How Can Fury Call Himself An ATG Heavyweight When He’s Not Even The Greatest Heavyweight Now????

[Loki]

He is THE ATG

You judge ATG by would they be able to beat any of the boxers before, and the answer is a resounding yes.

People look at the 70s and 80s with rose-tinted glasses. Athletes get better with every generation. Fact.

Ali and Foreman and the rest NEVER fought anybody who comes CLOSE to the SIZE of Tyson Fury. And I know some bonehead will come in and say "sIzE IsN't EvErYtHiNg LoOk aT vAlUeV" ignoring the fact that not only is Fury massive, he uses his height and weight extremely well AND he moves like someone much smaller. Fact

No boxer from the past with the possible exception of Lennox Lewis and Vitali Klitschko would beat Fury because of the sheer size and weight difference. Joe Lewis was just 6'1. Marciano was just 5'8. Foreman, considered a giant of his time, would be average height at best today. Fact.

That is not how you evaluate ATG status at all!! Crikey mate what you’re talking about is a mythical matchup list, that’s schoolyard stuff, ATG status is judged by achievements in the era you completed, so who you fought, results, method and manner of results, when the fights happened, longevity ect

Fury was almost beaten by Wladimir Klitschko who was past his prime. I scored the fight a draw, but the judges scored it for Fury. If that is the case that no boxer from the past except for Lewis and Vitali K. would beat Fury, then why is Fury retiring now? Why not wait to fight the winner of Usyk vs. Joshua II? I think George Foreman, Larry Holmes, and Riddick Bowe would beat Fury, especially if they are all in their primes. The best opponent Fury beat is Wilder because Wladimir was not in his prime. Is that good enough to be considered an all time great? I don't think so.

Correct - Wlad’s last prime fight was against Pulev. He looked terrible against Bryant and Fury. The AJ fight was better but in his prime, he’d beaten Fury and AJ.

[Loki]

Fury is most definitely an all time great. Wlad had an 18 title defense streak going when Fury went on the road and beat him as the opponent. Wilder had a 10 title defense streak going and Fury again beat him on the road as the opponent. Wilder's streak should have ended at 7 though as Fury did enough to win the first time.

Who else has ever beaten 2 long reigning champions in order to capture every single belt there is? Wlad was the best boxer of his generation and Fury schooled him completely. Wilder was the hardest hitter of his generation and Fury bulldozed his arse and outpowered him.

I want to see the Fury fight vs the winner of AJ and Usyk and also think it would greatly enhance Fury's legacy. But even without it Fury is one of the very best HW's of all time. His size and skill set is unmatched in history. The only flaw he has is not having an absolute iron jaw but he does have a decent beard. He can be beat by the right shot at the right time but reality is there is no man who has ever boxed that Fury could not beat. He's the best really big man ever to lace them up. So many of the smaller greats would get manhandled and schooled by him. They would all be like Wilder and dependent on landing the one perfect shot otherwise they are going to lose. Fury is the man.

Wlad was past his prime. He was after he fought Pulev.

Fury’s best win was against Wilder, who can’t box and just has a dynamite right hand.

Usyk beats Fury. That’s my call.

[Loki]

Fury is just a freak show that's bigger than everyone else. The truth is the only great fighter he has beaten is Wladimir Klitchko in a total stink fest that he probably did just enough to nick 7 rounds out of 12. All this talk of being an ATG and retiring after every fight is tedious. How many times has he retired now, 6?

[RScarf1]

Fury has said that his victory over Wladimir was even more of an accomplishment because he won in Wladimir's adopted home country of Germany at the time. (I guess he currently lives in Ukraine now.) I don't believe that the judges showed any favoritism towards Wladimir in his fight against Fury. In fact, I think the opposite is true. The belts at stake for this fight were the WBA, IBF, WBO, and IBO. I don't know which sanctioning bodies' judges were used for this. I believe that the powers that be wanted Fury to be the new champion because he was younger and had a more outspoken personality compared to Wladimir. Also, I think they felt that Fury's fights would be more entertaining and therefore there would be more people wanting to watch which leads to more money and therefore higher sanctioning fees.

