Is Anthony Joshua among the top ten HWs since 2000 ?

[oogiebe]

even if someone tried to fight the best possible, i cant rate them for fights they never had.

That's all that matters and I'd bet 50 heavyweights since 2000 have a better win than vitali.

You really exaggerate, this is becoming bizarre.

It's always bizarre when people defend vitalis resume. It's Corrie Sanders man. Anybody that beat rahman, old holy field, Ruiz, chagaev, wilder, fury, wlad, Sanders himself, etc...50 might be an exaggeration because of the timeline, but it's definitely 30 or 40.

100%. "what might have been" isn't part of the record and can't be counted. I'd be curious how long the list of folks who in fact do have better wins is. But that's for another thread.

Dude, all-time it might be 500. Guys like Garcia that beat Norton and Martin over Witherspoon. Hell it might be 1000!

Just look at who beat guys like Patterson; Liston; Holmes; Mercer; Shavers; Lyle; even Quarry...you may not be far off the mark!

[Enlightened-One]

Prior to the David Lemieux bout, people were not only claiming that GGG was the pound-for-pound best in the sport, but that he was already a dead-cert first-ballot future Hall-of-Famer capable of beating all-time-greats like Marvin Hagler and Bernard Hopkins. Their argument was that it wasn’t Golovkin’s fault for not having faced better opposition.

Yet the majority of the same set of people are claiming that Vitali Klitschko is an undeserving member of the IBHoF, due to him not having faced better opposition.

To me, there’s a double-standard being applied here.

Vitali beat the best available opponents in his own era. A few big names even refused to face him. And it seems that the voters for the IBHoF agree with me, otherwise they wouldn’t have inducted him into their Hall-of-Fame.

No one can provide a list of names Vitali ducked.

[oogiebe]

Prior to the David Lemieux bout, people were not only claiming that GGG was the pound-for-pound best in the sport, but that he was already a dead-cert first-ballot future Hall-of-Famer capable of beating all-time-greats like Marvin Hagler and Bernard Hopkins. Their argument was that it wasn’t Golovkin’s fault for not having faced better opposition.

Yet the majority of the same set of people are claiming that Vitali Klitschko is an undeserving member of the IBHoF, due to him not having faced better opposition.

To me, there’s a double-standard being applied here.

Vitali beat the best available opponents in his own era. A few big names even refused to face him. And it seems that the voters for the IBHoF agree with me, otherwise they wouldn’t have inducted him into their Hall-of-Fame.

No one can provide a list of names Vitali ducked.

No one said Vitali ducked anyone.

[cfang]

The thing with both vit and wlad is they didn't really have a career defining fight in their prime. Ofc vit had the Lewis fight and wlad Joshua but the k's were the two best heavys of their era and didn't fight each other. Imagine they weren't brothers? They'd have had a trilogy of fights most likely and probably classics. They'd be seen differently.

I think their era was weak but between them they beat everyone they could. Both are great heavys who must be around 8-15 somewhere of all time heavys but no higher.

In answer to the question. Obviously Joshua is in a top ten since 2000. Lewis is top, then the k's then Joshua. I can't see anyone else in there.

[Bard of Boxrec]

Lol, EO has finally short-circuited and is now copy and pasting his earlier messages.

Man, as has already been mentioned, if anyone says that about GGG, they're wrong too.

Go and have a lie down. Literally noone agrees with you apart from the dude who started the thread and thinks it's a debate that AJ belongs in the top ten HWs since 2000

[Onetimeonly]

The thing with both vit and wlad is they didn't really have a career defining fight in their prime. Ofc vit had the Lewis fight and wlad Joshua but the k's were the two best heavys of their era and didn't fight each other. Imagine they weren't brothers? They'd have had a trilogy of fights most likely and probably classics. They'd be seen differently.

I think their era was weak but between them they beat everyone they could. Both are great heavys who must be around 8-15 somewhere of all time heavys but no higher.

In answer to the question. Obviously Joshua is in a top ten since 2000. Lewis is top, then the k's then Joshua. I can't see anyone else in there.

