Is Anthony Joshua among the top ten HWs since 2000 ?

[Lackeos]

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

Joshua beat Povetkin and Wlad, and is undefeated. Ranking Joshua below #5 is not acceptable. Joshua's best win is better than Povetkin's best. Joshua's second best win is better than Povetkin's second best. Joshua's third best win is better than Povetkin's third best. Joshua's fourth best win is better than Povetkin's fourth best. Joshua beat Povetkin and beat the other guy who beat Povetkin.

[jamamb]

josh is top 3 minimum, only ones who could arguably rank ahead are len and wlad.

i would rank josh 1 or 2 personally, with him and len. len still had some pretty good wins in the 2000s and even at the very end was good enough to bash vitalis face in

[Bard of Boxrec]

josh is top 3 minimum, only ones who could arguably rank ahead are len and wlad.

i would rank josh 1 or 2 personally, with him and len. len still had some pretty good wins in the 2000s and even at the very end was good enough to bash vitalis face in

Exactly, lol at vitali being ahead of AJ. Just lol.

[Onetimeonly]

He's easily top 3.

[Enlightened-One]

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

Joshua beat Povetkin and Wlad, and is undefeated. Ranking Joshua below #5 is not acceptable. Joshua's best win is better than Povetkin's best. Joshua's second best win is better than Povetkin's second best. Joshua's third best win is better than Povetkin's third best. Joshua's fourth best win is better than Povetkin's fourth best. Joshua beat Povetkin and beat the other guy who beat Povetkin.

A 26½ year old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 41-year-old version of Wladimir Klitschko that had been inactive for 1½ years, tasted defeat in his previous outing and hadn’t delivered a truly impressive performance for more than 2½ years.

A 28-year-old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 39-year-old past-his-prime version of Alexander Povetkin that hadn’t delivered an impressive performance for several years, as well as going life and death with David Price, which was a bout that was previously considered as being a blatant mismatch, since the Russian’s opponent was merely a British domestic level fighter.

Can we at least agree on those facts, since they cannot possibly be refuted, can they?

Anthony Joshua’s bouts against both of these men were universally regarded as being really tough contests for the Brit. It seemed clear to me at the time that had AJ faced much younger prime iterations of these men, he’d have very likely lost.

Beating an opponent with a name is meaningless, unless you personally feel that the following fighters deserve to be regarded as Hall-of-Famers, simply because they hold victories over all-time-greats that were past-their-primes: Kevin McBride, Danny Williams, Trevor Berbick, Larry Donald and Mick Leahy?

You really need to be able to objectively evaluate the outcome of bouts by appreciating their true context, because if you can’t do that, then you shouldn’t be following the sport in the first place! You need to do much more than read through websites detailing the professional records of fighters! It's only one piece of the proverbial puzzle!

[lillywhite14]

Longevity at world level then ranks Joshua below Povetkin and Fury

Joshuas beaten better opponents than them two have, and he’s also beaten Povetkin too!

Fury has fought two world title fights

Does the context of fights not mean much to you?

You mean barely beating an ageing champion who didn’t take him seriously, or not getting a victory against a chinney crude, wild swinging, easy to hit Wilder?

For what it’s worth I don’t subscribe to either of them theories 100% although they do have more an element of truth, but it’s easy to twist things to suit.

I rate Joshua above both Fury and Wilder as it stands. Fury gets too much credit at times whilst Joshua is the opposite.

[lillywhite14]

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

Joshua beat Povetkin and Wlad, and is undefeated. Ranking Joshua below #5 is not acceptable. Joshua's best win is better than Povetkin's best. Joshua's second best win is better than Povetkin's second best. Joshua's third best win is better than Povetkin's third best. Joshua's fourth best win is better than Povetkin's fourth best. Joshua beat Povetkin and beat the other guy who beat Povetkin.

A 26½ year old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 41-year-old version of Wladimir Klitschko that had been inactive for 1½ years, tasted defeat in his previous outing and hadn’t delivered a truly impressive performance for more than 2½ years.