I'll give you an example of how it sometimes does not give a boxer any preferential treatment to fight in his or her home country. When the IBF was first being involved in women's boxing, they had a vacant IBF world female featherweight title fight between Stacey Reile of the United States and Dahianna Santana of the Dominican Republic. The fight was in Costa Rica and Reile won by a close split decision. They had an immediate rematch in Las Vegas, so it was in the United States. There was controversy in the first fight because there were some in the media who felt that Santana deserved the win. Perhaps that is why the IBF ordered an immediate rematch. In the rematch, Santana fought with an intense desire to win and she won by unanimous decision. Unlike the first fight which was close, this fight was not and the media felt that Santana definitely deserved the win.

After Fury won against Wladimir, he had a three year hiatus from boxing. Fighting in the United States which is Deontay Wilder's home country, Fury had a draw and two wins by knockout. I think Fury received fair treatment from the judges and referees in these fights.

[RScarf1]

Since it was difficult to score, how could there be a consensus? I don't know of any media that had Klitschko winning, but the opinions varied as to how much Fury won by.

Consensus: a generally accepted opinion or decision among a group of people; majority of opinion; general agreement or concord; harmony.

The vast majority of the media, fight fans and boxing pundits felt that Wladimir Klitschko lost eight or nine rounds when he fought Tyson Fury.

Therefore, the general consensus is that Tyson Fury deserved his victory over Wladimir Klitschko. There was no controversy about the outcome.

You even said it yourself in your own post, no one thought that Wladimir Klitschko was robbed against Tyson Fury, because everyone felt 'The Gypsy King' deserved his victory over 'Dr Steelhammer'.

Does it really matter if people felt that Fury won by different margins on the scorecards, because they all agree about the outcome?

It doesn't get any more simpler than that!

I agree with you that there was a consensus in the media that Fury deserved to win. I meant that there was not a consensus as to the margin of victory. Some in the media thought it was close and some not so close. Maybe a majority thought it was not close as you state, but I think even the minority opinion has some credibility. It's like in the U.S. Supreme Court where a minority opinion makes valid arguments and writes dissenting opinions, but is outvoted by the majority of justices.

[Ruthless-RKO]

He’s not had the longevity.

[brilo33]

fury beats both of them easy, and i think fury is on the decline now ,

[margaret thatcher]

fury beats both of them easy, and i think fury is on the decline now ,

if he beats both easy it's a no brainer to take the undisputed fight then

imagine that.............easy fight, undisputed, huge win for his career and massive payday. he'd be a fool to retire on whyte rather than becoming undisputted

[brilo33]

fury beats both of them easy, and i think fury is on the decline now ,

if he beats both easy it's a no brainer to take the undisputed fight then

imagine that.............easy fight, undisputed, huge win for his career and massive payday. he'd be a fool to retire on whyte rather than becoming undisputted

dont work like that tho does it , of cause aj usyk can chin him and win, also going trainng camp 8 ,9 weeks but also waiting for that could take 6 months lot of mental stress, i remember when having to fight at break time in school the hour lesson felt a life time i remember being called out a shop that felt a long time, i personally think he will fight the winner

[caldo2025]

Fury is definitely avoiding Usyk and AJ for that matter.

Fury is not avoiding anyone.

Tyson has claimed his intention to retire during 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022.

It's something he does regularly, but he keeps coming back.

• November 2013 - Tyson Fury announces his retirement via Twitter, due to David Haye’s withdrawal from their bout
• November 2015 – Tyson Fury claimed he’s considering retirement after the Klitschko bout
• October 2016 – Tyson Fury announces his retirement, but a few hours later he retracted his comments
• July 2017 – Tyson Fury announces his retirement from boxing due to waiting for a date for his UKAD anti-doping hearing
• December 2018 – Tyson Fury promises to retire after he’s competed in his next two outings
• October 2019 – Tyson Fury promises to retire during 2020 after competing in three more bouts
• February 2020 – Sugar Hill Steward said that Tyson Fury will retire after the Deontay Wilder victory
• March 2020 – Tyson Fury makes a 180 degree U-turn and promises to continue boxing well into his forties
• June 2021 – Fury claimed he’d retire after the third Deontay Wilder bout
• November 2021 – Tyson Fury admitted to contemplating retirement, but was now looking forward to a bout against Dillian Whyte
• March 2022 – Tyson Fury announced his plans to retire after the Dillian Whyte fight
• April 2022 – Tyson Fury claims he has officially retired

Only a mentally-deranged intellectually-subnormal person takes his “retirement” claims seriously and accuses him of “ducking” his world-rated peers!

Tyson Fury signed a six-fight co-promotional deal with Top Rank during February 2019.

