The only benefit to beating them is becoming a two division champ. Neither of those guys are likely to go down as a great heavyweight. Evidently I have a lower opinion of their legacies than you do. I think Usyk would have been better off staying at cruiserweight and only moving up to heavyweight to collect a belt. That could change if Itauma or Surov pan out. This seems to be an era where cruiserweight was better than heavyweight for some reason So if we imagine a scenario where Usyk stays at cruiserweight until 2024 then moves up to best Dubois in 2025 (who is coming off wins over Hrgovic, Joshua and Miller) I don't see people making a big deal about him not fighting Joshua or Fury. Hope that makes sense.
Nope I think it's entirely possible perhaps even likely that Opetaia and Breidis are better than Joshua and Fury. I don't see them losing to Ruiz or getting dropped by Cunningham or struggling with Ngannou How is picking cruiserweights over them a big stretch when they both lost to a former cruiserweight?
Tbf Usyk took the fights he needed too at Heavyweight,so he could get all the Belts and Titles which he did so admirably and then gave the previous Belt/Titles holders the rematches and beat them once more to cement his position. Usyk then defeated arguably the top contender at the time in Dubois who he also then defeated in a rematch. Then we have the Parker Kabayel Wardley fights which we all wanted to see which have not happened yet (Parker certainly not involved in a Title shot now and Wardley new to the list) Usyk for one does not fight often enough at Heavyweight which has always been the case since he moved up,even despite this I think Usyk is allowed a cross over fight like many fighters before him,however after this fight then Usyk has to start fighting his mandatory’s with Kabayel certainly in poll position .
I have to acknowledge a lot of what you wrote here, except that Dubois was seen as an unworthy title challenger (he got the fight because Warren is a master of manuevering). But overall while I hold a different opinion, I think what you are saying is fair enough. However, I do want to explore this idea that "Usyk is allowed a cross over fight like many fighters before him". This as I said in a different thread, really seems like a lowering of the bar. Usyk is the undisputed king of the heavyweight division, the pinnacle of the sport. Who were these many fighters before him?
Again, this is purely delusion. Even those who agree with you broadly in the thread are going to find this borderline insane. Good luck to you on winning the conversation you are having with yourself.
Fury has an absolutely horrendous resume. Usyk moving to heavyweight later and not fighting him is not a big deal in my book. Why would it be? Joshua wouldn't be an issue because Usyk would have a win over Dubois who beat him. This is no different than Lewis not fighting Bowe and Moorer
He doesn't. You are making yourself more foolish with evert post. Good luck to you in the conversation you are having with yourself.
Fury beat 3 Ring ranked opponents. That's not much of a resume is it. Chris Byrd has a similar resume to Fury. Would you like to compare them?
Fury vs Byrd Wlad- Vitali Tua-Wilder McCline-Whyte Oquendo-Chisora Looks pretty similar to me. Byrd also beat old Holyfield.
Riddick Bowe is another example. Generally he is regarded as having a rather thin resume. But he matches up pretty well with Fury Holyfield-Wlad Golota-Wilder Tubbs-Whyte Donald-Chisora Then you have Seldon, Ferguson, Hide vs Wallin, Johnson, etc
The Ring doesn't mean anything. It is of no import at all. He ended two long-reigning champions, one of which is an acknowledged all time great. That is all. Your problem is that you have been living in a fantasy echo chamber. Fury's resume may be less than great, but it is very good.
POST SCRIPT: By the way, I would compare them, and there is nothing wrong with Byrd's record, either. Byrd's record was no more than"horrendous" than Fury's.
Wilders championship competition was terrible. Realistically his reputation largely rests on giving Fury problems which seems like circular logic. For Wilder to be a big win we have to assume he was far better than his resume indicates but I see no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt. He could have taken harder fights if he wanted to. It's not like everyone was ducking him.
First, it's important to note Usyk's track record up until this point has been exemplary. Unifying the cruiserweight division before taking a warm up fight in Witherspoon before testing himself against a solid name on Chisora. Then proceeding to take on two of the better heavyweights in the division along with a young, hungry contender in Dubios. The result: the first undisputed heavyweight champion since Lennox Lewis. You truly can't argue that this wasn't a once in a lifetime achievement. However, this doesn't excuse the past year and a bit where I feel he's let it get to his head and become another Fury, stalling the division and taking on safe fights just to line his pockets. I know some will say "who can blame him?" And they're right to an extent, I think most people would absolutely do the same. But that won't stop me from holding him to the same standard I did for Tyson fury and other champions of the past. If you're a champion you need to act like one, or retire to pursue those freak show money fights.
Yes, but he is still a ten defense titlist and managed a few goods wins. You throw around these words like "horrendous" and "terrible" inappropriately. He has a place in history, such as it ism, which Fury displaced. Usyk displaced Fury. That is how this works. Again, good luck in the conversation you are having with yourself.