BoxRec

Even with a victory over the other, Wilder/Fury couldn’t claim to be number one. Even Joshua can’t claim that spot until he’s beaten one/both of the others.

Guts wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 06:15 Even with a victory over the other, Wilder/Fury couldn’t claim to be number one. Even Joshua can’t claim that spot until he’s beaten one/both of the others.

No.1 is decided on who they have fought not if they fight each other,thats like saying errol spence cant be crowned no.1 in the welterweight division cause he hasnt fought thurman porter or pacman. In my opinion on who they have fought Joshua is no.1 even if fury beats wilder because although wilder is wbc champ who has he fought? He hasnt fought anyone of note and the 2 he was meant to fight povetkin and ortiz all of sudden fail drug tests? Bit fishy to me (i know he fought Ortiz but he wasnt even fit to fight) Joshua fought povetkin and dealt with him cause thats what champions do and thats what makes them no.1 in the division.

Joshua has depth and thickness to the resume with a high number of wins against a higher level, but only if you exclude what would be Fury's best two wins, which we can't.

The guy to be number one ranked for me is the guy who has beaten the better guys. I do not care how many, just the better guys and nothing on the record of AJ would stand up to an away win over Wilder. Throw on top beating a fresher Klit and he has to be number one.

Win v win, opponent vs opponent. Fury has the edge, clearly. If this dream unfolded, who would AJ have beaten that is better than the fresher, active Wlad and Wilder??

Beating the best guys in the world trumps beating the "next best guys".

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 08:10 Joshua has depth and thickness to the resume with a high number of wins against a higher level, but only if you exclude what would be Fury's best two wins, which we can't.

The guy to be number one ranked for me is the guy who has beaten the better guys. I do not care how many, just the better guys and nothing on the record of AJ would stand up to an away win over Wilder. Throw on top beating a fresher Klit and he has to be number one.

Win v win, opponent vs opponent. Fury has the edge, clearly. If this dream unfolded, who would AJ have beaten that is better than the fresher, active Wlad and Wilder??

Beating the best guys in the world trumps beating the "next best guys".

Good post

If we are talking about rating someone as a champion, then Joshua, by miles, Fury lost the plot after beating Wlad, pulled out of a rematch, and lost almost 3 years of his career.

Consistency counts too, Joshua continues to defend his titles, and beat what is put in front of him, whilst Fury was sitting on his arse drinking and snorting coke.

Joshua. better resume, better fighter in general, just better. Also has a win against a better version of Wlad.

jamesmcdonnell wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 08:49 If we are talking about rating someone as a champion, then Joshua, by miles, Fury lost the plot after beating Wlad, pulled out of a rematch, and lost almost 3 years of his career.

Consistency counts too, Joshua continues to defend his titles, and beat what is put in front of him, whilst Fury was sitting on his arse drinking and snorting coke.

Which is why I wouldn't rate him as #1 now, if he beats Wilder the slate is clean.
Of course then the fight between the 2 will be made, it will be huge, and settle all arguments.

Coco wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 10:07

jamesmcdonnell wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 08:49 If we are talking about rating someone as a champion, then Joshua, by miles, Fury lost the plot after beating Wlad, pulled out of a rematch, and lost almost 3 years of his career.

Consistency counts too, Joshua continues to defend his titles, and beat what is put in front of him, whilst Fury was sitting on his arse drinking and snorting coke.

Which is why I wouldn't rate him as #1 now, if he beats Wilder the slate is clean.
Of course then the fight between the 2 will be made, it will be huge, and settle all arguments.

So two good wins in 5 years beats what joshua has done in the same period?

Topsy turvy logic

Ah....sorry misread, yes settled when fury and joshua meet.

Fury. He would have the best CV and would have held more titles.

It’s not by a country mile but that means fury would have held:
The English
Irish
Commonwealth ?
British
European
2 intercontinental
The WBA super
IBO
IBF
WBO
WBC
And Ring titles

Plus beaten the number 1 in the division, (I’m not sure if wlad was number 1 when AJ fought, him) plus the number 2 in the division in wilder. Del and Cunningham were also ranked top 10 at the time fury fought them as well I believe.

Whyte is a good scalp for AJ now but at the time they fought he was ranked nowhere.

Aj has realistically beaten povetkin who was the number 3, Parker who was the number 3, and wlad who I think was number 2. Dominic might have been top 10, not sure about takam. So it is close. Either man could argue a case for being number 1. I’d be tempted to go with the boxrec ranking

Riddick Blowe wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 09:08 Also has a win against a better version of Wlad.

Flip side of the coin. A Wlad who looked better as he was in with an inferior opponent

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:46

Riddick Blowe wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 09:08 Also has a win against a better version of Wlad.

Flip side of the coin. A Wlad who looked better as he was in with an inferior opponent

Anyone with eyes could see Wlad was much improved for the Joshua fight, regardless of the opposition.

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:48

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:46

Riddick Blowe wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 09:08 Also has a win against a better version of Wlad.

Flip side of the coin. A Wlad who looked better as he was in with an inferior opponent

Anyone with eyes could see Wlad was much improved for the Joshua fight, regardless of the opposition.

How could they see that? What do you mean?

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:51

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:48

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:46

Flip side of the coin. A Wlad who looked better as he was in with an inferior opponent

Anyone with eyes could see Wlad was much improved for the Joshua fight, regardless of the opposition.

How could they see that? What do you mean?

I can not understand how anyone can argue that a 41 year old WLAD was an improved opponent.
Joshua was just inexperienced that made Wlad look improved.
You do not improve at 41

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:51

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:48

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:46

Flip side of the coin. A Wlad who looked better as he was in with an inferior opponent

Anyone with eyes could see Wlad was much improved for the Joshua fight, regardless of the opposition.