If ‘The Gypsy King’ decides to face Francis Ngannou next in an exhibition, that will be the sixth event that Top Rank has been involved in with Fury, which will mark the completion of that deal.

Tyson Fury might be using the “retirement” angle as a negotiating tactic to orchestrate a contract renewal, or to encourage other promoters to bid for his services.

Of course, there’s a possibility that Fury may decide to stay “retired”, depending on the outcome of the Joshua-Usyk rematch, but I suspect he’ll inevitably make a comeback if he’s offered a big enough payday.

So enough of the stupid “Tyson is ducking AJ and Usyk” claims please!!!

Actually, good point here I guess. Less common as Haley’s Comet for you but you’re right. Boxers at the top of the game use retirement angles to redeem better paydays but how will they handle the strap? My guess is that they will give him a little time to submit his retirement paperwork and whatnot. But at some point regardless, the belt needs to be stripped if no fight is in the works right?

But again, I agree with you. But who knows with this guy? He could really be done and I wouldn’t be surprised.

[RScarf1]

From an article on Fightnews.com: “This is the truth...I’m done.” Fury stated that he is not interested in fighting Usyk or Joshua, although he may be receptive to WWE or exhibitions.

In my opinion, Fury doesn't want to fight the best in the heavyweight division. He says he wanted to retire as an undefeated heavyweight champion. I guess fighting Usyk or Joshua would jeopardize that. He is willing to do WWE or exhibitions because that will get him money, but not affect his pro boxing record.

[Thomastearns]

From an article on Fightnews.com: “This is the truth...I’m done.” Fury stated that he is not interested in fighting Usyk or Joshua, although he may be receptive to WWE or exhibitions.

In my opinion, Fury doesn't want to fight the best in the heavyweight division. He says he wanted to retire as an undefeated heavyweight champion. I guess fighting Usyk or Joshua would jeopardize that. He is willing to do WWE or exhibitions because that will get him money, but not affect his pro boxing record.

Yes, he's wisely following the Mayweather business plan of max money for minimum danger. That's why he vacated the UK title at the last minute to avoid David Price all those years ago.

Think about it for a moment, why would he want to face a really good boxer who's at the peak of his powers? Surely everyone knows by now that what comes out of Fury's mouth is about as reliable as that of Amber Heard's?

Fury's roughly the same age as Joshua and younger than Usyk, but more importantly, he's had far less fights than either.

Just like Mayweather though Fury will fight if the money is right, and that can only mean one person.

Of course all of this depends upon what happens in the AJ v Usyk rematch. Until then Fury is no better than possibly the 3rd best heavyweight right now.

It's no secret that Fury's always wanted to fight Joshua, who wouldn't for £100million+?

Call him what you want, but he's certainly no mug that Tyson Fury.

[H8Usernames]

Oleksander Usyk is a cruiserweight who at the age of 21 competed as an amateur in the light heavyweight division.

Tyson Fury is 6"9 heavyweight. 2 inches taller than Vitali Klitschko was and he isn't suffering from the robotic matchstickman syndrome like Vitali was.

This is just Vitali Klitschko vs Tomasz Adamek II. This isn't a good fight and one that I would rather not see happen.

A) Fury isn’t 6’9. He’s 6’7. It’s bollocks. B) Comparing Usyk to Adamek demonstrates you’re an idiot.

I had my doubts about Usyk at HW, but after the AJ fight (and he beats him in the rematch) I think he’s made that transition brilliantly. I also think he will box Furys ears off (takes him into the matrix).

Acctually you are the idiot. It should be obvious to anyone that I am saying that one fight is comparable with the other not that the fighters are exactly the same. Fury is much better than Vitali was and Usyk is alot better than Adamek was yet their encounter will only prove the same thing that Vit vs Ada did that size really does matter.

[RScarf1]

Of course all of this depends upon what happens in the AJ v Usyk rematch. Until then Fury is no better than possibly the 3rd best heavyweight right now.

I agree. Regardless of the BoxRec ratings which rates Fury number one, I would rate him number three.

[AngryGoon38]

Boxing history is littered with rivalries that never resulted in bouts being made, but ultimately didn’t affect the legacies of either fighter to any great degree.

The same will almost certainly apply to both Usyk and Fury.