Between them? Wtf is that? Wlad beat all the better fighters. Why does vitali get credit for that? Between Lewis, Byrd And Ruiz they beat most everyone. Odd statement from a knowledgeable poster. If vitali ducked anyone it was rahman. But I don't play that game and it's irrelevant for historical rankings. What matters is what happened and he lost to the two top guys he faced, Lewis was obviously a good loss but a loss all the same and he may have never beaten a top 200 heavyweight. That's 8-12 ever? Gtfoh

[oogiebe]

The thing with both vit and wlad is they didn't really have a career defining fight in their prime. Ofc vit had the Lewis fight and wlad Joshua but the k's were the two best heavys of their era and didn't fight each other. Imagine they weren't brothers? They'd have had a trilogy of fights most likely and probably classics. They'd be seen differently.

I think their era was weak but between them they beat everyone they could. Both are great heavys who must be around 8-15 somewhere of all time heavys but no higher.

In answer to the question. Obviously Joshua is in a top ten since 2000. Lewis is top, then the k's then Joshua. I can't see anyone else in there.

Between them? Wtf is that? Wlad beat all the better fighters. Why does vitali get credit for that? Between Lewis, Byrd And Ruiz they beat most everyone. Odd statement from a knowledgeable poster. If vitali ducked anyone it was rahman. But I don't play that game and it's irrelevant for historical rankings. What matters is what happened and he lost to the two top guys he faced, Lewis was obviously a good loss but a loss all the same and he may have never beaten a top 200 heavyweight. That's 8-12 ever? Gtfoh

You didn't get the memo on boxing tag teams I assume...

[Enlightened-One]

Lol, EO has finally short-circuited and is now copy and pasting his earlier messages.

Man, as has already been mentioned, if anyone says that about GGG, they're wrong too.

Go and have a lie down. Literally noone agrees with you apart from the dude who started the thread and thinks it's a debate that AJ belongs in the top ten HWs since 2000

I repeat questions that no one can answer.

You couldn’t, so why criticise the same question being posed again?

If the truth doesn’t bother you, then the response to my post shouldn’t either.

[Onetimeonly]

The thing with both vit and wlad is they didn't really have a career defining fight in their prime. Ofc vit had the Lewis fight and wlad Joshua but the k's were the two best heavys of their era and didn't fight each other. Imagine they weren't brothers? They'd have had a trilogy of fights most likely and probably classics. They'd be seen differently.

I think their era was weak but between them they beat everyone they could. Both are great heavys who must be around 8-15 somewhere of all time heavys but no higher.

In answer to the question. Obviously Joshua is in a top ten since 2000. Lewis is top, then the k's then Joshua. I can't see anyone else in there.

Between them? Wtf is that? Wlad beat all the better fighters. Why does vitali get credit for that? Between Lewis, Byrd And Ruiz they beat most everyone. Odd statement from a knowledgeable poster. If vitali ducked anyone it was rahman. But I don't play that game and it's irrelevant for historical rankings. What matters is what happened and he lost to the two top guys he faced, Lewis was obviously a good loss but a loss all the same and he may have never beaten a top 200 heavyweight. That's 8-12 ever? Gtfoh

You didn't get the memo on boxing tag teams I assume...

The spinks brothers beat two of the top 3 ever!

[oogiebe]

The thing with both vit and wlad is they didn't really have a career defining fight in their prime. Ofc vit had the Lewis fight and wlad Joshua but the k's were the two best heavys of their era and didn't fight each other. Imagine they weren't brothers? They'd have had a trilogy of fights most likely and probably classics. They'd be seen differently.

I think their era was weak but between them they beat everyone they could. Both are great heavys who must be around 8-15 somewhere of all time heavys but no higher.

In answer to the question. Obviously Joshua is in a top ten since 2000. Lewis is top, then the k's then Joshua. I can't see anyone else in there.