A 28-year-old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 39-year-old past-his-prime version of Alexander Povetkin that hadn’t delivered an impressive performance for several years, as well as going life and death with David Price, which was a bout that was previously considered as being a blatant mismatch, since the Russian’s opponent was merely a British domestic level fighter.

Can we at least agree on those facts, since they cannot possibly be refuted, can they?

Anthony Joshua’s bouts against both of these men were universally regarded as being really tough contests for the Brit. It seemed clear to me at the time that had AJ faced much younger prime iterations of these men, he’d have very likely lost.

Beating an opponent with a name is meaningless, unless you personally feel that the following fighters deserve to be regarded as Hall-of-Famers, simply because they hold victories over all-time-greats that were past-their-primes: Kevin McBride, Danny Williams, Trevor Berbick, Larry Donald and Mick Leahy?

You really need to be able to objectively evaluate the outcome of bouts by appreciating their true context, because if you can’t do that, then you shouldn’t be following the sport in the first place! You need to do much more than read through websites detailing the professional records of fighters! It's only one piece of the proverbial puzzle!

Wlad was awful against Fury. Was it Tyson? Perhaps. He was also awful against Jennings. Was he too comfortable?

The best Wlad performance? Potentially against Joshua. When was the last time you see Wlad out and up on his toes looking to actually win a fight as opposed to just doing enough? It looked more like the younger Wlad who wasn’t so risk averse. He did something similar against Haye. Perhaps it was Joshua, and he isn’t actually all that good?

Povetkin? Joshua wasn’t going particulalry well early doors as Povetkin style was causing him a few issues, just as it would do Wilder and Fury ( he’d possibly beat Wilder, even now ) but in the end Joshua took him apart, like we’d never seen before. Comprehensive victory. Joshua never looked in any real trouble at any point so not sure what the ‘most like have lost against younger version’ claim is. Joshua would still have the power and ability to knock the younger version out too I suspect.

Hopefully all these questions will be answered soon enough. After all their next fights you’ll have Wilder with a win over a guy who’s unbeaten record was already ended by Joshua ( one of quite a few ) and Fury with a win over somebody who’d get beat by half a dozen current British heavyweights alone. Joshua will have a win over Miller, who would actually qualify as Fury and Wilder’s second best win yet would be Joshua’s 4th or 5th!

As it stands, Joshua has the best record of the three imo.

[Enlightened-One]

Longevity at world level then ranks Joshua below Povetkin and Fury

Joshuas beaten better opponents than them two have, and he’s also beaten Povetkin too!

Fury has fought two world title fights

Does the context of fights not mean much to you?

You mean barely beating an ageing champion who didn’t take him seriously, or not getting a victory against a chinney crude, wild swinging, easy to hit Wilder?

Wladimir Klitschko’s trainer, the legendary Emanuel Steward, predicted in 2012 that Tyson Fury would eventually become a world champion… a dominant figure in the heavyweight scene… and even repeated this assertion during multiple interviews.

Manny knew Fury, he stayed with him and he had Tyson together with Klitschko during training camp, with other top heavyweights… and he claimed that the ‘Gypsy King’ was incredibly “tough”… “maybe even the toughest”.

Therefore, Wladimir Klitschko took Tyson Fury seriously!

In terms of your thoughts about Fury’s performance against Wilder, well you’ve just said something that is extremely absurd! I don’t even need to challenge your opinion on this matter. I’ll allow others to critique the words you’ve wrote.

[Bard of Boxrec]

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

Joshua beat Povetkin and Wlad, and is undefeated. Ranking Joshua below #5 is not acceptable. Joshua's best win is better than Povetkin's best. Joshua's second best win is better than Povetkin's second best. Joshua's third best win is better than Povetkin's third best. Joshua's fourth best win is better than Povetkin's fourth best. Joshua beat Povetkin and beat the other guy who beat Povetkin.

