gilgamesh wrote:He's not wrong Horse. There's at least 5 dudes at Heavyweight that could kick his ass.
I might have to quit this forum.
What a rotten post.
If Fury winds up beating a few of the top guys even if they're boring non-fights like the Wlad fight I'll give him some credit. Until he beats a top opponent that actually fights him I'm not that impressed by what he's done.
If Klitschko actually fights in the rematch, and Fury beats him again I'll give him credit. If it's a replay of the 1st fight, then Wlad is just shot or has completely lost his balls or something.
I think Joshua, Wilder, Luis Ortiz and possibly a few others could beat Fury, but that's the fun of Boxing. I could be wrong. Time will tell.
I think only Fury is definately #1. There is a few in which there can be a case for.... DeGale and McDonnell - but personally... I have the guy who outclassed Abraham as the #1 Super Middle and Yamanaka at Bantam - McDonnell is very close though.
Name them and tell us what they've done to prove it.
They have to prove it in the ring. They don't have to prove it for you to have the opinion that they could beat him.
But the people I think could beat him are
Luis Ortiz
Anthony Joshua
Deontay Wilder (I'm 50/50 on who could win between him and Fury, but I can see Wilder knocking him out and vice versa)
Wladimir Klitschko (I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he won the rematch. I'm picking him to win again)
There's a few other that would be longshots, but it wouldn't be the biggest shocker in the world to me if they beat Fury like Bryant Jennings. Not sure how Pulev would fare against Fury though I figure Fury would win that one.
Name them and tell us what they've done to prove it.
They have to prove it in the ring. They don't have to prove it for you to have the opinion that they could beat him.
But the people I think could beat him are
Luis Ortiz
Anthony Joshua
Deontay Wilder (I'm 50/50 on who could win between him and Fury, but I can see Wilder knocking him out and vice versa)
Wladimir Klitschko (I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he won the rematch. I'm picking him to win again)
There's a few other that would be longshots, but it wouldn't be the biggest shocker in the world to me if they beat Fury like Bryant Jennings. Not sure how Pulev would fare against Fury though I figure Fury would win that one.
Prove was the wrong phrase, but what have they done to make you think that is what I meant.
SamWise72 wrote:I think the point with Fury is that he's undoubtedly number 1, but almost certainly not the best. Maybe not even in the top 5. Sooner or later, if he doesn't retire, he'll have to fight Ortiz, or AJ, or Wilder or even Pulev, and at that point, a lot of people think he'll be exposed. None of this stops him being the number 1.
Every name you mention would've lost (or already have lost) to Klitschko. Fury didn't break sweat.
This constant talking down of Fury because he isn't a massive one punch banger & his torso isn't aesthetically pleasing is ridiculous. He's very unorthodox but also very skilled & does things other heavyweights wouldn't have even thought about, let alone dream about. He's also pretty much the only heavyweight out there with a Plan A, a Plan B & a Plan C. This is his time.
Wales wrote:
Also using the "to be the man beat the man" theory, what happens if Fury beats Wlad then 3 low level guys for argument sake Chisora Whyte and Adamek but Joshua goes on a 5 fight KO winning streak beating Brazeale Parker Wilder Povetkin Ortiz ? Is fury still #1?
Maybe not, but we can only judge the hear and now. As of today Fury has to be #1.
DeGale is joint with Jack IMO, if they fight soon the winner will clearly claim the #1 spot.
BitPlayer wrote:
Name them and tell us what they've done to prove it.
They have to prove it in the ring. They don't have to prove it for you to have the opinion that they could beat him.
But the people I think could beat him are
Luis Ortiz
Anthony Joshua
Deontay Wilder (I'm 50/50 on who could win between him and Fury, but I can see Wilder knocking him out and vice versa)
Wladimir Klitschko (I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he won the rematch. I'm picking him to win again)
There's a few other that would be longshots, but it wouldn't be the biggest shocker in the world to me if they beat Fury like Bryant Jennings. Not sure how Pulev would fare against Fury though I figure Fury would win that one.
Prove was the wrong phrase, but what have they done to make you think that is what I meant.
Ortiz and Joshua just seem all around more skilled than Fury to me, and look more impressive in their fights. Wilder has explosive power, he's a wild and not the most technically sound fighter, but Wilder has a strong chance of KO'ing any of his opponents. Wladimir Klitschko is better than Fury, he just needs to fight.
Jennings I just think is a solid contender with a good array of skills, and I think it's within the realm of possibility that he could outwork and outfight Fury for a close decision or possibly a surprise KO. Pulev I figure is probably too rigid to be able to beat Fury, but he'd make for an interesting opponent anyhow.
I love the fact we have 13 world champions but let be honest here. 1/ How many apart from Fury have won titles in the ring or vacant titles? 2/ with all due respect to some of them they are not genuine world champions. If we are honest the standard is not what it was 15 years ago
Muttley wrote:I love the fact we have 13 world champions but let be honest here. 1/ How many apart from Fury have won titles in the ring or vacant titles? 2/ with all due respect to some of them they are not genuine world champions. If we are honest the standard is not what it was 15 years ago
The standard of what is not the same as 15 years ago?
