Tyson Fury would have been eaten for dinner in my era, claims Frank Bruno

[mickey1975]

still gotta beat usyk to show he's the king, levels above all the rest

usyk beating aj comfortable on 1 try is right up there with fury beating wilder. aj and wilder are similar level.

But AJ had already been done in, badly, by the time Usyk got him.

[margaret thatcher]

easily won the rematch and then dominated pulev, which would be right up there with the best wilder's ever done

[Coco]

still gotta beat usyk toshow he's the king, levels above all the rest

usyk beating aj comfortable on 1 try really isnt any worse than fury needing 2 attempts at wilder

Def, but size does mean a lot, esp if you know how to use it, in shape I can't see Fury losing.
Whether you are looking at the Cunningham or the last Wilder fight, Fury showed how to deal with a smaller man when he was up against it.
Having a 19st bloke lying all over you who is always alert to move you into the big shots is an impossible conundrum

[margaret thatcher]

could be, but then again otto wallin's a light hitting box and mover and he tore fury's face up and hurt him. usyk's a level above that and can be a problem for anyone. you'd favour fury but he needs to prove it in the ring and not in hypotheticals. hes not the undisputed champ

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

It’s all good fun. Bowe was quite good though. I think the general consensus is that pre Stewart he was probably too good for Lewis, the early version. I don’t think he was fat, certainly not in comparison to say Fury or even Whyte. I think regardless of the past revisionism it’s really quite hard to rate the current crop as other than thin in depth and true ability.

It's not what Eddie Futch, Bowe's trainer, thought Lennox would win in 92-93. Lennox had just pole axed Rudduck in 1 round. He got stopped by 1 punch both before and after Steward.

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

still gotta beat usyk to show he's the king, levels above all the rest

usyk beating aj comfortable on 1 try is right up there with fury beating wilder. aj and wilder are similar level.

This makes no sense when Fury clearly won the first fight

[margaret thatcher]

it was close with the knockdowns and him not putting a lot of rounds beyond doubt, certainly a draw was much more feasible than it would have been in aj-usyk

aj and wilder are absolutely similar level, usyk really had little problems with aj and that win ranks up with fury's 4 kd series with wilder

[Ruthless-RKO]

it was close with the knockdowns and him not putting a lot of rounds beyond doubt, certainly a draw was much more feasible than it would have been in aj-usyk

aj and wilder are absolutely similar level, usyk really had little problems with aj and that win ranks up with fury's 4 kd series with wilder

I have no arguments with anyone scoring the first fight to Wilder by that same judge's card. It wasn't the best fight, Fury didn't always do much either apart from prancing and showboating and there was two 10-8 rounds for Wilder.

I did score it 114-111 I think it was for Fury.

[margaret thatcher]

ya first fight could legit be scored close, all you need to do to get a draw is give wilder 3 of the 10 no KD rounds . the rounds were quieter than the other 2 fights and some of them he could have been given a little edge. i had it for tyson barely but wasnt overly fussed with the draw

[DrDuke]

AJ and Wilder are on about the same level, but Usyk winning AJ on the 1 try and without KDs doesn't make him better than Fury.

First of all, Fury was robbed in the 1st Wilder fight.

Secondly, Usyk has a better chin. Fury has already been sent down by Cunningham and that guy with a crazy Serbian name. Usyk took clean punches of Gassiev, Briedis and even Joshua caught him flush. He hardly blinked, as we know.

It seems like Fury has just a good chin with excellent recovery, while Usyk possesses a freakish chin.

[Ruthless-RKO]

AJ and Wilder are on about the same level, but Usyk winning AJ on the 1 try and without KDs doesn't make him better than Fury.

To be fair, I think if he really wanted to, Usyk could have dropped AJ at least twice in that round, he has the engine and he didn't move to the next gear.

[DrDuke]

AJ and Wilder are on about the same level, but Usyk winning AJ on the 1 try and without KDs doesn't make him better than Fury.

To be fair, I think if he really wanted to, Usyk could have dropped AJ at least twice in that round, he has the engine and he didn't move to the next gear.

That's right. Joshua was ready to go. Usyk admitted, that his team had been repeatedly telling him to fight cautious through the fight and not to get too aggressive. If Usyk pushed more, Joshua would only fall apart more. But it's impossible to blame Usyk anyway, he did what he had to do.

[Ruthless-RKO]

AJ and Wilder are on about the same level, but Usyk winning AJ on the 1 try and without KDs doesn't make him better than Fury.

To be fair, I think if he really wanted to, Usyk could have dropped AJ at least twice in that round, he has the engine and he didn't move to the next gear.

That's right. Joshua was ready to go. Usyk admitted, that his team had been repeatedly telling him to fight cautious through the fight and not to get too aggressive. If Usyk pushed more, Joshua would only fall apart more. But it's impossible to blame Usyk anyway, he did what he had to do.

Yeh, he won a comfortable decision.

[Riddick Bowie]

it was close with the knockdowns and him not putting a lot of rounds beyond doubt, certainly a draw was much more feasible than it would have been in aj-usyk

aj and wilder are absolutely similar level, usyk really had little problems with aj and that win ranks up with fury's 4 kd series with wilder

I have no arguments with anyone scoring the first fight to Wilder by that same judge's card. It wasn't the best fight, Fury didn't always do much either apart from prancing and showboating and there was two 10-8 rounds for Wilder.

I did score it 114-111 I think it was for Fury.

I'd contest the 12th being a 10-8 for Wilder. Fury jumped up and had him on the verge of going for the rest of the round! You can't give Deontay a two-pointer in that state. I'd argue that should be scored 10-10.