A 26½ year old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 41-year-old version of Wladimir Klitschko that had been inactive for 1½ years, tasted defeat in his previous outing and hadn’t delivered a truly impressive performance for more than 2½ years.

A 28-year-old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 39-year-old past-his-prime version of Alexander Povetkin that hadn’t delivered an impressive performance for several years, as well as going life and death with David Price, which was a bout that was previously considered as being a blatant mismatch, since the Russian’s opponent was merely a British domestic level fighter.

Can we at least agree on those facts, since they cannot possibly be refuted, can they?

Anthony Joshua’s bouts against both of these men were universally regarded as being really tough contests for the Brit. It seemed clear to me at the time that had AJ faced much younger prime iterations of these men, he’d have very likely lost.

Beating an opponent with a name is meaningless, unless you personally feel that the following fighters deserve to be regarded as Hall-of-Famers, simply because they hold victories over all-time-greats that were past-their-primes: Kevin McBride, Danny Williams, Trevor Berbick, Larry Donald and Mick Leahy?

You really need to be able to objectively evaluate the outcome of bouts by appreciating their true context, because if you can’t do that, then you shouldn’t be following the sport in the first place! You need to do much more than read through websites detailing the professional records of fighters! It's only one piece of the proverbial puzzle!

Instead of writing a novel, just use your eyes and accept that wlads performance against AJ was excellent .

[Enlightened-One]

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

Joshua beat Povetkin and Wlad, and is undefeated. Ranking Joshua below #5 is not acceptable. Joshua's best win is better than Povetkin's best. Joshua's second best win is better than Povetkin's second best. Joshua's third best win is better than Povetkin's third best. Joshua's fourth best win is better than Povetkin's fourth best. Joshua beat Povetkin and beat the other guy who beat Povetkin.

A 26½ year old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 41-year-old version of Wladimir Klitschko that had been inactive for 1½ years, tasted defeat in his previous outing and hadn’t delivered a truly impressive performance for more than 2½ years.

A 28-year-old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 39-year-old past-his-prime version of Alexander Povetkin that hadn’t delivered an impressive performance for several years, as well as going life and death with David Price, which was a bout that was previously considered as being a blatant mismatch, since the Russian’s opponent was merely a British domestic level fighter.

Can we at least agree on those facts, since they cannot possibly be refuted, can they?

Anthony Joshua’s bouts against both of these men were universally regarded as being really tough contests for the Brit. It seemed clear to me at the time that had AJ faced much younger prime iterations of these men, he’d have very likely lost.

Beating an opponent with a name is meaningless, unless you personally feel that the following fighters deserve to be regarded as Hall-of-Famers, simply because they hold victories over all-time-greats that were past-their-primes: Kevin McBride, Danny Williams, Trevor Berbick, Larry Donald and Mick Leahy?

You really need to be able to objectively evaluate the outcome of bouts by appreciating their true context, because if you can’t do that, then you shouldn’t be following the sport in the first place! You need to do much more than read through websites detailing the professional records of fighters! It's only one piece of the proverbial puzzle!

Wlad was awful against Fury. Was it Tyson? Perhaps. He was also awful against Jennings. Was he too comfortable?

The best Wlad performance? Potentially against Joshua. When was the last time you see Wlad out and up on his toes looking to actually win a fight as opposed to just doing enough? It looked more like the younger Wlad who wasn’t so risk averse. He did something similar against Haye. Perhaps it was Joshua, and he isn’t actually all that good?

Povetkin? Joshua wasn’t going particulalry well early doors as Povetkin style was causing him a few issues, just as it would do Wilder and Fury ( he’d possibly beat Wilder, even now ) but in the end Joshua took him apart, like we’d never seen before. Comprehensive victory. Joshua never looked in any real trouble at any point so not sure what the ‘most like have lost against younger version’ claim is. Joshua would still have the power and ability to knock the younger version out too I suspect.