Muttley wrote:I love the fact we have 13 world champions but let be honest here. 1/ How many apart from Fury have won titles in the ring or vacant titles? 2/ with all due respect to some of them they are not genuine world champions. If we are honest the standard is not what it was 15 years ago
The standard of what is not the same as 15 years ago?
Name them and tell us what they've done to prove it.
They have to prove it in the ring. They don't have to prove it for you to have the opinion that they could beat him.
But the people I think could beat him are
Luis Ortiz
Anthony Joshua
Deontay Wilder (I'm 50/50 on who could win between him and Fury, but I can see Wilder knocking him out and vice versa)
Wladimir Klitschko (I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he won the rematch. I'm picking him to win again)
There's a few other that would be longshots, but it wouldn't be the biggest shocker in the world to me if they beat Fury like Bryant Jennings. Not sure how Pulev would fare against Fury though I figure Fury would win that one.
I would add Parker and Haye. I think Takam, on his performance vs Parker, would have a good shot with his marauding style and toughness. He would land plenty on Fury and could hurt him too.
Muttley wrote:I love the fact we have 13 world champions but let be honest here. 1/ How many apart from Fury have won titles in the ring or vacant titles? 2/ with all due respect to some of them they are not genuine world champions. If we are honest the standard is not what it was 15 years ago
The standard of what is not the same as 15 years ago?
The standard of boxing is not as good as it was 15 or 20 years ago. The fighters are better conditioned now and have a greater understanding of nutrition but in terms of ring craft and boxing skills its not the same
I like Fury and think he deserves his number 1 title for the Wlad win.
I do often follow that with the caveat that he has flaws and does look beatable, there is a good chance one or two in the division could shock him.
But some of the people being listed....... come on now
I've read 9 names in the last 5 posts. If this is to be believed Tyson is barely top 10.
Takam, Pulev, Jenning, Parker.....
Deary me, might as well just throw Povetkin, Stiverne and Ustinov in there for good measure
There's critical analysis then there's just fantasy based purely on your hatred of the big man. ffs
davie wrote:I like Fury and think he deserves his number 1 title for the Wlad win.
I do often follow that with the caveat that he has flaws and does look beatable, there is a good chance one or two in the division could shock him.
But some of the people being listed....... come on now
I've read 9 names in the last 5 posts. If this is to be believed Tyson is barely top 10.
Takam, Pulev, Jenning, Parker.....
Deary me, might as well just throw Povetkin, Stiverne and Ustinov in there for good measure
There's critical analysis then there's just fantasy based purely on your hatred of the big man. ffs
Just because he is the Champ, doesn't mean there aren't bad matchups for him in the division. Remember what Fury did in his career before beating the Covent Garden Street Mime. He hadn't done much impressive, which was why he was such an underdog to Wlad. All someone like Joshua would have to do to eclipse the pre-Wlad career of Fury would be to beat someone like Pulev.
And I forgot Povetkin. Add him to the list. Stiverne and Ustinov are names that don't belong in the discussion.
davie wrote:I like Fury and think he deserves his number 1 title for the Wlad win.
I do often follow that with the caveat that he has flaws and does look beatable, there is a good chance one or two in the division could shock him.
But some of the people being listed....... come on now
I've read 9 names in the last 5 posts. If this is to be believed Tyson is barely top 10.
Takam, Pulev, Jenning, Parker.....
Deary me, might as well just throw Povetkin, Stiverne and Ustinov in there for good measure
There's critical analysis then there's just fantasy based purely on your hatred of the big man. ffs
Everyone I said I think could beat him I mean it sincerely. I don't ever call my fights based on how I feel about a guy. I'm analyzing the matchup, the strengths and flaws of both fighters.
davie wrote:I like Fury and think he deserves his number 1 title for the Wlad win.
I do often follow that with the caveat that he has flaws and does look beatable, there is a good chance one or two in the division could shock him.
But some of the people being listed....... come on now
I've read 9 names in the last 5 posts. If this is to be believed Tyson is barely top 10.
Takam, Pulev, Jenning, Parker.....
Deary me, might as well just throw Povetkin, Stiverne and Ustinov in there for good measure
There's critical analysis then there's just fantasy based purely on your hatred of the big man. ffs
Just because he is the Champ, doesn't mean there aren't bad matchups for him in the division. Remember what Fury did in his career before beating the Covent Garden Street Mime. He hadn't done much impressive, which was why he was such an underdog to Wlad. All someone like Joshua would have to do to eclipse the pre-Wlad career of Fury would be to beat someone like Pulev.
And I forgot Povetkin. Add him to the list. Stiverne and Ustinov are names that don't belong in the discussion.
A bad resume that was considered the 3rd best in the division. He may not have done a ton pre wlad, but much more than many of the people people say would beat have done.
Muttley wrote:I love the fact we have 13 world champions but let be honest here. 1/ How many apart from Fury have won titles in the ring or vacant titles? 2/ with all due respect to some of them they are not genuine world champions. If we are honest the standard is not what it was 15 years ago
The standard of what is not the same as 15 years ago?