Here’s an old post of mine from years ago (fights that marinated [could have happened], but never did... or happened well past their expiry dates, when it was far too late):

• Barry McGuigan vs. Azumah Nelson (1986)
• Donovan 'Razor' Ruddock vs. Corrie Sanders (1990)
• Donovan 'Razor' Ruddock vs. Evander 'The Real Deal' Holyfield (1992)
• Donovan 'Razor' Ruddock vs. Riddick 'Big Daddy' Bowe (1992)
• Evander ‘The Real Deal’ Holyfield vs. Lennox Lewis (1996 instead of 1999)
• Evander ‘The Real Deal’ Holyfield vs. Mike Tyson (1990 instead of 1997)
• Floyd Mayweather Jr. vs. Antonio Margarito (2007)
• Floyd Mayweather Jr. vs. Kostya Tszyu (2004)
• Floyd Mayweather Jr. vs. Manny Pacquiao (2009)
• Floyd Mayweather Jr. vs. Paul Williams (2005)
• Floyd Mayweather Jr. vs. Shane Mosley (2005)
• George Foreman vs. Larry Holmes (1977, 1992 & 2002)
• George Foreman vs. Lennox Lewis (1998.)
• George Foreman vs. Mike Tyson (1990)
• George Foreman vs. Muhammad Ali II (1976)
• George Foreman vs. Sonny Liston (1969)
• Herbie Hide vs. Jeremy Williams (1996)
• Herbie Hide vs. Tommy Morrison (1993)
• Herol ‘Bomber’ Graham vs. Chris Eubank (1990)
• Herol ‘Bomber’ Graham vs. Marvin Hagler (1987)
• Herol ‘Bomber’ Graham vs. Nigel Benn (1990)
• Herol ‘Bomber’ Graham vs. Steve Collins (1989)
• Herol 'Bomber' Graham vs. Kirkland Laing (1980)
• Ike Ibeabuchi vs. Evander Holyfield (1999)
• Ike Ibeabuchi vs. Lennox Lewis (1999)
• Ike Ibeabuchi vs. Mike Tyson (1999)
• Ike Ibeabuchi vs. Oliver McCall (1999)
• Ike Ibeabuchi vs. Vitali Klitschko (1999)
• Ike Ibeabuchi vs. Wladimir Klitschko (1999)
• James Toney vs. Bernard Hopkins (1993)
• James Toney vs. Chris Eubank (1993)
• James Toney vs. Mike Tyson (2003)
• James Toney vs. Nigel Benn (1993)
• James Toney vs. Steve Collins (1992)
• Joe Calzaghe vs. Carl Froch (2008.)
• Joe Calzaghe vs. Steve Collins (1997)
• Joe Calzaghe vs. Sven Ottke (2002)
• Joe Frazier vs. Kenny Norton (1973)
• Jose Luis Castillo vs. Diego Corrales III (2005)
• Juan Manuel Márquez vs. Eric Morales (2003)
• Julian Jackson vs. Michael Nunn (1989)
• Julian Jackson vs. Sugar Ray Leonard (1989)
• Julian Jackson vs. Tommy Hearns (1989)
• Kostya Tszyu vs. Oscar De La Hoya (1997)
• Kostya Tszyu vs. Vernon Forrest (1995)
• Marvin Hagler vs. Mike McCallum (1987)
• Marvin Hagler vs. Tommy Hearns II (1985)
• Michael Moorer vs. Virgil Hill (1990)
• Mike Tyson vs. David Tua (2000)
• Mike Tyson vs. Riddick Bowe (1996)
• Mike Tyson vs. Vitali Klitschko (2000)
• Mike Tyson vs. Wladimir Klitschko (2000)
• Naseem Hamed vs. Juan Manuel Márquez (1997)
• Naseem Hamed vs. Manny Pacquiao (2000)
• Nigel Benn vs. Chris Eubank III (1994)
• Oscar De La Hoya vs. Felix Trinidad II (2000)
• Pernell 'Sweet Pea' Whitaker vs. Meldrick Taylor (1991)
• Pernell 'Sweet Pea' Whitaker vs. 'Terrible' Terry Norris (1995)
• Ray Mercer vs. Evander ‘The Real Deal’ Holyfield II (1995)
• Ray Mercer vs. Lennox Lewis II (1995)
• Ricky Hatton vs. Miguel Cotto (2005)
• Riddick Bowe vs. Lennox Lewis (1996)
• Roberto Duran vs. Herol ‘Bomber’ Graham (1989)
• Roberto Duran vs. Julian Jackson (1989)
• Roberto Duran vs. Nigel Benn (1989)
• Roberto Duran vs. Thomas Hearns (1980 instead of 1984)
• Rocky Marciano vs. Floyd Patterson (1956)
• Rocky Marciano vs. Ingemar Johansson (1956)
• Rocky Marciano vs. Sonny Liston (1956)
• Roy Jones Jr. vs. Bernard Hopkins (2002)
• Roy Jones Jr. vs. Dariusz Michalczewski (2002)
• Roy Jones Jr. vs. Evander ‘The Real Deal’ Holyfield (2003)
• Roy Jones Jr. vs. Gerald McClellan (1995)
• Roy Jones Jr. vs. James Toney II (2003)
• Roy Jones Jr. vs. Joe Calzaghe (1997)
• Roy Jones Jr. vs. Mike McCallum (1994 instead of 1996)
• Roy Jones Jr. vs. Mike Tyson (2003)
• Sergio Martinez vs. Antonio Margarito II (2004 or 2009)
• Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Aaron Pryor (1982)
• Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Marvin Hagler II (1988.)
• Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Michael Nunn (1988.)
• Sugar Ray Leonard vs. Tommy Hearns II (1987 instead of 1989)
• 'Terrible' Terry Norris vs. Felix 'Tito' Trinidad (1997)
• Tommy Morrison vs. 'Smokin' Bert Cooper (1993)