Hopefully all these questions will be answered soon enough. After all their next fights you’ll have Wilder with a win over a guy who’s unbeaten record was already ended by Joshua ( one of quite a few ) and Fury with a win over somebody who’d get beat by half a dozen current British heavyweights alone. Joshua will have a win over Miller, who would actually qualify as Fury and Wilder’s second best win yet would be Joshua’s 4th or 5th!

As it stands, Joshua has the best record of the three imo.

You’re confusing one of Wladimir’s most exciting bouts of his career with him being at his athletic peak and pugilistic prime. They aren’t the same thing.

A similar principle applies to Povetkin also. The Russian’s age prevented him from maintaining the winning momentum during the bout.

We shouldn’t pretend that the age of a fighter is irrelevant!

We'll agree to disagree, but I feel I’ve made my point.

None of us should browse websites and analyse the legacy of fighters based purely on reading their professional boxing record, whilst ignoring context.

It’s a very poor argument to say that fighter A beat fighter B, therefore fighter A is greater than fighter B, because that’s definitely not always the case, especially when other factors affecting the outcome are being completely ignored or dismissed.

[Bard of Boxrec]

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

Joshua beat Povetkin and Wlad, and is undefeated. Ranking Joshua below #5 is not acceptable. Joshua's best win is better than Povetkin's best. Joshua's second best win is better than Povetkin's second best. Joshua's third best win is better than Povetkin's third best. Joshua's fourth best win is better than Povetkin's fourth best. Joshua beat Povetkin and beat the other guy who beat Povetkin.

A 26½ year old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 41-year-old version of Wladimir Klitschko that had been inactive for 1½ years, tasted defeat in his previous outing and hadn’t delivered a truly impressive performance for more than 2½ years.

A 28-year-old version of Anthony Joshua defeated a 39-year-old past-his-prime version of Alexander Povetkin that hadn’t delivered an impressive performance for several years, as well as going life and death with David Price, which was a bout that was previously considered as being a blatant mismatch, since the Russian’s opponent was merely a British domestic level fighter.

Can we at least agree on those facts, since they cannot possibly be refuted, can they?

Anthony Joshua’s bouts against both of these men were universally regarded as being really tough contests for the Brit. It seemed clear to me at the time that had AJ faced much younger prime iterations of these men, he’d have very likely lost.

Beating an opponent with a name is meaningless, unless you personally feel that the following fighters deserve to be regarded as Hall-of-Famers, simply because they hold victories over all-time-greats that were past-their-primes: Kevin McBride, Danny Williams, Trevor Berbick, Larry Donald and Mick Leahy?

You really need to be able to objectively evaluate the outcome of bouts by appreciating their true context, because if you can’t do that, then you shouldn’t be following the sport in the first place! You need to do much more than read through websites detailing the professional records of fighters! It's only one piece of the proverbial puzzle!

Wlad was awful against Fury. Was it Tyson? Perhaps. He was also awful against Jennings. Was he too comfortable?

The best Wlad performance? Potentially against Joshua. When was the last time you see Wlad out and up on his toes looking to actually win a fight as opposed to just doing enough? It looked more like the younger Wlad who wasn’t so risk averse. He did something similar against Haye. Perhaps it was Joshua, and he isn’t actually all that good?

Povetkin? Joshua wasn’t going particulalry well early doors as Povetkin style was causing him a few issues, just as it would do Wilder and Fury ( he’d possibly beat Wilder, even now ) but in the end Joshua took him apart, like we’d never seen before. Comprehensive victory. Joshua never looked in any real trouble at any point so not sure what the ‘most like have lost against younger version’ claim is. Joshua would still have the power and ability to knock the younger version out too I suspect.

Hopefully all these questions will be answered soon enough. After all their next fights you’ll have Wilder with a win over a guy who’s unbeaten record was already ended by Joshua ( one of quite a few ) and Fury with a win over somebody who’d get beat by half a dozen current British heavyweights alone. Joshua will have a win over Miller, who would actually qualify as Fury and Wilder’s second best win yet would be Joshua’s 4th or 5th!

