I get the rush to downgrade guys after a result but I disagree, too much time in between these bouts for them to have any insight on one another. Also I think Aj still deserves respect for what he's done in the division being the main attraction when heavyweight boxing lacked one for years. I can't even rate what this fight means do him yet until we see what Dubois does next. If he mows down the next handful of guys he faces it's different than if he gets clipped by a lower level guy his next time out. I have a much better understanding of why Wlad fought safety 1st once guys started getting bigger than I did in real time for sure lol.
I agree with some of that, but I rank Usyk higher than Klitschko because 1) Usyk never lost, Klitschko had some bad losses to not-so-great opponents 2) Usyk became undisputed, which Klitschko never achieved 3) Usyk was the undisputed and linear champion in TWO divisions 4) Usyk has been at a size disadvantage at HW, Klitschko was bigger than most of his opponents I'm not trying to disparage Wladimir Klitschko, I agree he IS under-appreciated by many and he had a GREAT run at heavyweight, but I rate Usyk above him. However, I rate Klitschko higher than all the other current and recent heavyweight titleholders such as Fury, Dubois, Wilder, and Joshua.
100% Usyk p4p is higher, but Wlad has great longevity Joe Louis never fought a pile of Fraziers or Foreman types, yet he is rated very high Wlad imo should be more appreciated. 20 plus title defences for a decade takes some going, especially from someone who had previously been painted all over the canvas on a few occasions and was disregarded at a time People are saying Dubois has had a great turnaround and I agree, but Wlad took it to another level
41 year old Wlad would’ve absolutely destroyed this version of Joshua. All those left hooks that Joshua was slipping back then would be landing flush.
Wlad is an ATG, perhaps doesn't match up as well head to head but he was a the clear dominant heavyweight for years and that counts for a lot. I have him 9th or 10th on my ATG list and this is coming from a person who was a big critic of his during his reign. But over time my appreciation of him has grown and he went from 12th on my list to now at worst 10th.
He's hugely appreciated and is one of the longest reigning world champions of all time. Vitali was better though and is a top 5 heavyweight for me.
Usyk is an all time great but at Heavyweight, Wlad beats him in my opinion. With Usyk not offering much threat of a KO and being much smaller, Wlad would dominate from the outside. Look at how he dominated other world class cruiserweights like Haye and Povetkin. Yes, Usyk is better than both but Wlad beat them much easier than I think Usyk would've.
With 0 signature victories, as a disputed champ dividing an era with his brother. Top 15. We have been fighting under Queensbury rules for a long time, and there are lots of guys to consider.
Povetkin and Haye were "signature victories," a meaningless phrase used to denigrate a guy who cleaned up and elevate others who didn't.
Povetkin was not even a champ. Haye is a guy who lost to a LHW. These were good fighters, but not great ones. Not Foreman, Frazier, and Liston. Not Baer, Walcott and Schmeling. Not Holmes and Spinks. And on and on.
He's somewhere between 6 and 10. He beat a lot of good fighters, some of them underrated: Ibragimov, Chagaev, Byrd, prime McCline, Barrett, Pulev, Thompson, Jefferson, Haye, Jennings, Povetkin, prime Peter, Rahman, Chambers, Brock, and Botha. And he beat nearly all of them impressively, by KO or TKO. Many were undefeated: Brock, Peter, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Jennngs, Pulev, Povetkin, Pianeta, prime Wach, Castillo, Shaheed, and Vujicic. Others had only one loss, and he stopped quite a few who had never been stopped before.
He's certainly not in the top 10 heavys of all time and for good reason. There's a long list of fighters who could have ruled the division for 10 years facing the competition he did, that's not his fault but it is what it is.