Can you think of a worse world heavyweight champion......

[Mimmy]

other than Tyson Fury?

Most likely gonna get some stick for saying this but imo I cant think of a champion of the world that is worse than Fury for winning the most prestigious title in the world. I think its being on par as Doncaster Rovers winning the FA Cup.

I was thinking maybe Herbie Hide but Im not too sure he is as bad as other possibilities.

So open to debate, who was proberly the worse of heavyweight champions?

[grub]

Primo Carnera or Fransisco Damiani

[Mimmy]

Primo Carnera or Fransisco Damiani

i was thinking of the German Damiani too! (was he German?)

[Boxerbeetle]

Bruce Seldon was pretty bad.

[TheGman]

Henry akinwande leon spinks bruce seldon oliver mcCall

[Stuarty]

Fury has just won the title from a long time dominant champion who nobody could get near over the last ten plus years so you're being a little unfair here IMO. Especially since he hasn't made a defence yet. I would personally need to see how he does over his next couple of fights before I could judge him as a champion. We've had guys like Rahman who won the title then lost it straight away, that could end up happening to Fury as Wlad is still dangerous. Nikolai Valuev was nothing more than a circus act as a heavyweight champ. Because we have so many belts there are probably going to be a lot of similar examples. Are we talking generic belt holders or actual lineal champions?

[dr_devious]

Deontay Wilder

[grub]

Bonecrusher Smith...he fought a who's who, but generally lost to them (a disinterested Witherspoon aside).

Frank Bruno...popular without a doubt, but who did he actually beat? Fury's beating of Wlad tops anything Bruno did.

[Mimmy]

Fury has just won the title from a long time dominant champion who nobody could get near over the last ten plus years so you're being a little unfair here IMO. Especially since he hasn't made a defence yet. I would personally need to see how he does over his next couple of fights before I could judge him as a champion. We've had guys like Rahman who won the title then lost it straight away, that could end up happening to Fury as Wlad is still dangerous. Nikolai Valuev was nothing more than a circus act as a heavyweight champ. Because we have so many belts there are probably going to be a lot of similar examples. Are we talking generic belt holders or actual lineal champions?

I accept you point but Steve Davis dominated snooker many years ago but age caught up with him. I get the fact Fury won a world title fair do's but the champion didnt throw any punches. That nigh tit could have been anyone in that ring it was just lucky for 'us' it was Fury. Im not slagging him off for his win. A win is a win but it does not mean a great deal unless he defends it for 10 years which is very very doubtful.

[Mimmy]

Bonecrusher Smith...he fought a who's who, but generally lost to them (a disinterested Witherspoon aside).

Frank Bruno...popular without a doubt, but who did he actually beat? Fury's beating of Wlad tops anything Bruno did.

I wouldnt say Bruno was the worse, indeed he didnt give much effort in the return to Tyson. Thats was a poor show I agree on that. Bruno deserved better imo just a shame there was a clause to fight Tyson after McCall. im sure Bruno would have defended at least once.

[mickey1975]

Are you for real? That one win puts him way above most who've held the crown in recent history, Haye, Bruno etc. I'm taking a break from Fury topics now, the guy can't win. Beat Wlad in Germany and he is still useless! Mental, thick twats!

[grub]

Fury has just won the title from a long time dominant champion who nobody could get near over the last ten plus years so you're being a little unfair here IMO. Especially since he hasn't made a defence yet. I would personally need to see how he does over his next couple of fights before I could judge him as a champion. We've had guys like Rahman who won the title then lost it straight away, that could end up happening to Fury as Wlad is still dangerous. Nikolai Valuev was nothing more than a circus act as a heavyweight champ. Because we have so many belts there are probably going to be a lot of similar examples. Are we talking generic belt holders or actual lineal champions?

I accept you point but Steve Davis dominated snooker many years ago but age caught up with him. I get the fact Fury won a world title fair do's but the champion didnt throw any punches. That nigh tit could have been anyone in that ring it was just lucky for 'us' it was Fury. Im not slagging him off for his win. A win is a win but it does not mean a great deal unless he defends it for 10 years which is very very doubtful.

You've got to look at why Wlad didn't throw any punches; and that has much to do with the performance of Fury as an opponent. Arguably, to make your opponent perform in such a way is what you're looking to do.

[TheGman]

And michael bentt

[moogie101]

You've got to look at why Wlad didn't throw any punches; and that has much to do with the performance of Fury as an opponent. Arguably, to make your opponent perform in such a way is what you're looking to do.

Personally I think you're giving Tyson far too much credit here.

I'm not a Fury fan BUT there have certainly been far worse fighters to hold a version of the Heavyweight title.

[bruthead]

If you mean undisputed heavyweight champion then maybe there's an argument. Loads of much worse guys have held belts in the modern era.

Time will tell if Fury was just a bad style match-up for Wlad or if he is truly the goods. But I think Fury would have beaten most of Wlad's opponents in the last few years, a prime David Haye being perhaps the only one I'm not sure about.