Between them? Wtf is that? Wlad beat all the better fighters. Why does vitali get credit for that? Between Lewis, Byrd And Ruiz they beat most everyone. Odd statement from a knowledgeable poster. If vitali ducked anyone it was rahman. But I don't play that game and it's irrelevant for historical rankings. What matters is what happened and he lost to the two top guys he faced, Lewis was obviously a good loss but a loss all the same and he may have never beaten a top 200 heavyweight. That's 8-12 ever? Gtfoh

You didn't get the memo on boxing tag teams I assume...

The spinks brothers beat two of the top 3 ever!

Great point! So Leon is obviously better than Wlad!

[Enlightened-One]

Prior to the David Lemieux bout, people were not only claiming that GGG was the pound-for-pound best in the sport, but that he was already a dead-cert first-ballot future Hall-of-Famer capable of beating all-time-greats like Marvin Hagler and Bernard Hopkins. Their argument was that it wasn’t Golovkin’s fault for not having faced better opposition.

Yet the majority of the same set of people are claiming that Vitali Klitschko is an undeserving member of the IBHoF, due to him not having faced better opposition.

To me, there’s a double-standard being applied here.

Vitali beat the best available opponents in his own era. A few big names even refused to face him. And it seems that the voters for the IBHoF agree with me, otherwise they wouldn’t have inducted him into their Hall-of-Fame.

No one can provide a list of names Vitali ducked.

No one said Vitali ducked anyone.

Yes they did.

[Bard of Boxrec]

Lol, EO has finally short-circuited and is now copy and pasting his earlier messages.

Man, as has already been mentioned, if anyone says that about GGG, they're wrong too.

Go and have a lie down. Literally noone agrees with you apart from the dude who started the thread and thinks it's a debate that AJ belongs in the top ten HWs since 2000

I repeat questions that no one can answer.

You couldn’t, so why criticise the same question being posed again?

If the truth doesn’t bother you, then the response to my post shouldn’t either.

So let me get this straight. Your ‘question’ is ‘whaaa whaaa whaaa, GGG gets credit for being a future Hall of famer but vitali gets discredited’ when literally NOONE in the thread has mentioned GGG.



Then you claim that vitali not ducking anyone is a useful determinant of his lofty standing .

[Enlightened-One]

Lol, EO has finally short-circuited and is now copy and pasting his earlier messages.

Man, as has already been mentioned, if anyone says that about GGG, they're wrong too.

Go and have a lie down. Literally noone agrees with you apart from the dude who started the thread and thinks it's a debate that AJ belongs in the top ten HWs since 2000

I repeat questions that no one can answer.

You couldn’t, so why criticise the same question being posed again?

If the truth doesn’t bother you, then the response to my post shouldn’t either.

So let me get this straight. Your ‘question’ is ‘whaaa whaaa whaaa, GGG gets credit for being a future Hall of famer but vitali gets discredited’ when literally NOONE in the thread has mentioned GGG.



Then you claim that vitali not ducking anyone is a useful determinant of his lofty standing .

People choose to exclude specific criteria to support their favourite fighter’s justification for being deemed Hall-of-Fame worthy.

The same people then decide to focus on the same set of previously excluded criteria to undermine the credentials of fighters they dislike, as their jusification for their belief about these men not being deemed Hall-of-Fame worthy.

For example: the same people who claim it wasn’t Gennady’s fault for “not having faced better opposition” also attack Dr. Ironfist for “not having faced better opposition”, even though the Ukraine is blameless for the type of fighters competing in his own era and weight class. As far as I’m concerned, neither man ducked anybody.

There’s nothing wrong with highlighting situations whereby double-standards are being applied.

I appear to have asked a difficult question, because no one attempted to explain the reason why they choose to apply different rules and standards to fighters they like as opposed to those they dislike.

[Bard of Boxrec]

Lol, EO has finally short-circuited and is now copy and pasting his earlier messages.

Man, as has already been mentioned, if anyone says that about GGG, they're wrong too.

Go and have a lie down. Literally noone agrees with you apart from the dude who started the thread and thinks it's a debate that AJ belongs in the top ten HWs since 2000

I repeat questions that no one can answer.

You couldn’t, so why criticise the same question being posed again?

If the truth doesn’t bother you, then the response to my post shouldn’t either.

