WHO WINS? Tyson Fury vs. Anthony Joshua

[rd350lc]

Fury is infinitely wittier than AJ and he'd likely get right in his head with all the verbal wind ups at the presser.

That's the difference: Fury is better at talking, Joshua is better at fighting.

Disagree, Fury is the better boxer of the two

He didn't say that , he said fighter .

[Syntax Error]

That's the difference: Fury is better at talking, Joshua is better at fighting.

Disagree, Fury is the better boxer of the two

He didn't say that , he said fighter .

Spot on.

I wasn't talking about straight up boxing ability.

I'm talking about fighting period.

Whilst Fury was busy getting high & fat, along with jibber jabbering on social media, Anthony Joshua was busy becoming the unified HW champion of the world.

Even more ironically, in Tyson's latest social media outburst, he is advising Joshua to stay busy!

You couldn't make it up.

[Boxerbeetle]

I always used to think Joshua would beat Fury fairly comfortably, but the Parker fight definitely made me a lot more unsure of that. I’d say it’s a 55-45 fight in favour of Joshua, assuming both were at their best.

[rd350lc]

I always used to think Joshua would beat Fury fairly comfortably, but the Parker fight definitely made me a lot more unsure of that. I’d say it’s a 55-45 fight in favour of Joshua, assuming both were at their best.

Did he really look that bad against Parker ?

I thought he won comfortably , showed he could go the distance and didn't look in any trouble at any stage in the fight .

Granted , not the usual destruction job , but an ok win nonetheless .

[mickey1975]

I always used to think Joshua would beat Fury fairly comfortably, but the Parker fight definitely made me a lot more unsure of that. I’d say it’s a 55-45 fight in favour of Joshua, assuming both were at their best.

Did he really look that bad against Parker ?

I thought he won comfortably , showed he could go the distance and didn't look in any trouble at any stage in the fight .

Granted , not the usual destruction job , but an ok win nonetheless .

He couldn’t get his right hand going because of “movement”.

[Boxerbeetle]

I always used to think Joshua would beat Fury fairly comfortably, but the Parker fight definitely made me a lot more unsure of that. I’d say it’s a 55-45 fight in favour of Joshua, assuming both were at their best.

Did he really look that bad against Parker ?

I thought he won comfortably , showed he could go the distance and didn't look in any trouble at any stage in the fight .

Granted , not the usual destruction job , but an ok win nonetheless .

It wasn’t that Joshua looked terrible or anything. But I certainly thought the fight showed that he can struggle against a mover, and that his power can be somewhat neutralised.

[rd350lc]

I always used to think Joshua would beat Fury fairly comfortably, but the Parker fight definitely made me a lot more unsure of that. I’d say it’s a 55-45 fight in favour of Joshua, assuming both were at their best.

Did he really look that bad against Parker ?

I thought he won comfortably , showed he could go the distance and didn't look in any trouble at any stage in the fight .

Granted , not the usual destruction job , but an ok win nonetheless .

He couldn’t get his right hand going because of “movement”.

And still won comfortably

[mickey1975]

Did he really look that bad against Parker ?

I thought he won comfortably , showed he could go the distance and didn't look in any trouble at any stage in the fight .

Granted , not the usual destruction job , but an ok win nonetheless .

He couldn’t get his right hand going because of “movement”.

And still won comfortably

Yes. Even the rounds he didn’t win! Parker wasn’t allowed to hit him, either.

[Grilling Machine]

Parker's 6'3" on a good morning, and what's Takam — about 6'1"? Fury's not the billed 6'9", but he is 6'7" all day. Big difference IMO when it comes to branding movers with universal efficacy.

Psychology, also, because Joshua's not Wlad. I actually thought that Wlad had just nicked his fight against Fury, and I'm sure that he did. People seem to forget Vitali raging at ringside, and that Wlad was perhaps a touch complacent after so many years as champ. Moreover, his mindset had been highly conservative for an age, where even in the knowledge of his likely ability to KO someone, he'd opt instead to carry them for a safe points win.

He was clearly in a different mood for the rematch, ditto against Joshua when he knew that fighting fire with fire was probably his best bet.

Fury can make Joshua look clumsy for a while, absolutely he can, but Joshua's gonna be sparked out before he ever endures a prolonged humiliation, because that's who he is. And given that he won't have to be wary of a smaller man getting up in his grill and firing shots that he doesn't see, Fury — for all his movement — is right there in front of him. I see it as Fury winning at a canter until he's caught, and then it's all over. Same as I foresaw the Wlad rematch going, had it happened.

I'd back Fury against pretty much everyone if he had an amazing chin or more power, but he doesn't. If he's to prove me wrong he needs more than one big name on his record. For all his shortcomings, Joshua's the main man right now.

[Oiky]

Tyson UD

[nitro5912]

Tyson points or AJ by KO.