[Stuarty]

Fury has just won the title from a long time dominant champion who nobody could get near over the last ten plus years so you're being a little unfair here IMO. Especially since he hasn't made a defence yet. I would personally need to see how he does over his next couple of fights before I could judge him as a champion. We've had guys like Rahman who won the title then lost it straight away, that could end up happening to Fury as Wlad is still dangerous. Nikolai Valuev was nothing more than a circus act as a heavyweight champ. Because we have so many belts there are probably going to be a lot of similar examples. Are we talking generic belt holders or actual lineal champions?

I accept you point but Steve Davis dominated snooker many years ago but age caught up with him. I get the fact Fury won a world title fair do's but the champion didnt throw any punches. That nigh tit could have been anyone in that ring it was just lucky for 'us' it was Fury. Im not slagging him off for his win. A win is a win but it does not mean a great deal unless he defends it for 10 years which is very very doubtful.

I get what you're saying I just think he has to be given the chance to defend his title before we can start criticising him as 'one of the worst champions'. Age does look to have caught up with Wlad. Against Jennings before Fury he was well below par but before that I thought he looked excellent against a dangerous Pulev so it's hard to tell. I don't think as you say 'it could've been anyone in the ring' that night, that's a disservice to Fury. He bamboozled Wlad with his tactics and his size and speed obviously played a big part. Could be a different story in the rematch then this type of thread would be more justifiable but until then it's unfair to categorise Fury as one of the worst. You're entitled to your opinion though and there has been god awful champions over the years! Maskeav, Liakhovic, Brewster and the plodding Samuel Peter to name a few fairly recent belt holders.

[Rexob]

David haye

[Horse]

Troll thread.

[jamesmcdonnell]

other than Tyson Fury?

Most likely gonna get some stick for saying this but imo I cant think of a champion of the world that is worse than Fury for winning the most prestigious title in the world. I think its being on par as Doncaster Rovers winning the FA Cup.

I was thinking maybe Herbie Hide but Im not too sure he is as bad as other possibilities.

So open to debate, who was proberly the worse of heavyweight champions?

John Ruiz
Leon Spinks


to name but two.

[reggaereggae]

other than Tyson Fury?

Most likely gonna get some stick for saying this but imo I cant think of a champion of the world that is worse than Fury for winning the most prestigious title in the world. I think its being on par as Doncaster Rovers winning the FA Cup.

I was thinking maybe Herbie Hide but Im not too sure he is as bad as other possibilities.

So open to debate, who was proberly the worse of heavyweight champions?

John Ruiz
Leon Spinks


to name but two.

Honestly? What a BS thread. Fury is very underrated. He beat a world heavy champ who'd barely lost a round in 10 years, let alone a fight.

He might be a bit awkward. But he's 6ft9 and effective. He may not look pretty, but he took more rounds off Wlad in one fight than any previous opponents .... Eff the haters

[Tuan_Jim]

Good thread, and a much needed counter balance to the disturbing 'duh, Tyson Fury big, he beat everyone in history, all on duh same night' school of thought.

In terms of pure talent he is pretty poor, but he has size and a fearless winner's mentality on his side.

Some of the men named in this thread, such as Bruce Seldon, had fine boxing skills, but were hindered by psychological problems.

On the other hand John Ruiz, Nikolay Valuev, Chagaev, Briggs, Lyakovic, Peter, Wilder, Stiverne, Maskaev, Rahman form a pantheon of incompetence. Fury is for the most part better than them.

[Dixonian]

Bonecrusher Smith...he fought a who's who, but generally lost to them (a disinterested Witherspoon aside).

Frank Bruno...popular without a doubt, but who did he actually beat? Fury's beating of Wlad tops anything Bruno did.

I wouldnt say Bruno was the worse, indeed he didnt give much effort in the return to Tyson. Thats was a poor show I agree on that. Bruno deserved better imo just a shame there was a clause to fight Tyson after McCall. im sure Bruno would have defended at least once.

I actually watched Bruno-Tyson II recently and thought it wasn't actually as bad an effort as is commonly believed. Perhaps that's just because of the gun shy title challengers we've had in recent years making it look good.

[simonwalsh]

True.

The likes of Doncaster shouldn't be allowed to win the FA Cup, or even bother trying to when everyone I'm sure gets much more joy in it being in a rotation between Arsenal, Chelsea and the Manchester teams I'm sure.

[Mimmy]

other than Tyson Fury?

Most likely gonna get some stick for saying this but imo I cant think of a champion of the world that is worse than Fury for winning the most prestigious title in the world. I think its being on par as Doncaster Rovers winning the FA Cup.

I was thinking maybe Herbie Hide but Im not too sure he is as bad as other possibilities.

So open to debate, who was proberly the worse of heavyweight champions?

John Ruiz
Leon Spinks


to name but two.

Honestly? What a BS thread. Fury is very underrated. He beat a world heavy champ who'd barely lost a round in 10 years, let alone a fight.

He might be a bit awkward. But he's 6ft9 and effective. He may not look pretty, but he took more rounds off Wlad in one fight than any previous opponents .... Eff the haters

not seen any post that people hate Tyson Fury. also why shouldnt there be a boxer worse than Fury?

[Dixonian]

Can I think of a worse world heavyweight champion? Yes, there's been so many over the years. Can I think of a worse linear champion? Now, that takes a bit of thinking.

However, as Stuarty said, in fairness we've got to give Fury a chance to prove himself. Time will tell. History will be the judge.