BoxRec Forum HW Top 15 ranking - Tyson Fury

[The Gratest]

He did relinquish The Ring belt when stating he'd retired Henry.

Edit: Just saw RKO's reply.

I'd put him at #1 just based on his larger body (no pun intended) of work at heavy compared to Usyk, although I rank Usyk's wins over AJ as more impressive than Fury's wins over Wilder.

The Ring magazine belt is not a real championship belt though. It's simply an ornament. So from my perspective the belt is meaningless. Giving it up just so the winner of Joshua-Usyk 2 can have it means nothing.

Out of Fury's own mouth it was strategic because he wants to be 3x Ring magazine champion just like Muhammad Ali and others who hold that distinction.

As for whether Usyk beating Joshua twice is better than Fury basically beating Wilder three times, I would say considering how far gone Fury was mentally and physically his comeback is far more impressive especially when you figure the bubble already burst on Joshua when he got stopped by Andy Ruiz.

If it's simply an ornament then Fury winning it for a 3rd time wouldn't hold any weight. It's not the belt itself though, it's the status it holds, and by relinquishing it, he throws that away. At the end of the day though, all belts are just trinkets/ornaments. The Ring belt was just a way of crowning the best between the current #1 and #2, and at that particular moment in time, it was between Usyk and Joshua.

As far as Ruiz bursting Joshua's bubble, does that suddenly negate all the wins over ranked opponents that Joshua had prior to that loss? No it does not, the same way that Lennox Lewis' KO by Rahman doesn't make his previous wins seem of any less value.
Fury's comeback from where he was mentally and physically should be commended, but that doesn't add weight to the fighters that Wilder had been KO'ing. Wilder's resume is severly lacking when compared to Joshua's, that's why I rank Usyk's victories higher.

[HomicideHenry]

I view it differently. One can make an argument that since 2015 Fury has been the consensus man to beat in order to be seen as the lineal heavyweight champion.

True he retired, officially, but upon coming back and defeating Wilder (I argue three times) plus Whyte who was the #1 contender for three years along with Otto Wallin who Joshua is set to fight next I find it more compelling than any claim that Usyk is number one.

Why? Usyk's only had four fights as a heavyweight. Chazz Witherspoon, Dereck Chisora, and the two Joshua fights. Considering how easy the Ukrainian made it look the first time around it was practically a foregone conclusion that Joshua would lose the rematch.

As for Joshua's wins throughout his career, people can argue however they want but upon closer inspection a lot of those guys were either on the tail end of their career (ie, Pulev & Povetkin) or were average at best contenders anyways. Never mind the fact that Joshua had an incredibly soft road to the title to begin with.

Not to say that Fury had some astounding career where he defeated a lot of great opponents because he didn't. There simply wasn't any great opponents out there. However, at the end of the day Joshua despite his gold medal pedigree proved to be the one with the glaring flaws and issues. Can he improve and turn it all around? Sure. But that is a what if.

Tyson Fury on the other hand keeps adapting and keeps having success in the ring. Kind of an irony that the man who did not qualify for the Olympics turned out to be the best heavyweight of his era basically.

[margaret thatcher]

if josh's record is flawed what does that make wilder's

aj after 2 years pro easily stopped dom breazeale in his first title defense. by comparison wilder fouhgt breazeale after 10+ years pro, 40 fights, and 10 defenses. dom's probably still a top 3 opponent wilder's beaten

wilder's only beaten 1 guy who would make aj's top 8, you can argue who the better fighter is, but josh clearly has a much better record.

[The Gratest]

I view it differently. One can make an argument that since 2015 Fury has been the consensus man to beat in order to be seen as the lineal heavyweight champion.

True he retired, officially, but upon coming back and defeating Wilder (I argue three times) plus Whyte who was the #1 contender for three years along with Otto Wallin who Joshua is set to fight next I find it more compelling than any claim that Usyk is number one.

Why? Usyk's only had four fights as a heavyweight. Chazz Witherspoon, Dereck Chisora, and the two Joshua fights. Considering how easy the Ukrainian made it look the first time around it was practically a foregone conclusion that Joshua would lose the rematch.

As for Joshua's wins throughout his career, people can argue however they want but upon closer inspection a lot of those guys were either on the tail end of their career (ie, Pulev & Povetkin) or were average at best contenders anyways. Never mind the fact that Joshua had an incredibly soft road to the title to begin with.