So let me get this straight. Your ‘question’ is ‘whaaa whaaa whaaa, GGG gets credit for being a future Hall of famer but vitali gets discredited’ when literally NOONE in the thread has mentioned GGG.



Then you claim that vitali not ducking anyone is a useful determinant of his lofty standing .

People choose to exclude specific criteria to support their favourite fighter’s justification for being deemed Hall-of-Fame worthy.

The same people then decide to focus on the same set of previously excluded criteria to undermine the credentials of fighters they dislike, as their jusification for their belief about these men not being deemed Hall-of-Fame worthy.

For example: the same people who claim it wasn’t Gennady’s fault for “not having faced better opposition” also attack Dr. Ironfist for “not having faced better opposition”, even though the Ukraine is blameless for the type of fighters competing in his own era and weight class. As far as I’m concerned, neither man ducked anybody.

There’s nothing wrong with highlighting situations whereby double-standards are being applied.

I appear to have asked a difficult question, because no one attempted to explain the reason why they choose to apply different rules and standards to fighters they like as opposed to those they dislike.

Maybe you could be taken more seriously if you can give examples of these people ACTUALLY DOING what you claim they do (which is show double standards) rather than just make vague assertions of ‘those same people’ etc.

[Enlightened-One]

Lol, EO has finally short-circuited and is now copy and pasting his earlier messages.

Man, as has already been mentioned, if anyone says that about GGG, they're wrong too.

Go and have a lie down. Literally noone agrees with you apart from the dude who started the thread and thinks it's a debate that AJ belongs in the top ten HWs since 2000

I repeat questions that no one can answer.

You couldn’t, so why criticise the same question being posed again?

If the truth doesn’t bother you, then the response to my post shouldn’t either.

So let me get this straight. Your ‘question’ is ‘whaaa whaaa whaaa, GGG gets credit for being a future Hall of famer but vitali gets discredited’ when literally NOONE in the thread has mentioned GGG.



Then you claim that vitali not ducking anyone is a useful determinant of his lofty standing .

People choose to exclude specific criteria to support their favourite fighter’s justification for being deemed Hall-of-Fame worthy.

The same people then decide to focus on the same set of previously excluded criteria to undermine the credentials of fighters they dislike, as their jusification for their belief about these men not being deemed Hall-of-Fame worthy.

For example: the same people who claim it wasn’t Gennady’s fault for “not having faced better opposition” also attack Dr. Ironfist for “not having faced better opposition”, even though the Ukraine is blameless for the type of fighters competing in his own era and weight class. As far as I’m concerned, neither man ducked anybody.

There’s nothing wrong with highlighting situations whereby double-standards are being applied.

I appear to have asked a difficult question, because no one attempted to explain the reason why they choose to apply different rules and standards to fighters they like as opposed to those they dislike.

Maybe you could be taken more seriously if you can give examples of these people ACTUALLY DOING what you claim they do (which is show double standards) rather than just make vague assertions of ‘those same people’ etc.

Without involving other people in our discussion, by quoting their specific words, I can provide links to threads whereby the general sentiments are that GGG deserves to be inducted into the Hall-of-Fame despite possessing a relatively poor resume, which they claim wasn’t his fault. You have probably commented on these sort of threads.

This thread already provides peoples assessments of Vitali’s career, whereby they claim the Ukraine doesn’t deserve his place in the Hall-of-Fame, because he possesses a poor resume.

Is it reasonable to assume that nearly everyone from this forum, barring a few idiots, doesn’t believe that Vitali or Gennady ducked anyone?

[ValMar]

Lol, EO has finally short-circuited and is now copy and pasting his earlier messages.

Man, as has already been mentioned, if anyone says that about GGG, they're wrong too.

Go and have a lie down. Literally noone agrees with you apart from the dude who started the thread and thinks it's a debate that AJ belongs in the top ten HWs since 2000

I repeat questions that no one can answer.

You couldn’t, so why criticise the same question being posed again?

If the truth doesn’t bother you, then the response to my post shouldn’t either.