• Notes: Some of these super-fights actually got to the stage of the negotiation table but the boxers either couldn’t agree terms or the contest was eventually cancelled for one reason or another.

• You may also notice that some of the fights in my list actually took place, but unfortunately at the wrong time, which is why I’ve still included them (by expressing a more appropriate year).

• I have estimated the years that the fight could have happened… or where I think negotiations actually took place but the contest never materialised.

• In my mind, there’s no point in speculating about “The Best Fights That Never Happened”… if they could have never taken place due to both fighters competing in completely different eras or weight classes. It’s far better to discuss bouts that were theoretically highly-possible.

Nice list of hypothetical bouts.
I like the last one Alot. Tommy Morrison vs Bert Cooper.
Morrison vs Bruce Seldon would've been Very Interesting as well. They could've duked it out in the early 90s.
Seldon seemed to be frozen with fear vs Tyson.
I think he would've done well vs Morrison,win,lose,or draw.

[Tony1244]

The ones I wanted were Ali-Foreman 1976, Tyson-Foreman 1990, and one you didn't mention Mayweather-GGG. Also Liston-Quarry 67-68.

[RScarf1]

I don't think it harms Usyk's legacy if he doesn't fight Fury. Usyk can only fight active boxers. It is Fury's decision if he chooses to remain retired. A lot of fights that never happened had boxers who accomplished a lot in their careers, so it didn't hurt their legacy as much. Fury will be inducted into the Hall of Fame someday, but his resume is too weak to be considered an all time great in my opinion.

[Lackeos]

Fury is definitely the best heavyweight right now. And, given his wins over Wlad, Wilder, Wilder again, and to a lesser extent, Whyte, Chisora, Cunningham, etc.; he's definitely an ATG heavyweight. Ridiculous to claim that someone who can dominantly outbox Wlad isn't an ATG. Wlad himself was a borderline top 10 heavyweight all-time. But, of course, boxrec is all about bias, trolling, and posting idiotic opinions.

[RScarf1]

Fury is definitely the best heavyweight right now. And, given his wins over Wlad, Wilder, Wilder again, and to a lesser extent, Whyte, Chisora, Cunningham, etc.; he's definitely an ATG heavyweight. Ridiculous to claim that someone who can dominantly outbox Wlad isn't an ATG. Wlad himself was a borderline top 10 heavyweight all-time. But, of course, boxrec is all about bias, trolling, and posting idiotic opinions.

All Fury has to do is prove he is the best heavyweight of his time, but he said he is not interested in fighting Usyk or Joshua. Joshua beat Wladimir too and more definitively.

[DrDuke]

Fury is definitely the best heavyweight right now. And, given his wins over Wlad, Wilder, Wilder again, and to a lesser extent, Whyte, Chisora, Cunningham, etc.; he's definitely an ATG heavyweight. Ridiculous to claim that someone who can dominantly outbox Wlad isn't an ATG. Wlad himself was a borderline top 10 heavyweight all-time. But, of course, boxrec is all about bias, trolling, and posting idiotic opinions.

All Fury has to do is prove he is the best heavyweight of his time, but he said he is not interested in fighting Usyk or Joshua. Joshua beat Wladimir too and more definitively.

