would fury have ko'd wlad if he fought him like wilder 2 +3

[margaret thatcher]

fury would be more open to being nailed and wladdy could punch

but at the same time i can imagine how panicked wlad would get with this 6'8 260 guy coming at him with good inside fighting and roughhousing

[Monte Fisto]

I assume we mean as follow on from the previous fight, way back when. Who knows, but I’d opt for no, Klitschko at the time was no where near as open as wilder and Fury was a different beast back then to that of today’s Fury. I’d say in hindsight if Fury stayed on his game he would win a pts decision again.

[Boxerbeetle]

Way too risky a tactic to do against anyone who isn’t as terrible as Wilder.

[Twinkle Toes]

Way too risky a tactic to do against anyone who isn’t as terrible as Wilder.

[HomicideHenry]

Another thread created in response to something I said ages ago you really need to find yourself a new hobby margaret thatcher.

And I'm not the only one with this opinion.

Maybe you can make an argument that Fury in the third fight would have not been successful against Klitschko, but by team Fury's own admission Fury basically trained for only three weeks for the rubbermatch.

Much as I like Wladimir Klitschko, I think Fury always would have his number because he was inside his head rent-free 24/7 365 days a year.

You would literally have to kill Tyson Fury to stop him from coming at you non-stop. Klitschko never was a killer or warrior, and his old legs would have given out on him eventually.

He'd probably dump Fury to the canvas a few times just like Wilder did, but the result would have ended the same. He would have thought that's all he needed to do in order to win, just like he did against Joshua letting him off the hook.

[gregregegg]

Would vlad of ko’d fury if he fought him when he wasn’t 39?

[DrDuke]

If Fury wasn't exactly that heavy like in the 3rd, he would KO Wlad for sure. He would do it even in the version of the 3rd, but the slower version would just give Wlad more chances for success. Wlad is simply chinny enough and he wouldn't be able to keep at bay so rangy and relentless opponent. Moreover, Wlad could try clinching tactics to neutralize Fury's aggression, but Tyson would only get better of it.

[margaret thatcher]

Would vlad of ko’d fury if he fought him when he wasn’t 39?

good question. not sure, though i think he'd always be a problem for any wlad. he obviously doesnt punch as hard, but too much size and ability not to give wlad problems i think

[DrDuke]

Fury can win any version of Wlad. He is a tougher fighter and a more versatile boxer than Klitschko.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Fury can win any version of Wlad. He is a tougher fighter and a more versatile boxer than Klitschko.

....and yet he scraped an incredibly narrow win against the 39 year old version, in a stinker of a fight....

[DrDuke]

Fury can win any version of Wlad. He is a tougher fighter and a more versatile boxer than Klitschko.

....and yet he scraped an incredibly narrow win against the 39 year old version, in a stinker of a fight....

Back then no one was talking about any decline of Klitschko and didn't take Fury seriously, but now theres's an every day revisionism of Klitschko being way past it.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Fury can win any version of Wlad. He is a tougher fighter and a more versatile boxer than Klitschko.

....and yet he scraped an incredibly narrow win against the 39 year old version, in a stinker of a fight....

Back then no one was talking about any decline of Klitschko and didn't take Fury seriously, but now theres's an every day revisionism of Klitschko being way past it.

Stop being so obtuse, are you trying to suggest that nobody thought that at 39, Wlad was past his best?

No fighter is at their peak at 39, even Hopkins had to adapt his style to winkle out wins at that age because he couldn't fight like he did earlier in his career.

[DrDuke]

....and yet he scraped an incredibly narrow win against the 39 year old version, in a stinker of a fight....

Back then no one was talking about any decline of Klitschko and didn't take Fury seriously, but now theres's an every day revisionism of Klitschko being way past it.

Stop being so obtuse, are you trying to suggest that nobody thought that at 39, Wlad was past his best?

No fighter is at their peak at 39, even Hopkins had to adapt his style to winkle out wins at that age because he couldn't fight like he did earlier in his career.

If you're so smartass, better tell what were the indications of Klitschko being way past prime and when it was over.

[danconnollyeire]

No. You can't ragdoll Wlad... he's too strong

[jamesmcdonnell]

Back then no one was talking about any decline of Klitschko and didn't take Fury seriously, but now theres's an every day revisionism of Klitschko being way past it.

Stop being so obtuse, are you trying to suggest that nobody thought that at 39, Wlad was past his best?

No fighter is at their peak at 39, even Hopkins had to adapt his style to winkle out wins at that age because he couldn't fight like he did earlier in his career.

If you're so smartass, better tell what were the indications of Klitschko being way past prime and when it was over.

I'm not wasting my time arguing with an idiot.

[DrDuke]

Stop being so obtuse, are you trying to suggest that nobody thought that at 39, Wlad was past his best?

No fighter is at their peak at 39, even Hopkins had to adapt his style to winkle out wins at that age because he couldn't fight like he did earlier in his career.

If you're so smartass, better tell what were the indications of Klitschko being way past prime and when it was over.

I'm not wasting my time arguing with an idiot.

What a pathetic self-discharge from the subject proposed by yourself. Ok, flow down to the canalization, if you wish.

[jamesmcdonnell]

If you're so smartass, better tell what were the indications of Klitschko being way past prime and when it was over.

I'm not wasting my time arguing with an idiot.

What a pathetic self-discharge from the subject proposed by yourself. Ok, flow down to the canalization, if you wish.

Bore off.

I'm not wasting time proving what anyone with half a brain would know to be self evident.

[DrDuke]

I'm not wasting my time arguing with an idiot.

What a pathetic self-discharge from the subject proposed by yourself. Ok, flow down to the canalization, if you wish.

Bore off.

I'm not wasting time proving what anyone with half a brain would know to be self evident.

Oh, you are doing so well with not wasting your time.

[brilo33]

depens how wlad had fought , as if wlad had fought like he did against aj fury would of sparked him, like when peoplebsay wilder shouldnt have fought like that, like fury aint a better boxer than him and would have switched it up , if wlad was so good why didnt he make fury fight like that

[Bard of Boxrec]

Fury can win any version of Wlad. He is a tougher fighter and a more versatile boxer than Klitschko.

....and yet he scraped an incredibly narrow win against the 39 year old version, in a stinker of a fight....

Back then no one was talking about any decline of Klitschko and didn't take Fury seriously, but now theres's an every day revisionism of Klitschko being way past it.

Agree, Wlad proved he had a lot left in the tank when he returned to put in a great performance vs AJ.

Fury would have beaten any version of Wlad, he’s just a lot better than jab and grab Wlad. Better range of punches, better engine, better chin, better volume, better movement. Power is the only advantage Wlad had.

He would have been more than capable of stopping Wlad in the same manner as he did to Wilder if he’d have marched forward too, but it was apparent in the fight that he could keep it as risk free as possible and win that way.