Not to say that Fury had some astounding career where he defeated a lot of great opponents because he didn't. There simply wasn't any great opponents out there. However, at the end of the day Joshua despite his gold medal pedigree proved to be the one with the glaring flaws and issues. Can he improve and turn it all around? Sure. But that is a what if.

Tyson Fury on the other hand keeps adapting and keeps having success in the ring. Kind of an irony that the man who did not qualify for the Olympics turned out to be the best heavyweight of his era basically.

Lineal has nothing to do with it. That's even less of value than The Ring belt that you so derided. I'm not sure how you can put any value on to that when the lineage was broken and the belt itself was created just for Fury, yet try to devalue The Ring belt which was awarded on merit. Doesn't make sense.

As for your second paragraph, i've already said put Fury at #1 based on his larger body of work at heavy compared to Usyk, so unsure why your trying to argue with something we agree upon?

Bloody hell, you criticise the level of Joshua's opposition, yet do so without casting an eye over Wilder's opponents? They were at the end of their careers? Wilder's best win is what, Ortiz? A guy no-one actually knows the age of yet looks like and could be as old as Geronimo?
Please tell me which of Wilder's opponents you rate higher than:
Klitschko
Parker
Povetkin
Pulev
Ruiz jr
Whyte
Hell, even Takam would be up there as one of Wilder's best wins if he'd fought him.

Joshua has been exposed and his flaws laid bare, but it's no disgrace in losing to someone as skilled and masterful as Usyk. Again though you're concentrating entirely on Joshua and not looking at Wilder. Has he not been just as much exposed, if not more, in his defeats? Joshua regrouped and did what he had to do to defeat Ruiz jr in a rematch (not his fault Ruiz jr was a fat pudding), and tried his best against Usyk, but came up short. Wilder hasn't managed to show anything new since his bubble was burst and had every excuse under the Sun(and seems to still do) for his defeats.

As for Fury being the best of his generation, no, that has not yet been determined. He has to fight Usyk or Joshua first before that title can be placed on him.

I also rate Usyk's wins over Joshua higher than Fury's over Wilder's as they were displays of utter masterful boxing ability over a much larger and more powerful opponent. Once Sugar Hill came in and told Fury to change his style, to manhandle and bulldoze the smaller Wilder (in the first fight Wilder weighed 11lbs less than Usyk did vs Joshua. Wilder the middleweight?), it turned into a sloppy bludgeoning contest rather than a display of skill. Not to take anything away from Fury, you fight to your strengths whilst taking away your opponent's.

[HomicideHenry]

Lineal was not made for Tyson Fury anyone who is a hardcore boxing purist knows that the lineal title goes all the way back to James Figg. So that's nonsense. It's the only title that has ever really truly mattered in boxing regardless of weight class because there is no politics or bias.

As for Wilder, he's not defeated anyone really of any great or good worth either. What makes him formidable is his combination of power and size and speed along with his reckless style that is somewhat unorthodox. I think many people would argue that Wilder potentially has what it takes to defeat Anthony Joshua by knockout as he's demonstrated heart, toughness and determination in the Fury fights.

[joshj909]

Lineal was not made for Tyson Fury anyone who is a hardcore boxing purist knows that the lineal title goes all the way back to James Figg. So that's nonsense. It's the only title that has ever really truly mattered in boxing regardless of weight class because there is no politics or bias.

As for Wilder, he's not defeated anyone really of any great or good worth either. What makes him formidable is his combination of power and size and speed along with his reckless style that is somewhat unorthodox. I think many people would argue that Wilder potentially has what it takes to defeat Anthony Joshua by knockout as he's demonstrated heart, toughness and determination in the Fury fights.

Ifs, buts and maybes. If he hasn't proven it then how can you rank him based on it? Was Chris Lovejoy in your top 10 before he lost?

[HomicideHenry]

Lineal was not made for Tyson Fury anyone who is a hardcore boxing purist knows that the lineal title goes all the way back to James Figg. So that's nonsense. It's the only title that has ever really truly mattered in boxing regardless of weight class because there is no politics or bias.

As for Wilder, he's not defeated anyone really of any great or good worth either. What makes him formidable is his combination of power and size and speed along with his reckless style that is somewhat unorthodox. I think many people would argue that Wilder potentially has what it takes to defeat Anthony Joshua by knockout as he's demonstrated heart, toughness and determination in the Fury fights.