So let me get this straight. Your ‘question’ is ‘whaaa whaaa whaaa, GGG gets credit for being a future Hall of famer but vitali gets discredited’ when literally NOONE in the thread has mentioned GGG.



Then you claim that vitali not ducking anyone is a useful determinant of his lofty standing .

People choose to exclude specific criteria to support their favourite fighter’s justification for being deemed Hall-of-Fame worthy.

The same people then decide to focus on the same set of previously excluded criteria to undermine the credentials of fighters they dislike, as their jusification for their belief about these men not being deemed Hall-of-Fame worthy.

For example: the same people who claim it wasn’t Gennady’s fault for “not having faced better opposition” also attack Dr. Ironfist for “not having faced better opposition”, even though the Ukraine is blameless for the type of fighters competing in his own era and weight class. As far as I’m concerned, neither man ducked anybody.

There’s nothing wrong with highlighting situations whereby double-standards are being applied.

I appear to have asked a difficult question, because no one attempted to explain the reason why they choose to apply different rules and standards to fighters they like as opposed to those they dislike.

Maybe you could be taken more seriously if you can give examples of these people ACTUALLY DOING what you claim they do (which is show double standards) rather than just make vague assertions of ‘those same people’ etc.

Without involving other people in our discussion, by quoting their specific words, I can provide links to threads whereby the general sentiments are that GGG deserves to be inducted into the Hall-of-Fame despite possessing a relatively poor resume, which they claim wasn’t his fault. You have probably commented on these sort of threads.

This thread already provides peoples assessments of Vitali’s career, whereby they claim the Ukraine doesn’t deserve his place in the Hall-of-Fame, because he possesses a poor resume.

Is it reasonable to assume that nearly everyone from this forum, barring a few idiots, doesn’t believe that Vitali or Gennady ducked anyone?

I do not know, and I can not know, but I believe that Vitali and GGG never ducked anybody (both of them are the genuine wariors and gentlemen). I am not so sure for their recpective promoters.

[Cojimar 1946]

I find the opposition argument pretty odd. Marvin Hagler is rated highly by many but he never beat an ATG middlweight.

[oogiebe]

I find the opposition argument pretty odd. Marvin Hagler is rated highly by many but he never beat an ATG middlweight.

His level of opposition wasn't nearly as poor as Vitali's (again not his fault). In fact it was pretty good. Not great, but pretty good, with a sprinkling of great wins.

KO'ing Tommy is all he needs IMHO. to go along with his long term domination of the division.

[Cojimar 1946]

I was referring more to Wladimir than Vitali. With Vitali the argument about not facing better opponents holds some merit but Wladimir did a pretty good job of fighting and beating the best of his time aside from his brother.

[oogiebe]

I was referring more to Wladimir than Vitali. With Vitali the argument about not facing better opponents holds some merit but Wladimir did a pretty good job of fighting and beating the best of his time aside from his brother.

I agree that Wlad had the better resume.

[ValMar]

I agree that Wlad had the better resume.

Which fukcing HW has the best resume since 2000 ?

[oogiebe]

Which fukcing HW has the best resume since 2000 ?

LOL!!! I was comparing Wlad to his brother. Who do YOU think?

[ValMar]

LOL!!! I was comparing Wlad to his brother. Who do YOU think?

Wlad's resume is better than Vitali's, undoubtedly.
Lewis is the No. 1, generally speaking, but had not a lot of fights since 2000 (+ loss against Rahman).
So, this is a very difficult question, and I have no answer.

[oogiebe]

Wlad's resume is better than Vitali's, undoubtedly.
Lewis is the No. 1, generally speaking, but had not a lot of fights since 2000 (+ loss against Rahman).
So, this is a very difficult question, and I have no answer.

I have Lewis too. Despite the loss, he beat Vitali; Rahman and a faded Tyson. Throw on Grant; Tua; and Botha. Not a bad list.

[ValMar]

I have Lewis too. Despite the loss, he beat Vitali; Rahman and a faded Tyson. Throw on Grant; Tua; and Botha. Not a bad list.

The bad list ? No..........
The short list ? Yes......
The best list ? Likely.............