The standard of boxing is not as good as it was 15 or 20 years ago. The fighters are better conditioned now and have a greater understanding of nutrition but in terms of ring craft and boxing skills its not the same
Do you think fighters are better conditioned? Probably have a larger percentage that cut weight and add lbs post weigh in. But fitness wise have things improved since days of 15 rounders.
BitPlayer wrote:
A bad resume that was considered the 3rd best in the division.
In a terrible division. Do we really have to go through all this again?
And still much better than most he's getting compared to, and generally considered a bit better than all but Wlad and Povetkin. His resume wasn't that strong, but compared to Joshua. or Parker, or Ortiz, he's done way more to prove himself.
BitPlayer wrote:
A bad resume that was considered the 3rd best in the division.
In a terrible division. Do we really have to go through all this again?
And still much better than most he's getting compared to, and generally considered a bit better than all but Wlad and Povetkin. His resume wasn't that strong, but compared to Joshua. or Parker, or Ortiz, he's done way more to prove himself.
Much better on the strength of a win over cruiserweight Cunningham (who had done NOTHING at heavyweight and decked Fury) then..who? Chisora I was a solid win, the best he has outside of Wlad. But then...Pajkic??? Kevin Johnson???
'Way more to prove himself' is laughable. Joshua has Whyte, arguably as good a win as Chisora I. Martin vs Cunningham would have been competitive. Joshua destroyed Kevin Johnson. None of the other clowns on Fury's ledger are relevant unless you want to make the point that he beat a ton of them in a row. And that's not even counting Fury's loss to John McDonut, no excuse for that at all. People say Fury was green, but we're talking John friggen McDermott here. Joshua would have crushed Big John at that stage of his career.
Riddick Blowe wrote:
In a terrible division. Do we really have to go through all this again?
And still much better than most he's getting compared to, and generally considered a bit better than all but Wlad and Povetkin. His resume wasn't that strong, but compared to Joshua. or Parker, or Ortiz, he's done way more to prove himself.
Much better on the strength of a win over cruiserweight Cunningham (who had done NOTHING at heavyweight and decked Fury) then..who? Chisora I was a solid win, the best he has outside of Wlad. But then...Pajkic??? Kevin Johnson???
'Way more to prove himself' is laughable. Joshua has Whyte, arguably as good a win as Chisora I. Martin vs Cunningham would have been competitive. Joshua destroyed Kevin Johnson. None of the other clowns on Fury's ledger are relevant unless you want to make the point that he beat a ton of them in a row. And that's not even counting Fury's loss to John McDonut, no excuse for that at all. People say Fury was green, but we're talking John friggen McDermott here. Joshua would have crushed Big John at that stage of his career.
Christian Hammer is Fury's third best win probably. I'm not looking to add anything else to the discussion, and I'm far from saying its a terrific win, but I thought I'd throw that out there.
BitPlayer wrote:
And still much better than most he's getting compared to, and generally considered a bit better than all but Wlad and Povetkin. His resume wasn't that strong, but compared to Joshua. or Parker, or Ortiz, he's done way more to prove himself.
Much better on the strength of a win over cruiserweight Cunningham (who had done NOTHING at heavyweight and decked Fury) then..who? Chisora I was a solid win, the best he has outside of Wlad. But then...Pajkic??? Kevin Johnson???
'Way more to prove himself' is laughable. Joshua has Whyte, arguably as good a win as Chisora I. Martin vs Cunningham would have been competitive. Joshua destroyed Kevin Johnson. None of the other clowns on Fury's ledger are relevant unless you want to make the point that he beat a ton of them in a row. And that's not even counting Fury's loss to John McDonut, no excuse for that at all. People say Fury was green, but we're talking John friggen McDermott here. Joshua would have crushed Big John at that stage of his career.
Christian Hammer is Fury's third best win probably. I'm not looking to add anything else to the discussion, and I'm far from saying its a terrific win, but I thought I'd throw that out there.
Riddick Blowe wrote:
In a terrible division. Do we really have to go through all this again?
And still much better than most he's getting compared to, and generally considered a bit better than all but Wlad and Povetkin. His resume wasn't that strong, but compared to Joshua. or Parker, or Ortiz, he's done way more to prove himself.
Much better on the strength of a win over cruiserweight Cunningham (who had done NOTHING at heavyweight and decked Fury) then..who? Chisora I was a solid win, the best he has outside of Wlad. But then...Pajkic??? Kevin Johnson???
'Way more to prove himself' is laughable. Joshua has Whyte, arguably as good a win as Chisora I. Martin vs Cunningham would have been competitive. Joshua destroyed Kevin Johnson. None of the other clowns on Fury's ledger are relevant unless you want to make the point that he beat a ton of them in a row. And that's not even counting Fury's loss to John McDonut, no excuse for that at all. People say Fury was green, but we're talking John friggen McDermott here. Joshua would have crushed Big John at that stage of his career.
Whyte's best win is a 40 year old cruiserweight journeyman, CHisora has had some actual wins. Cunningham had done more at heavy than Whyte. Johnson was so much more shot when he fought Joshua it's not even comparable, before Fury he had some recent wins, befre Joshua he was on a big losing streak and hadn't fought in ages.