As it stands, Joshua has the best record of the three imo.

You’re confusing one of Wladimir’s most exciting bouts of his career with him being at his athletic peak and pugilistic prime. They aren’t the same thing.

A similar principle applies to Povetkin also. The Russian’s age prevented him from maintaining the winning momentum during the bout.

We shouldn’t pretend that the age of a fighter is irrelevant!

We'll agree to disagree, but I feel I’ve made my point.

None of us should browse websites and analyse the legacy of fighters based purely on reading their professional boxing record, whilst ignoring context.

It’s a very poor argument to say that fighter A beat fighter B, therefore fighter A is greater than fighter B, because that’s definitely not always the case, especially when other factors affecting the outcome are being completely ignored or dismissed.

No, he’s crediting wlad with a great performance because it was a great performance. He didn’t mention athletic prime. Use your eyes rain man ! It was a great performance. It’s ok to recognise it!

Povetkin may have been past his best but the matchup was all wrong for him. Joshua beat him relatively straightforwardly, while Wlad hated pov’s rushes so much he had to resort to his famous octopus impression to contain him. Without being penalised.

[Thomastearns]

Yes, obviously. But just exactly where, we won't know til he meets Fury or Wilder.

We all know how fast opinion can change in this sport. Just imagine if he loses his next fight, I know it's not easy to do for anyone, not even Jarrell Miller. But if he did lose, all of a sudden he wouldn't even be in some people's top 20 since 2000. This sport is all about from hero to zero (and sometimes even back to hero).

As things stand I'd have him as 4th, slightly behind both Klitschko's and Lewis. But I don't see any reason why he can't surpass all three.

[skanksta]

How about, because Lewis is on a different plane of existence to AJ ?

Lewis is up there with the ATGs, while AJ is a rich man's Frank Bruno.
Imagine what a motivated, peak Lewis would do to the current big 3

Also - yes OBVIOUSLY, because top 10 since 2000 isn't a high bar to clear !

[jamamb]

his resume puts him easily past vitali already

be warned, looking at vits resume may burn your eyes

[oogiebe]

Longevity at world level then ranks Joshua below Povetkin and Fury

Joshuas beaten better opponents than them two have, and he’s also beaten Povetkin too!

Fury has fought two world title fights

Does the context of fights not mean much to you?

You mean barely beating an ageing champion who didn’t take him seriously, or not getting a victory against a chinney crude, wild swinging, easy to hit Wilder?

Wladimir Klitschko’s trainer, the legendary Emanuel Steward, predicted in 2012 that Tyson Fury would eventually become a world champion… a dominant figure in the heavyweight scene… and even repeated this assertion during multiple interviews.

Manny knew Fury, he stayed with him and he had Tyson together with Klitschko during training camp, with other top heavyweights… and he claimed that the ‘Gypsy King’ was incredibly “tough”… “maybe even the toughest”.

Therefore, Wladimir Klitschko took Tyson Fury seriously!

In terms of your thoughts about Fury’s performance against Wilder, well you’ve just said something that is extremely absurd! I don’t even need to challenge your opinion on this matter. I’ll allow others to critique the words you’ve wrote.

I don't think that Lilly was being absurd at all. He makes good points. Certainly not outrageous.

[oogiebe]

his resume puts him easily past vitali already

be warned, looking at vits resume may burn your eyes

I don't rate Vitali that highly. Arm puncher who benefited from weak opposition. Had quite a good chin though.

[oogiebe]

How about, because Lewis is on a different plane of existence to AJ ?

Lewis is up there with the ATGs, while AJ is a rich man's Frank Bruno.
Imagine what a motivated, peak Lewis would do to the current big 3

Also - yes OBVIOUSLY, because top 10 since 2000 isn't a high bar to clear !