I think AJ has a switch that he flicks in fights where he just goes screw this and goes balls out. Like wlad round 5 & 11.

He didn't need to flick that v parker or Takam because he was winning in 2nd gear in both fights. He is learning that he doesn't need to press on when he is comfortable.

Against fury it won't be a comfortable night so he will flick that switch and just say feck it. If he can land a clean powerful combination against fury then I think it is probably night night. I just am not certain that if fury is like he v wlad that he will land it.

I also think his trainer(not uncle Peter) may be his undoing tactically in the top fights.

[dr_devious]

Disagree, Fury is the better boxer of the two

He didn't say that , he said fighter .

Spot on.

I wasn't talking about straight up boxing ability.

I'm talking about fighting period.

Whilst Fury was busy getting high & fat, along with jibber jabbering on social media, Anthony Joshua was busy becoming the unified HW champion of the world.

Even more ironically, in Tyson's latest social media outburst, he is advising Joshua to stay busy!

You couldn't make it up.

Fury's superior boxing ability make him a very live candidate to beat Joshua if he can get back to his best, so it remains to be seen who is the better fighter at this stage

[jamamb]

news to me that 'fighter' doesnt work as a general term for a boxer

[ILikeBeer]

I favour Joshua, though Fury is obviously better than I thought he was due to the Klitschko win.

He's been out for too long now. If they fought now, without Fury having any kind of a warm up, I'd pick Joshua.

[Rob3_142]

Parker's 6'3" on a good morning, and what's Takam — about 6'1"? Fury's not the billed 6'9", but he is 6'7" all day. Big difference IMO when it comes to branding movers with universal efficacy.

Psychology, also, because Joshua's not Wlad. I actually thought that Wlad had just nicked his fight against Fury, and I'm sure that he did. People seem to forget Vitali raging at ringside, and that Wlad was perhaps a touch complacent after so many years as champ. Moreover, his mindset had been highly conservative for an age, where even in the knowledge of his likely ability to KO someone, he'd opt instead to carry them for a safe points win.

He was clearly in a different mood for the rematch, ditto against Joshua when he knew that fighting fire with fire was probably his best bet.

Fury can make Joshua look clumsy for a while, absolutely he can, but Joshua's gonna be sparked out before he ever endures a prolonged humiliation, because that's who he is. And given that he won't have to be wary of a smaller man getting up in his grill and firing shots that he doesn't see, Fury — for all his movement — is right there in front of him. I see it as Fury winning at a canter until he's caught, and then it's all over. Same as I foresaw the Wlad rematch going, had it happened.

I'd back Fury against pretty much everyone if he had an amazing chin or more power, but he doesn't. If he's to prove me wrong he needs more than one big name on his record. For all his shortcomings, Joshua's the main man right now.

I think this is a good summary of how I expect things to unfold. One thing Joshua has never had to deal with is being behind on the cards (well against Klitschko he may have been, but that was such a messy fight). So if it goes into the latter rounds and he needs to find a KO, that would be very interesting to see.

[Twinkle Toes]

I'd lean towards Fury, but reckon it'd be a close decision. A lot depends on what Fury has in the tank.

Joshua can hit very hard, but if Parker can keep out of the way for 12 rounds then for sure Fury can. The big difference between Fury and Parker is that Fury has enough ability to win rounds while keeping himself out of trouble. Parker couldn't do that with enough consistently to take more than 3 rounds or so from Joshua.

I do wonder though if Fury has seen his best days, he's not looked after himself the last couple of years, and he looks many years beyond his actual age. Joshua is a well oiled machine, but at the same time appears to still be learning. He hasn't peaked in my opinion.

[lillywhite14]

Parker was extremely passive against Joshua, he definitely had his version of dancing shoes on that night.

Joshua coasted. The irony of Fury then slagging it off. He coasted for yonks under Peter. Never taking chances in either quality of opponent and then in the ring against said opponent.

It’s safe to say, neither has faced anyone like the other. That’s why it’s so intriguing. Fury has only ever faced one puncher in his career, and Wlad was pretty awful that night ( case to be made that Fury made him awful ) Tyson has never been in there with a beast like Joshua.

[samwbr]

Parker was extremely passive against Joshua, he definitely had his version of dancing shoes on that night.

Joshua coasted. The irony of Fury then slagging it off. He coasted for yonks under Peter. Never taking chances in either quality of opponent and then in the ring against said opponent.

It’s safe to say, neither has faced anyone like the other. That’s why it’s so intriguing. Fury has only ever faced one puncher in his career, and Wlad was pretty awful that night ( case to be made that Fury made him awful ) Tyson has never been in there with a beast like Joshua.

Parker knew after about 90 secs of the first round that Joshua was a lot stronger than they first thought.

