Because size is important there's a reason weight classes exist and overcoming size as a smaller man is impressive especially when you beat a skilled big man. And its not like Ali beat great heavyweights during 64-67 his best wins were Patterson who is a small heavyweight and was probably injured and Liston who while a great heavyweight at his best, was past his best by the time of the fight and was also injured. All of Ali's best wins came after his exile. And Fury fights to the occasion but its clear the Fury that fought Usyk was one of the best versions of Fury its why Usyk's victory was so impressive if he fought the same Fury that fought Ngannou then yes it wouldn't be an impressive victory its clear he didn't if you watched the fight. When evaluating a victory you have to ask yourself how good was the fighter when he beat him and you can only do that by watching the fight not going by records or narratives or how he looked previously
Fury was/is on the slide and has been since Wilder II, in my opinion. A good win for Usyk, but he didn't fight the best version of Fury. Ali would have made relatively light work of Fury that night. If the rematch goes ahead and Fury somehow reverses the result, it will be one heck of a turnaround.
I agree that beating Patterson is not one of Ali's marquee wins but a "minor" victory, because Patterson after Liston was alredy damaged goods and because regardless how good Patterson was, Ali was simply head and shoulders the superior fighter. Thus let's say it was an 'easy' win for Ali. But that doesn't make Usyk win over Joshua a fight for the ages. Regardless all the hype going on Joshua is just a glorified SHW who has size and some skills, but that's it. Thus, Usyk beating Joshua is no doubt a good addition to his resume, but it is not the overglorified feat the media is trying to sell us.
It was a great win in what universe is beating a skilled superheavyweight as a small heavyweight not impressive? People really don't understand how much of a factor size is in a fight there's a reason weight classes exist or do you think a great middleweight could beat a decent superheavyweight?
Most people on this forum were calling Fury a bum after the Ngannou fight and thought he was finished as a top level boxer. I just looked at a poll a day after the fight and it was 150-70 in favour of Ngannou in regards to who people thought won the fight on this forum. Now people are classing Usyk's win over Fury as one of the greatest wins of all time fans are fickle they change their mind all the time. If Usyk loses his next fight I guarantee you'll see this forum flooded with threads "Usyk was always overrated"
Well when we see HW's fight like this again, maybe we will consider it... let Usyk get through a few of these battles first. This content is protected
People always go OTT as you know after a big fight. I think Usyk is an ATG and I've said many times I do rate him as such for his overall achievements, but I think people are getting a bit too carried away I've seen Usyk classed as the "GOAT" and a top 10 Heavyweight of all time which I think is overrating him. I think Usyk would have a troubling style for most and is one of the most skilled big men I've seen, but people need to realize hes only had 22 fights and whilst he does have a good resume hes not beat a single great fighter yet. People want to bring that Usyk has beaten bigger fights and I'm not denying that isn't a good achievement, but we also have to take into account that neither Joshua or Fury are great.
There is a bare minimum level to the quality of an opponent you need to beat to assess how good you are H2H. Longevity is irrelevant and most of all, PADDING is irrelevant. A post-prime Usyk beating a (physically) prime AJ x2 and motivated post-prime Fury means that he IS an ATG heavyweight from a H2H perspective. To include people like Floyd Patterson or Vitali Klitschko in these discussions but say Usyk is unworthy is imo ridiculous. I think someone actually said that in this thread, that Vitali has proved himself at Heavyweight but Usyk hasn't. Which means that one values beating a bunch of fodder ahead of beating the two best heavyweights of the era and combined 3x, which I find absurd. If Usyk beat Chaz Weatherspoom and Chisora 10 more times he'd be an ATG H2H opponent at Heavyweight but he's not right now, what? That's also ignoring the fact that modern day cruiserweights are just as heavy as pre 90's heavyweights and heavier than pre 50's heavyweights, so it's very intellectually dishonest to not take into account his Cruiserweight credentials when assessing his H2H ability. A lot of boxing fans are just pathologically incapable of appreciating new developments but know that they'll get street cred for sucking off fighters of older eras, and so will reflexively downplay the achievements of any new fighter because of it. See; Every single Marciano thread.
Size matters but it is not the end all of boxing. I am not dismissing Usyk's victory over Joshua, it was a very good victory but not the ultimate feat. Joshua is huge and has some skills and that's it. Ruiz stopped him cold, that tell us a lot about Joshua as a fighter. Beating Joshua doesn't mean instant HW ATG status. I like Usyk a lot and he has a solid resume as CW ATG but he still needs to nurture his resume at HW.
Great Post. Rose colored nostalgia reigns supreme in this forum by many fans. Anything occurring for the last 20 odd years now is laughably downplayed by many biased posters. Quite transparent lol.
On its own no but I think beating Joshua twice (and Joshua looked good in the second fight) and Fury plus his other solid wins over Chisora and Dubois is enough to be considered an ATG especially when you do so as the smaller man in each fight.
I think that the poll you referred to indicates a fairly high level of anti-Fury sentiment. Whereas Usyk can apparently facilitate photosynthesis from his backside.