LL was my fav hw of all time. AJ is an unfinished book. What if he loses several fights over the last part of his career? I don't fancy how some have crowned him when he has more work to do and fights to fight.

[skanksta]

his resume puts him easily past vitali already

be warned, looking at vits resume may burn your eyes

I don't rate Vitali that highly. Arm puncher who benefited from weak opposition. Had quite a good chin though.

I reckon Vitali is ATG gatekeeper.
Nowhere near any greatest HW list, but a tough Sultan of Brunei who could go the distance with any of them. (barring face falling apart obvs).
He'd crush almost all of the big LHWs that used to fight @ HW in the 50s and earlier - before people got really big.

I think him vs Tyson would be the dream match I'd like to see most.
Size vs speed.

[Onetimeonly]

his resume puts him easily past vitali already

be warned, looking at vits resume may burn your eyes

Vitali resume wise is in the Ruiz lane.

[skanksta]

I kind of struggled to put this list together, because Hall-of-Famers like Lennox Lewis didn’t compete much since the turn of the Millenium.

Also, it’s hard to evaluate the sort of fighters worthy of places 8th, 9th & 10th in the list, because the heavyweight division was either weak or sometimes the perceived “better” names didn’t face each other. Any number of fighters could’ve easily taken those slots in my list, such as:

• Hasim Rahman
• John Ruiz
• James Toney
• David Haye
• Nikolay Valuev

However, all these guys were deeply flawed in their own way (as-is Chris Byrd, Kubrat Pulev & Ruslan Chagaev).

Anyway, you guys will probably laugh at my list, but here’s my top ten since 2000:

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

For the record, longevity on the world scene is one of my main criteria also (such as their world ratings between 2000 through to the end of 2018, hence the reason why Tyson Fury is rated so high).

Deontay Wilder’s rating is a tricky one, because he deserves to be rated highly due to his accomplishments ad longevity, but I’m convinced that a lot of heavyweights could’ve beaten him if they faced each other in their prime (i.e. David Haye, James Toney etc.).

Anyway, I’m looking forward to being aggressively ridiculed for my thoughts!

I WILL laugh at that list.
Lennox just edging Povetkin, in the SAME BREATH as decent SMW Chris Byrd ?! Behind a guy he beat when he was old, past it, thought he was fighting Kirk Johnson and in one of his notorious complacent phases.
Jeez Louise !
WT. Actual F.

[oogiebe]

I kind of struggled to put this list together, because Hall-of-Famers like Lennox Lewis didn’t compete much since the turn of the Millenium.

Also, it’s hard to evaluate the sort of fighters worthy of places 8th, 9th & 10th in the list, because the heavyweight division was either weak or sometimes the perceived “better” names didn’t face each other. Any number of fighters could’ve easily taken those slots in my list, such as:

• Hasim Rahman
• John Ruiz
• James Toney
• David Haye
• Nikolay Valuev

However, all these guys were deeply flawed in their own way (as-is Chris Byrd, Kubrat Pulev & Ruslan Chagaev).

Anyway, you guys will probably laugh at my list, but here’s my top ten since 2000:

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

For the record, longevity on the world scene is one of my main criteria also (such as their world ratings between 2000 through to the end of 2018, hence the reason why Tyson Fury is rated so high).

Deontay Wilder’s rating is a tricky one, because he deserves to be rated highly due to his accomplishments ad longevity, but I’m convinced that a lot of heavyweights could’ve beaten him if they faced each other in their prime (i.e. David Haye, James Toney etc.).

Anyway, I’m looking forward to being aggressively ridiculed for my thoughts!

I WILL laugh at that list.
Lennox just edging Povetkin, in the SAME BREATH as decent SMW Chris Byrd ?! Behind a guy he beat when he was old, past it, thought he was fighting Kirk Johnson and in one of his notorious complacent phases.
Jeez Louise !
WT. Actual F.

E-I-e-I-EO!

[lillywhite14]

Longevity at world level then ranks Joshua below Povetkin and Fury

Joshuas beaten better opponents than them two have, and he’s also beaten Povetkin too!