Ifs, buts and maybes. If he hasn't proven it then how can you rank him based on it? Was Chris Lovejoy in your top 10 before he lost?

Never heard of Chris Lovejoy I'm mostly a fan of the heavyweight division I don't follow a lot of the lighter divisions. Anyways I rank him based on it because I honestly think you would have to kill Wilder to stop him, forever chasing the KO, and considering Joshua's flaws I think Wilder would defeat him.

And considering many textbook style boxers like Anthony Joshua never were able to really land anything of consequence on Fury, and considering Wilder is the only person to ever really give Fury any problems, I generally consider Wilder to be the second or third best heavyweight in the world.

[oogiebe]

Lineal was not made for Tyson Fury anyone who is a hardcore boxing purist knows that the lineal title goes all the way back to James Figg. So that's nonsense. It's the only title that has ever really truly mattered in boxing regardless of weight class because there is no politics or bias.

As for Wilder, he's not defeated anyone really of any great or good worth either. What makes him formidable is his combination of power and size and speed along with his reckless style that is somewhat unorthodox. I think many people would argue that Wilder potentially has what it takes to defeat Anthony Joshua by knockout as he's demonstrated heart, toughness and determination in the Fury fights.

Ifs, buts and maybes. If he hasn't proven it then how can you rank him based on it? Was Chris Lovejoy in your top 10 before he lost?

Never heard of Chris Lovejoy I'm mostly a fan of the heavyweight division I don't follow a lot of the lighter divisions. Anyways I rank him based on it because I honestly think you would have to kill Wilder to stop him, forever chasing the KO, and considering Joshua's flaws I think Wilder would defeat him.

And considering many textbook style boxers like Anthony Joshua never were able to really land anything of consequence on Fury, and considering Wilder is the only person to ever really give Fury any problems, I generally consider Wilder to be the second or third best heavyweight in the world.

You never heard of Chris Lovejoy. Guess you ain't a hardcore fan. (Oh, and he's a Hw)

[margaret thatcher]

Lineal was not made for Tyson Fury anyone who is a hardcore boxing purist knows that the lineal title goes all the way back to James Figg. So that's nonsense. It's the only title that has ever really truly mattered in boxing regardless of weight class because there is no politics or bias.

As for Wilder, he's not defeated anyone really of any great or good worth either. What makes him formidable is his combination of power and size and speed along with his reckless style that is somewhat unorthodox. I think many people would argue that Wilder potentially has what it takes to defeat Anthony Joshua by knockout as he's demonstrated heart, toughness and determination in the Fury fights.

so if wilder's resume doesnt matter to you, why does aj's?

[oogiebe]

Lineal was not made for Tyson Fury anyone who is a hardcore boxing purist knows that the lineal title goes all the way back to James Figg. So that's nonsense. It's the only title that has ever really truly mattered in boxing regardless of weight class because there is no politics or bias.

As for Wilder, he's not defeated anyone really of any great or good worth either. What makes him formidable is his combination of power and size and speed along with his reckless style that is somewhat unorthodox. I think many people would argue that Wilder potentially has what it takes to defeat Anthony Joshua by knockout as he's demonstrated heart, toughness and determination in the Fury fights.

so if wilder's resume doesnt matter to you, why does aj's?

Classic moving the goal posts.

[margaret thatcher]

fury to 1 btw, i actually think you can make a case usyk beating aj clearly without major struggle is better than fury beating wilder with life and death moments, but fury has spent longer in the division and hence been able to accumulate a deeper resume there

1 fury
2 usyk
3 wilder
4 josh
5 joyce

is my top 5

[oogiebe]

fury to 1 btw, i actually think you can make a case usyk beating aj clearly without major struggle is better than fury beating wilder with life and death moments, but fury has spent longer in the division and hence been able to accumulate a deeper resume there

1 fury
2 usyk
3 wilder
4 josh
5 joyce

is my top 5

100%

[The Gratest]

Lineal was not made for Tyson Fury anyone who is a hardcore boxing purist knows that the lineal title goes all the way back to James Figg. So that's nonsense. It's the only title that has ever really truly mattered in boxing regardless of weight class because there is no politics or bias.

As for Wilder, he's not defeated anyone really of any great or good worth either. What makes him formidable is his combination of power and size and speed along with his reckless style that is somewhat unorthodox. I think many people would argue that Wilder potentially has what it takes to defeat Anthony Joshua by knockout as he's demonstrated heart, toughness and determination in the Fury fights.