[Ruthless-RKO]

it was close with the knockdowns and him not putting a lot of rounds beyond doubt, certainly a draw was much more feasible than it would have been in aj-usyk

aj and wilder are absolutely similar level, usyk really had little problems with aj and that win ranks up with fury's 4 kd series with wilder

I have no arguments with anyone scoring the first fight to Wilder by that same judge's card. It wasn't the best fight, Fury didn't always do much either apart from prancing and showboating and there was two 10-8 rounds for Wilder.

I did score it 114-111 I think it was for Fury.

I'd contest the 12th being a 10-8 for Wilder. Fury jumped up and had him on the verge of going for the rest of the round! You can't give Deontay a two-pointer in that state. I'd argue that should be scored 10-10.

Many cases like this, even for flash KD's where a boxer has dominated, majority judges still give it 10-8.

best case for Fury, it would be a 10-9 for Wilder.

Never a 10-10 with a KD.

[Boxerbeetle]

One of the main reasons I view the current era so poorly is the length of time Wilder held a belt. There’s always been guys who are total crap skillwise and lethal with a single shot - especially at heavy - but how many of them actually held title belts for a long period of time? Wilder only managed it because this era is extremely weak, and even then his team had to massively cherrypick his opponents.

[margaret thatcher]

bermane stiverne and dom breazeale are wilder's 2nd and 3rd best opponents beaten, he obviously had some great gifts but dude beat very little of quality

ppl called breazeale a soft first defense for 2.5 year pro aj, and aj of course won easily. then wilder beats the same guy after 11 years pro and it gets hyped and is one of his best wins lol

[DrDuke]

One of the main reasons I view the current era so poorly is the length of time Wilder held a belt. There’s always been guys who are total crap skillwise and lethal with a single shot - especially at heavy - but how many of them actually held title belts for a long period of time? Wilder only managed it because this era is extremely weak, and even then his team had to massively cherrypick his opponents.

It's more about Wilder cherry picking than era being poor. Wilder didn't fight the best available and picked Fury only because Fury was mistakenly considered by many as a rusty and declined fighter.

[Ruthless-RKO]

One of the main reasons I view the current era so poorly is the length of time Wilder held a belt. There’s always been guys who are total crap skillwise and lethal with a single shot - especially at heavy - but how many of them actually held title belts for a long period of time? Wilder only managed it because this era is extremely weak, and even then his team had to massively cherrypick his opponents.

He was down on the cards in some of the fights he won by KO.

Not his fault he has that equaliser to win a fight.

[Riddick Bowie]

I have no arguments with anyone scoring the first fight to Wilder by that same judge's card. It wasn't the best fight, Fury didn't always do much either apart from prancing and showboating and there was two 10-8 rounds for Wilder.

I did score it 114-111 I think it was for Fury.

I'd contest the 12th being a 10-8 for Wilder. Fury jumped up and had him on the verge of going for the rest of the round! You can't give Deontay a two-pointer in that state. I'd argue that should be scored 10-10.

Many cases like this, even for flash KD's where a boxer has dominated, majority judges still give it 10-8.

best case for Fury, it would be a 10-9 for Wilder.

Never a 10-10 with a KD.

Moorer got a 10-9 versus Holyfield in a round he was knocked down in!

Rounds where both men are knocked down, or one goes down and the other gets badly hurt, can be scored 10-10.

[Riddick Bowie]

One of the main reasons I view the current era so poorly is the length of time Wilder held a belt. There’s always been guys who are total crap skillwise and lethal with a single shot - especially at heavy - but how many of them actually held title belts for a long period of time? Wilder only managed it because this era is extremely weak, and even then his team had to massively cherrypick his opponents.

It's very hard to imagine any era in history where someone as laughably bad as Deontay Wilder would win such a prestigious belt, let alone defend it 10 times.

[Autobarn]

Wilder has many shortcomings but his power is impressive & he twice stopped a guy, in memorable fights, who was all wrong for him: Ortiz.

And, to his credit, he pushed his luck vs another who had a bad style for him, Fury, in a trilogy that featured two hugely exciting battles. We should give the man a little credit; and the same for Fury in besting the biggest puncher in the sport.

At heavyweight sometimes all that matters is the big punch, ala the revered Ernie Shavers. Was Shavers “Sh it”, because he “only” had a big punch?

[DrDuke]

One of the main reasons I view the current era so poorly is the length of time Wilder held a belt. There’s always been guys who are total crap skillwise and lethal with a single shot - especially at heavy - but how many of them actually held title belts for a long period of time? Wilder only managed it because this era is extremely weak, and even then his team had to massively cherrypick his opponents.

It's very hard to imagine any era in history where someone as laughably bad as Deontay Wilder would win such a prestigious belt, let alone defend it 10 times.

Belts get devalued with time.

[Boxerbeetle]

Wonder how Shavers would do in this era? I’d definitely take him to beat the living shit out of Wilder.

[Riddick Bowie]

Wilder has many shortcomings but his power is impressive & he twice stopped a guy, in memorable fights, who was all wrong for him: Ortiz.

And, to his credit, he pushed his luck vs another who had a bad style for him, Fury, in a trilogy that featured two hugely exciting battles. We should give the man a little credit; and the same for Fury in besting the biggest puncher in the sport.

At heavyweight sometimes all that matters is the big punch, ala the revered Ernie Shavers. Was Shavers “Sh it”, because he “only” had a big punch?

Really how "wrong" for Wilder can a 40 year old man be?

Shavers had limitations but the tapes clearly prove he punched with better, more fluid form than Wilder, his footwork was better and he had a wider arsenal of shots.