Fury has fought two world title fights

Does the context of fights not mean much to you?

You mean barely beating an ageing champion who didn’t take him seriously, or not getting a victory against a chinney crude, wild swinging, easy to hit Wilder?

Wladimir Klitschko’s trainer, the legendary Emanuel Steward, predicted in 2012 that Tyson Fury would eventually become a world champion… a dominant figure in the heavyweight scene… and even repeated this assertion during multiple interviews.

Manny knew Fury, he stayed with him and he had Tyson together with Klitschko during training camp, with other top heavyweights… and he claimed that the ‘Gypsy King’ was incredibly “tough”… “maybe even the toughest”.

Therefore, Wladimir Klitschko took Tyson Fury seriously!

In terms of your thoughts about Fury’s performance against Wilder, well you’ve just said something that is extremely absurd! I don’t even need to challenge your opinion on this matter. I’ll allow others to critique the words you’ve wrote.

I don't think that Lilly was being absurd at all. He makes good points. Certainly not outrageous.

He cut out the bit where I said I don’t necessarily agree with it, but it’s an example of very reasonable suggestions when taking fights into context.
Waffling on like an old woman, cutting bits when quoting others etc, makes himself look a bit of tit to be honest.

Anyway, Wlad was clearly of a different mindset when he came to Wembley. It was the first time in years he’d gone to the lions den as a challenger. You could see it from the off. I think that Wlad might have beaten Fury. We’ll never know

Hopefully we find out just who sits where in the next year. I predict Joshua keeps facing a higher level of opposition than the other two yet getting less credit for it. As it stands he has the best opponent out of the three, then afterwards talk is of Pulev and Usyk if the other two can’t be convinced to fight him. He cannot be accused of going on a bum of the month campaign that’s for sure.

I’d like to see Fury emerge as the main man in the long run because I can’t help but like him, in and out the ring, but I think Joshua beats him and Wilder. Infact I think people will look back and laugh at these threads about how difficult we all found it to separate them all.


Lennox would have smashed all three to bits though, no doubt

[Enlightened-One]

I kind of struggled to put this list together, because Hall-of-Famers like Lennox Lewis didn’t compete much since the turn of the Millenium.

Also, it’s hard to evaluate the sort of fighters worthy of places 8th, 9th & 10th in the list, because the heavyweight division was either weak or sometimes the perceived “better” names didn’t face each other. Any number of fighters could’ve easily taken those slots in my list, such as:

• Hasim Rahman
• John Ruiz
• James Toney
• David Haye
• Nikolay Valuev

However, all these guys were deeply flawed in their own way (as-is Chris Byrd, Kubrat Pulev & Ruslan Chagaev).

Anyway, you guys will probably laugh at my list, but here’s my top ten since 2000:

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

For the record, longevity on the world scene is one of my main criteria also (such as their world ratings between 2000 through to the end of 2018, hence the reason why Tyson Fury is rated so high).

Deontay Wilder’s rating is a tricky one, because he deserves to be rated highly due to his accomplishments ad longevity, but I’m convinced that a lot of heavyweights could’ve beaten him if they faced each other in their prime (i.e. David Haye, James Toney etc.).

Anyway, I’m looking forward to being aggressively ridiculed for my thoughts!

I WILL laugh at that list.
Lennox just edging Povetkin, in the SAME BREATH as decent SMW Chris Byrd ?! Behind a guy he beat when he was old, past it, thought he was fighting Kirk Johnson and in one of his notorious complacent phases.
Jeez Louise !
WT. Actual F.

My list is in the context of who achieved the most in the sport since the start of the Millennium. It wasn’t a greatest ever list.

Lewis didn’t compete much since the year 2K onwards.

If it was a greatest ever list, then I would have submitted a completely different post.

[oogiebe]

I kind of struggled to put this list together, because Hall-of-Famers like Lennox Lewis didn’t compete much since the turn of the Millenium.