Joshua didn't beat Klit more definitively, as objectively it was at least a close fight, but more likely a Klit's fight before the stoppage. Joshua was hurt, down and outboxed before he managed to catch Klit. For a huge part Klit was in control, while against Fury he was outboxed widely himself.

[RScarf1]

Joshua didn't beat Klit more definitively, as objectively it was at least a close fight, but more likely a Klit's fight before the stoppage. Joshua was hurt, down and outboxed before he managed to catch Klit. For a huge part Klit was in control, while against Fury he was outboxed widely himself.

115-112 on two of the judges scorecards is not being "outboxed widely." Fury won by a decision. Joshua won by TKO in the eleventh round and Joshua was winning on two of the judges' scorecards 96-93 and 95-93. Klitschko was knocked down twice in the eleventh round. That is a more definitive win in my opinion.

[DrDuke]

Joshua didn't beat Klit more definitively, as objectively it was at least a close fight, but more likely a Klit's fight before the stoppage. Joshua was hurt, down and outboxed before he managed to catch Klit. For a huge part Klit was in control, while against Fury he was outboxed widely himself.

115-112 on two of the judges scorecards is not being "outboxed widely." Fury won by a decision. Joshua won by TKO in the eleventh round and Joshua was winning on two of the judges' scorecards 96-93 and 95-93. Klitschko was knocked down twice in the eleventh round. That is a more definitive win in my opinion.

Since you prefer to consider official scorecards in building own opinion, why for you Fury winning on all three is less convincing than Joshua wining on two?

Why should a KO win over a chinny boxer be necessarily better than outboxing him?

[RScarf1]

Since you prefer to consider official scorecards in building own opinion, why for you Fury winning on all three is less convincing than Joshua wining on two?

Why should a KO win over a chinny boxer be necessarily better than outboxing him?

Fury outboxed him according to the scorecards, but not significantly based on the scorecards and what I saw. Also, they both landed 23% of their punches. Since Wladimir is chinny as you described, why couldn't Fury knock him out? Fury has 23 wins by knockout out of 32 wins.

[DrDuke]

Since you prefer to consider official scorecards in building own opinion, why for you Fury winning on all three is less convincing than Joshua wining on two?

Why should a KO win over a chinny boxer be necessarily better than outboxing him?

Fury outboxed him according to the scorecards, but not significantly based on the scorecards and what I saw. Also, they both landed 23% of their punches. Since Wladimir is chinny as you described, why couldn't Fury knock him out? Fury has 23 wins by knockout out of 32 wins.

Fury has never been a one punch KO artist, although he has developed more power recently. A lot of his stoppages are technical.

As you have noticed, there indeed was a low output of connected punches in the Fury-Klit bout. Obviously, that helped the chinny boxer to survive, yet, despite the fact of low action and not the most reasonable scorecards, the bout was almost totally controlled by Fury.

Joshua was in control over Klit only during some early rounds, until he managed to comeback in the 11th. The only thing, where Joshua surpasses Fury, is punching power, so there was no surprise in Joshua stopping the chinny Klit instead of Fury, even despite the fact of having a worse performance overall.

[RScarf1]

Fury has never been a one punch KO artist, although he has developed more power recently. A lot of his stoppages are technical.

As you have noticed, there indeed was a low output of connected punches in the Fury-Klit bout. Obviously, that helped the chinny boxer to survive, yet, despite the fact of low action and not the most reasonable scorecards, the bout was almost totally controlled by Fury.

Joshua was in control over Klit only during some early rounds, until he managed to comeback in the 11th. The only thing, where Joshua surpasses Fury, is punching power, so there was no surprise in Joshua stopping the chinny Klit instead of Fury, even despite the fact of having a worse performance overall.

You make some valid points, although you seem to not want to give any credit to Klitschko for Fury not landing as much. I feel that both Fury and Joshua outboxed Klitschko overall by close margins and the judges' scores reflect that (Fury 115-112=3, Joshua at time of stoppage 96-93=3). I understand that there were other scores that were different. I also feel that Klitschko was hindered and hurt by illegal rabbit punches landed by Fury. The referee deducted only one point near the end of the fight.

All in all, a win by TKO or KO is more impressive in my opinion than a close decision even if it is unanimous. If it was a wide unanimous decision that Fury won by, then it would be more open to debate as to whether Fury or Joshua had the more impressive win over Klitschko. Some in the media felt that Fury vs. Klitschko was a close fight and I understand you may disagree with that view.