[dirk2686]

I think the biggest question mark is over what actually is 'prime Fury' and can he get it back. Because it seems that the Klitschko fight has largely overshadowed what was a very good, if flawed, career. Whilst Fury may have looked the part against Hammer and Chisora in the fights before Klitschko, he was shocking shape for his fight before those, against an opponent as limited as Joey Abell, and before that was being sat on his backside and easily found by career cruiserweight Steve Cunningham.

This is why I don't really buy the mythology of Fury being some elite boxer. He's come out with the old bag of rice to hit me line this past week - but he's only had four fights since Cunningham decked him. And regardless of how you rate the Klitschko win for either, it seems pretty obvious that Whyte, Martin, Breazeale, Molina, Takam and Parker represent a sterner test than Hammer, Chisora, Cunningham, Abell and Johnson.

[Rob3_142]

This is it for me, I want people to be able to see beyond the Klitschko fight, and see there is a vulnerable boxer in there. I don't mean chin-wise, but from himself. His weight clearly fluctuates quite significantly, which could be an indicator of motivation and application in training. I think if he's got the bit between his teeth, we have a fit, sound minded Fury that we saw against Klitschko. We may well have that against Joshua because the rivalry has been rolling on for so long, and as far as personalities and fan bases go, they're polar opposites.

[mickey1975]

I think the biggest question mark is over what actually is 'prime Fury' and can he get it back. Because it seems that the Klitschko fight has largely overshadowed what was a very good, if flawed, career. Whilst Fury may have looked the part against Hammer and Chisora in the fights before Klitschko, he was shocking shape for his fight before those, against an opponent as limited as Joey Abell, and before that was being sat on his backside and easily found by career cruiserweight Steve Cunningham.

This is why I don't really buy the mythology of Fury being some elite boxer. He's come out with the old bag of rice to hit me line this past week - but he's only had four fights since Cunningham decked him. And regardless of how you rate the Klitschko win for either, it seems pretty obvious that Whyte, Martin, Breazeale, Molina, Takam and Parker represent a sterner test than Hammer, Chisora, Cunningham, Abell and Johnson.

So you’re basically saying it has all come together in his last three fights, but let’s look beyond them, back to his learning fights!

[wesshaw1985]

And regardless of how you rate the Klitschko win for either, it seems pretty obvious that Whyte, Martin, Breazeale, Molina, Takam and Parker represent a sterner test than Hammer, Chisora, Cunningham, Abell and Johnson.

So you are saying Fury wasn't as well tested or prepared as Joshua was for a younger Klitschko?

[mickey1975]

And regardless of how you rate the Klitschko win for either, it seems pretty obvious that Whyte, Martin, Breazeale, Molina, Takam and Parker represent a sterner test than Hammer, Chisora, Cunningham, Abell and Johnson.

So you are saying Fury wasn't as well tested or prepared as Joshua was for a younger Klitschko?

He constantly contradicts himself, mate.

[wesshaw1985]

And regardless of how you rate the Klitschko win for either, it seems pretty obvious that Whyte, Martin, Breazeale, Molina, Takam and Parker represent a sterner test than Hammer, Chisora, Cunningham, Abell and Johnson.

So you are saying Fury wasn't as well tested or prepared as Joshua was for a younger Klitschko?

He constantly contradicts himself, mate.

Yep.

The Fury that beat Klit unanimous decisions the Joshua that beat Klit, with ease...

[dirk2686]

I think the biggest question mark is over what actually is 'prime Fury' and can he get it back. Because it seems that the Klitschko fight has largely overshadowed what was a very good, if flawed, career. Whilst Fury may have looked the part against Hammer and Chisora in the fights before Klitschko, he was shocking shape for his fight before those, against an opponent as limited as Joey Abell, and before that was being sat on his backside and easily found by career cruiserweight Steve Cunningham.

This is why I don't really buy the mythology of Fury being some elite boxer. He's come out with the old bag of rice to hit me line this past week - but he's only had four fights since Cunningham decked him. And regardless of how you rate the Klitschko win for either, it seems pretty obvious that Whyte, Martin, Breazeale, Molina, Takam and Parker represent a sterner test than Hammer, Chisora, Cunningham, Abell and Johnson.

So you’re basically saying it has all come together in his last three fights, but let’s look beyond them, back to his learning fights!

No. I'm saying that rating Fury as some barely hittable heavyweight genius on the basis of one fight doesn't really add up. You have to be able to look at a fighter's career as a whole and recognise that there are fights when boxers can look great and others when the same fighter looks terrible. Take Mayweather himself; certainly didn't look an all time great first time against Maidana, but absolutely did against Canelo.

The trouble with Fury is that he's only fought one top drawer opponent in his career, and he won a close fight where two punches landed per minute beat one punch landed per minute. So if he maintains that standard forever then good for him, but history tells us this doesn't happen and performance can fluctuate. Also, it's not that much evidence.