Also, it’s hard to evaluate the sort of fighters worthy of places 8th, 9th & 10th in the list, because the heavyweight division was either weak or sometimes the perceived “better” names didn’t face each other. Any number of fighters could’ve easily taken those slots in my list, such as:

• Hasim Rahman
• John Ruiz
• James Toney
• David Haye
• Nikolay Valuev

However, all these guys were deeply flawed in their own way (as-is Chris Byrd, Kubrat Pulev & Ruslan Chagaev).

Anyway, you guys will probably laugh at my list, but here’s my top ten since 2000:

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

For the record, longevity on the world scene is one of my main criteria also (such as their world ratings between 2000 through to the end of 2018, hence the reason why Tyson Fury is rated so high).

Deontay Wilder’s rating is a tricky one, because he deserves to be rated highly due to his accomplishments ad longevity, but I’m convinced that a lot of heavyweights could’ve beaten him if they faced each other in their prime (i.e. David Haye, James Toney etc.).

Anyway, I’m looking forward to being aggressively ridiculed for my thoughts!

I WILL laugh at that list.
Lennox just edging Povetkin, in the SAME BREATH as decent SMW Chris Byrd ?! Behind a guy he beat when he was old, past it, thought he was fighting Kirk Johnson and in one of his notorious complacent phases.
Jeez Louise !
WT. Actual F.

My list is in the context of who achieved the most in the sport since the start of the Millennium. It wasn’t a greatest ever list.

Lewis didn’t compete much since the year 2K onwards.

Lewis did enough to be best since 2000, don't kid yourself. Including beating your number two.

[Enlightened-One]

I kind of struggled to put this list together, because Hall-of-Famers like Lennox Lewis didn’t compete much since the turn of the Millenium.

Also, it’s hard to evaluate the sort of fighters worthy of places 8th, 9th & 10th in the list, because the heavyweight division was either weak or sometimes the perceived “better” names didn’t face each other. Any number of fighters could’ve easily taken those slots in my list, such as:

• Hasim Rahman
• John Ruiz
• James Toney
• David Haye
• Nikolay Valuev

However, all these guys were deeply flawed in their own way (as-is Chris Byrd, Kubrat Pulev & Ruslan Chagaev).

Anyway, you guys will probably laugh at my list, but here’s my top ten since 2000:

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Tyson Fury
4. Lennox Lewis
5. Alexander Povetkin
6. Anthony Joshua
7. Deontay Wilder
8. Chris Byrd
9. Kubrat Pulev
10. Ruslan Chagaev

For the record, longevity on the world scene is one of my main criteria also (such as their world ratings between 2000 through to the end of 2018, hence the reason why Tyson Fury is rated so high).

Deontay Wilder’s rating is a tricky one, because he deserves to be rated highly due to his accomplishments ad longevity, but I’m convinced that a lot of heavyweights could’ve beaten him if they faced each other in their prime (i.e. David Haye, James Toney etc.).

Anyway, I’m looking forward to being aggressively ridiculed for my thoughts!

I WILL laugh at that list.
Lennox just edging Povetkin, in the SAME BREATH as decent SMW Chris Byrd ?! Behind a guy he beat when he was old, past it, thought he was fighting Kirk Johnson and in one of his notorious complacent phases.
Jeez Louise !
WT. Actual F.

My list is in the context of who achieved the most in the sport since the start of the Millennium. It wasn’t a greatest ever list.

Lewis didn’t compete much since the year 2K onwards.

Lewis did enough to be best since 2000, don't kid yourself. Including beating your number two.

Vitali was on the ascendancy, he was still improving and Lewis retired rather than take the rematch, even though he originally wanted to do one.

The bout was also taken on short notice.

I guess we’ll never know what the outcome of their bout would’ve been had the cut never happened or if they engaged in the rematch.

Lewis is a greater fighter than all the names on my list, but others achieved more since the start of the Millennium.