FFS Henry, what is it with you and reading comprehension? I've seen it mentioned on here about you before but now get to witness it first-hand.
First you seem to completely misunderstand what I said about ranking Fury #1, try to argue with something we agree upon.
Now you don't even bother to correctly read what I wrote about the Lineal BELT. I never said they made the Lineal title up (despite the lineage being broken just prior to Fury inheriting it). I said they made a BELT up for him, a Lineal champion BELT. That is what I was comparing, The Ring BELT against the trinket (Lineal BELT) they specifically made up for Fury.

Here he is with the worthless trinket.


So you can't compare Wilder's opposition to Joshua's then? Good to know my point has been made where you can't even offer up a direct reply.

It's Wilder's recklessness and lack of boxing fundamentals that got him exposed once he fought at a higher level. He has that power equalizer, but not much else. Again though, you're away on a tangent here, we're not actually discussing who would win between Joshua and Wilder, that's never been proven.

I'll make this as simple as I can, without the need to delve into if's and buts, lineal champions or anything else that will cause you to diverge where none is needed.

I'd rank Fury above Usyk based on Fury's number of higher level wins at HW.

I rate Usyk's wins over Joshua higher than Fury's wins over Wilder. This is based on Joshua facing and defeating a higher calibre of opponent than Wilder has.

[oogiebe]

All that said, AJ's resume is superior, but if you put a gun to my head, I'd bet on Wilder to KO AJ.

[Bandog]

All that said, AJ's resume is superior, but if you put a gun to my head, I'd bet on Wilder to KO AJ.

Wilder KOing AJ is a decent bet.

What's funny to me is the irony some don't get is that Fury's best win is against the "worst" skilled boxer. Face it, Wilder isn't as bad as most haters make him out to be. Otherwise, Fury's resume isn't very good.

No one can survive the heavyweight ranks of professional boxing without skills. He has knocked down or knocked out everyone he has fought.

[DrDuke]

It's ridiculous, how Fury makes fans to discuss total bullcrap like lineal championships or ways how to consider a fighter retired. And those discussions are endless. That's why you gotta love the Gypsy King.

[Bandog]

It's ridiculous, how Fury makes fans to discuss total bullcrap like lineal championships or ways how to consider a fighter retired. And those discussions are endless. That's why you gotta love the Gypsy King.

Lineal champs are obsolete. Most don't even know wtf it is.

[The Gratest]

All that said, AJ's resume is superior, but if you put a gun to my head, I'd bet on Wilder to KO AJ.

A bit extreme mate. You americans and your guns, jeez.

Oogiebe in his local betting shop.

[CMCanavessi]

It's ridiculous, how Fury makes fans to discuss total bullcrap like lineal championships or ways how to consider a fighter retired. And those discussions are endless. That's why you gotta love the Gypsy King.

Lineal champs are obsolete. Most don't even know wtf it is.

Might be for you, not for all of us, and certainly not "most" of us.

[HomicideHenry]

The funny thing is if and when Tyson Fury defeats Usyk becoming the undisputed champion everybody will say, "Now he's proven himself to be number one," when us guys who are really fans of this sport or division will point out that we always said he was the number one top heavyweight since 2015. Which goes to show that most so-called boxing fans are really political animals rather than sports fans. They care all about the politics rather than the facts.

[margaret thatcher]

fury aint the undisputed king of the division at all

[The Gratest]

Never heard of Chris Lovejoy, only interested in the Heavyweights. classic.

[tiny_acres]

fury to 1 btw, i actually think you can make a case usyk beating aj clearly without major struggle is better than fury beating wilder with life and death moments, but fury has spent longer in the division and hence been able to accumulate a deeper resume there

1 fury
2 usyk
3 wilder
4 josh
5 joyce

is my top 5

Exactly my top 5. After that it is a huge drop off

[oogiebe]

All that said, AJ's resume is superior, but if you put a gun to my head, I'd bet on Wilder to KO AJ.

A bit extreme mate. You americans and your guns, jeez.

Oogiebe in his local betting shop.

It's an expression mate.

[The Gratest]

All that said, AJ's resume is superior, but if you put a gun to my head, I'd bet on Wilder to KO AJ.

A bit extreme mate. You americans and your guns, jeez.

Oogiebe in his local betting shop.

It's an expression mate.

I know