I pointed out how similar Fury appeared to Ali long before he beat Wlad, I'll stick with it now that he's actually beaten him. Similarities: Tallest respected champ ever up to his time, represents a stage of physical size progression of the division Good power, but not great by any means Along with size, relies on speed and punching output Big questions about his chin going into first HW bout against a hard hitting champ (both knocked down twice by poor, much smaller opposition), Both subject to weight and conditioning variations (Ali's later in career to be fair) I think Fury will probably be the dominant champ for the next 5 years. I think his career will be shortened due to his mental issues, lack of discipline, conditioning problems. I could very well see him retiring, letting someone else become a champ, and then coming back and beating them when he got bored or broke. It wouldn't surprise me to see him become more like Rid**** Bowe, however, the other HW champ he reminds me of. Again, a natural example of size progression, beats a respected champ (and keeps beating him), but does little outside of that. If he beats Wlad again, but then either loses to Wilder Joshua etc, and then retires, or faces stiff's for a couple years then retires. His career would be very reminiscent of Bowes. I could see that happening too.
I can't see fury being any sort of a dominating force.. I can't see him living through a fight with the top 3, he really has no chance against, DW AJ & Ortiz.. he just doesn't have any tool to keep them off him. A 40 yr old wlad is a whole different story than those 3 guaranteed.. I haven't seen enough of parker for any answers to had been answered. This board seems to rate him highly, I really don't know what they've seen. I've never seen him against anyone, not even a areolla level opponent . If he's been in can sme tell me who it was against Thanks in advance
I don't quite understand how Ken Norton is considered a good model - he was awarded a vacant WBC belt and lost it in his first and only defense - and Mike Tyson is considered a bad model - he unified all the titles, made about 10 WBC title defenses and was one of the richest and recognizable athletes in the world ... I think Tyson Fury will follow his own Tyson Fury model. I think he'll win and lose the title a couple times over the next 10 or 12 years. I think he might go to jail for a time - because of his confrontational demeanor. I think he might quit and come back. I think he's going to be around for a long time ... in an era when the division will feature some stellar bouts. But I don't think he's going to hold the title for any long stretches. He'll just have multiple reigns of two or three defenses each. That's my guess. The long consecutive reigns - Louis, Holmes, Klitschko - come about every 30 years or so. So, if the sport follows form, we shouldn't expect to see another decade-long reign until the 2040s.
Wilder is garbage, Joshua's people have admitted that they need another year and a half before they will put him in the ring with Fury, and Ortiz is a 36 year old steroids abuser who just beat a janitor. The only one of these guys who is any kind of threat to Fury is Joshua, and he has a long way to go. Parker could be trouble, but like Joshua, the verdict is still out. Norton is a good model because, at the end of the day, though everyone knows he is no Ali, Frazier, Foreman, or Holmes, he is still regarded as an ATG of sorts. He squeeked into the second tier. A good win and the quality of the era buoyed him. Tyson is a bad model because he could have done so much more with his career had he not gone off the rails at 23. I said in the premise that these were not absolutes. Of course Tyson and Dempsey are greats. Arguably, Schmeling is too. I am not trying to argue about the greatness of the models. Just vote who you think he will most clearly mirror.