsmakers as he was a unified champion and Olympic gold medalist. The context I am referring to is this forum - not the public at large.

Outside of Fury and Wilder - which has been debated at impossible length on here, usually with blinkered loyalty to one’s bias - he fought the top guys at the right time. Losing to the great Usyk, and Dubois is no shame. He avenged Ruiz - fair enough.

it’s this kind of pettiness and blinkered bias that aggravates me.

 

I believe @CST80 called it, to be fair!

 

Top 100. The amount of votes for top 30 is laughable.

 

Many did.