How could they see that? What do you mean?

Wlad was clearly better than he was against Fury. He actually came to fight, probably knowing it was his last chance. Plus he didn’t have all the out of the ring issues that were going on during the Fury build-up.

tiny_acres wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:58

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:51

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:48

Anyone with eyes could see Wlad was much improved for the Joshua fight, regardless of the opposition.

How could they see that? What do you mean?

I can not understand how anyone can argue that a 41 year old WLAD was an improved opponent.
Joshua was just inexperienced that made Wlad look improved.
You do not improve at 41

I’m obviously not saying he improved as a fighter. I’m saying he put in an improved performance, which is completely different.

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 14:08

tiny_acres wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:58

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:51

How could they see that? What do you mean?

I can not understand how anyone can argue that a 41 year old WLAD was an improved opponent.
Joshua was just inexperienced that made Wlad look improved.
You do not improve at 41

I’m obviously not saying he improved as a fighter. I’m saying he put in an improved performance, which is completely different.

My opinion is that he put in an improved performance because of Joshua's inexperience at the time.
Would he of looked improved facing the same Fury that beat him? We will never know

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 14:07

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:51

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:48

Anyone with eyes could see Wlad was much improved for the Joshua fight, regardless of the opposition.

How could they see that? What do you mean?

Wlad was clearly better than he was against Fury. He actually came to fight, probably knowing it was his last chance. Plus he didn’t have all the out of the ring issues that were going on during the Fury build-up.

As said already. Flip side of the coin. A Wlad who looked better as he was in with an inferior opponent

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 15:03

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 14:07

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 13:51

How could they see that? What do you mean?

Wlad was clearly better than he was against Fury. He actually came to fight, probably knowing it was his last chance. Plus he didn’t have all the out of the ring issues that were going on during the Fury build-up.

As said already. Flip side of the coin. A Wlad who looked better as he was in with an inferior opponent

No doubt you can argue it both ways if you’re so inclined, but for me Wlad looked far better and more up for a fight from the first bell against Joshua than he did against Fury (or even Jennings for that matter, which he won).

I'd say fury was no1 if he beat Wilder , fury beat the man in wlad the AJ picked up the pieces atter if fury beats Wilder he'll of beat two champions in there backyard .

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 08:10 Joshua has depth and thickness to the resume with a high number of wins against a higher level, but only if you exclude what would be Fury's best two wins, which we can't.

The guy to be number one ranked for me is the guy who has beaten the better guys. I do not care how many, just the better guys and nothing on the record of AJ would stand up to an away win over Wilder. Throw on top beating a fresher Klit and he has to be number one.

Win v win, opponent vs opponent. Fury has the edge, clearly. If this dream unfolded, who would AJ have beaten that is better than the fresher, active Wlad and Wilder??

Beating the best guys in the world trumps beating the "next best guys".

Fresher klitschko? Wlad and fury hardly threw a punch thats why he was fresher,AJ beat a more dangerous Klitschko. On top of this who has wilder fought for you to say he is the best out there? Klitschko beat everyone out there from top to bottom but wilder? No way. AJ's record stands head and shoulders above fury's record at present.

thechump wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 16:35

tobyh5 wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 08:10 Joshua has depth and thickness to the resume with a high number of wins against a higher level, but only if you exclude what would be Fury's best two wins, which we can't.

The guy to be number one ranked for me is the guy who has beaten the better guys. I do not care how many, just the better guys and nothing on the record of AJ would stand up to an away win over Wilder. Throw on top beating a fresher Klit and he has to be number one.

Win v win, opponent vs opponent. Fury has the edge, clearly. If this dream unfolded, who would AJ have beaten that is better than the fresher, active Wlad and Wilder??

Beating the best guys in the world trumps beating the "next best guys".

Fresher klitschko? Wlad and fury hardly threw a punch thats why he was fresher,AJ beat a more dangerous Klitschko. On top of this who has wilder fought for you to say he is the best out there? Klitschko beat everyone out there from top to bottom but wilder? No way. AJ's record stands head and shoulders above fury's record at present.

Wlad threw more punches against Aj because he could hit him he couldn't hit Fury why can't people accept that?

He had less to lose against Aj aswell

Without wishing to be overly simplistic, Joshua is clearly number 1 at the moment and Wilder is number 2. I’m not sure how one can logically answer that beating #2 makes you #1.

It certainly sets up a great fight.

it depends, i can see how beating the #2 could put someone in the top spot if things are close at the top. if were just talking a basic ordering of things, someone has to be in the number 1 spot etc, it can sometimes be enough

if were talking about making an asbolute man of the division, far above all others, no questions asked, hes the champ etc, then no , the winner of wilder-fury needs to beat aj, and aj needs to beat them for that. aj currently is the number 1 rather clearly, but not to the extent of this latter type of kingpin

Loynesy wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 18:50 Without wishing to be overly simplistic, Joshua is clearly number 1 at the moment and Wilder is number 2. I’m not sure how one can logically answer that beating #2 makes you #1.

It certainly sets up a great fight.

Because fury also beat the number 1. Where as AJ beat wlad when he was number 2.

Finn wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 19:16

Loynesy wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 18:50 Without wishing to be overly simplistic, Joshua is clearly number 1 at the moment and Wilder is number 2. I’m not sure how one can logically answer that beating #2 makes you #1.

It certainly sets up a great fight.

Because fury also beat the number 1. Where as AJ beat wlad when he was number 2.

And that doesn't mean shit.

Wlad isn't the number 1 now, AJ is. Wilder is the number 2.

When fury beat wlad he rightly become number 1. He then buggers off on a bender & loses that spot to AJ. So he has to beat AJ again to become number 1.