Just what were Tyson Fury's Title Fights?

[SteveO]

He had an undefeated run from 2015-2024 as linear champion.

Ah yes. The non-existent belt he carried and retired around 10 times in that time.

That's the one

[keithmoonhangover]

I'm going to use some olde time words to describe it. After his failed tests, Fury had a claim to the heavyweight championship. With that in mind, I don't class fighting Sefer Seferi as any kind of title 'defence'.

[Boxerbeetle]

I personally don’t hold Fury’s failed tests against him - 90% of heavyweight boxers are on PEDs.

[Boxerbeetle]

And the idea that Joshua is ‘clean’ because he hasn’t failed a test is laughable btw. I like him, but absolutely no way he’s clean. The only top heavy I’d be willing to stake any money on being PED free is Wilder (not because I particularly trust him, but just feel his style wouldn’t hugely benefit so maybe not worth it).

[gilgamesh]

I personally don’t hold Fury’s failed tests against him - 90% of heavyweight boxers are on PEDs.

I'm with you on that. I'm so avidly of this opinion that I don't even take James Toney's WBA Heavyweight title win over John Ruiz away from him.

It is interesting that everyone feels this way pretty much about Tyson Fury having so relatively few title defenses. It definitely makes he and AJ's standing All time a lot closer, if many of his other bouts weren't considered title bouts.

I even considered his Draw against Deontay Wilder in their 1st bout to be a successful defense of his Lineal crown, but if you all believe he simply had no lineal crown then that means he was just a challenger that didn't win the belt as opposed to a fellow defending Champion who also kept his title. It makes that bout worth more for Wilder than it's worth for Fury historically.

[KiwiRider]

By time he fought wilder even the ring belt was vacant

Good point. I forgot about the Ring belt.
There was also never a time during his reign when he was undisputed or generally considered the world #1.
When he beat Wlad, there was Wilder, and when he finally beat Wilder, there was AJ.

Will Usyk not be generally considered number 1 if all Wardleys fans disagree?

Uysk cleaned out the division, Fury beat Klitschko then bottled the rematch while Wilder held the other belt. It isn't even close.

[Boxerbeetle]

I personally don’t hold Fury’s failed tests against him - 90% of heavyweight boxers are on PEDs.

I'm with you on that. I'm so avidly of this opinion that I don't even take James Toney's WBA Heavyweight title win over John Ruiz away from him.

It is interesting that everyone feels this way pretty much about Tyson Fury having so relatively few title defenses. It definitely makes he and AJ's standing All time a lot closer, if many of his other bouts weren't considered title bouts.

I even considered his Draw against Deontay Wilder in their 1st bout to be a successful defense of his Lineal crown, but if you all believe he simply had no lineal crown then that means he was just a challenger that didn't win the belt as opposed to a fellow defending Champion who also kept his title. It makes that bout worth more for Wilder than it's worth for Fury historically.

Yep and to take it a step further - I don’t pay any attention to controversial decisions either. Wilder took his first loss in Fury 1, Taylor took his first loss in Catterall 1, etc. No need to give this corrupt sport any more legitimacy than it deserves by going along with the official results; we all know they are dodgy.

Where the decision is controversial or arguable, I’m happy to go with the officials. But where the is blatant, I’ll simply ignore it when considering a fighter’s record / form.

[gilgamesh]

I think the draw in Wilder vs Fury 1 is fair. People don't give Wilder enough credit for how well he did early in that bout I don't think.

[gregregegg]

I personally don’t hold Fury’s failed tests against him - 90% of heavyweight boxers are on PEDs.

I'm with you on that. I'm so avidly of this opinion that I don't even take James Toney's WBA Heavyweight title win over John Ruiz away from him.

It is interesting that everyone feels this way pretty much about Tyson Fury having so relatively few title defenses. It definitely makes he and AJ's standing All time a lot closer, if many of his other bouts weren't considered title bouts.

I even considered his Draw against Deontay Wilder in their 1st bout to be a successful defense of his Lineal crown, but if you all believe he simply had no lineal crown then that means he was just a challenger that didn't win the belt as opposed to a fellow defending Champion who also kept his title. It makes that bout worth more for Wilder than it's worth for Fury historically.

Yep and to take it a step further - I don’t pay any attention to controversial decisions either. Wilder took his first loss in Fury 1, Taylor took his first loss in Catterall 1, etc. No need to give this corrupt sport any more legitimacy than it deserves by going along with the official results; we all know they are dodgy.

Where the decision is controversial or arguable, I’m happy to go with the officials. But where the is blatant, I’ll simply ignore it when considering a fighter’s record / form.

I dream to be this… but ultimently there’s two many to remember so I am relient on boxrec…

For me the biggest one is GGG vs canelo 1 (and to a lesser extent 2)… that bad judging has completly redefined GGGs legacy and it’s really not fair. That 118 card is criminal and obviously should have been investigated and deleted somehow… and that is universally accepted.

I also have my own opinion ones… only one I can think of is how differently I score Katy Taylor and therfor her career for the record I like her as personality, she’s helped women’s boxing an insane amount but… I had her losing both person and all 3 Serrano fights and both persoon fights. Basically gives her a record looking more like chisora than Usyk…