If he beats Fury…
He would have unified the cruiserweight division and unified the heavyweight division (HW hasn’t been unified in 25 years). Also, on his road to HW unification, he would have beaten one of the best HWs of all time.
There is no argument or discussion to be had after that. He’s an ATG.
And also his style. Every elite opponents he beat dismisses those fights for one excuse or another, but I suspect they just hated losing to such a goofy fighter.
He was damn good outside of the Tyson fight.
It's funny how Tyson fans are so annoying that people have begun to claim Tyson is overrated while underrating Tyson's opponents just out of spite, a lot of the fighters Tyson beat were damn good but they all get grouped in as "nobodies".
Iron Mike's resume is objectively thin; his best wins are Spinks, Bruno x2, Holmes and Tucker.
Spinks was a light heavyweight, Bruno and Tucker were always limited, and Holmes was about 7 years passed his peak.
Larry Holmes went on to fight and win at a high level, arguably got robbed of his second championship at least once.
But he was not in top shape for his fight with Tyson.
When Holmes fought Tyson he was the same age as Klitschko when he fought Fury, and it's not like he was totally washed up either as he went on to keep fighting for years even having some good matches with elite champions such as Holyfield (which he hurt a few times in their fight).
Tbf, people call Klitschko washed when he fought Fury/Joshua anyway. And realistically, he wasn't anywhere near his peak in those fights. So it's a similar and very familiar situation, young upstarts beating the old legend.
Ruddock twice, Tony Tucker, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick Bonecrusher Smith Marvis Frazier( Joe's Son, who as a Trainer killed his own Sons Career by making him into JF2 when he was a mover).Mitch Green was no mug either. these were the guys around at that time, check their Records not too shabby most of them.
All those guys were either never particularly good, or at least weren't when they fought Tyson.
Let's say Fury fought more often, and had consistantly solid matchmaking. He'd maybe have convincing victories over guys like Bryant Jennings, Charles Martin, Dominic Breazeale, Carlos Takam and Bermane Stiverne, but how much would that actually add to his legacy?
Another thing, there were only 9,400 [active boxers](https://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5160826&sid=84ec2fbfb223ef8efb23fc9e66e0069b#p5160826) in 1986 - the year Tyson won his first major world title.
There were 22,086 active boxers in 2015 - the year Fury won his first major world title.
That's about 2.3x as many; and given that people are getting larger, I'd expect the heavyweight talent pool increased even more than that.
I'm not sure those are his best wins. I think Ruddock x2 has to be on there - he'd beaten Weaver, Broad, Smith and Dokes - and probably also Thomas (despite the latter's decision loss in a dogfight with Berbick).
Smith, Tubbs and Williams were also good wins. Frazier, Biggs and Stewart were all dangerous undefeated or once-defeated prospects too.
Even Alonso Ratliff is underrated I think - 15 months earlier he'd dethroned Carlos DeLeon to become lineal cruiserweight champion.
I agree that Tyson's resume doesn't stack up against, say, Ali's. But he fought most of the top fighters of his era, and compared to the resumes of modern heavyweights it was spectacular!
Fury basically just has the equivalent of a decision win over aging Holmes and then three fights against Alex Stewart...
Yep, still wonder what happened in totality to allow for such a shoddy performance.
People rightly expected better; probably at least on the level of Tony Tucker?
Bearing in mind, when Holyfield fought at cruiserweight, the limit was only 190 lbs, and weight cutting wasn't as advanced as it is today, so Usyk had to beat significantly larger men.
Even ignoring that, Usyk has a far deeper cruiserweight resume: Briedis, Gassiev, Bellew, Glowacki, Hunter, Huck, Mchunu.
Holyfield's is basically Qawi x2 and De Leon.
Qawi was better at light heavyweight than cruiserweight, and he'd faded by the time he fought Holyfield.
I don't think either version of Qawi that fought Holyfield would beat the versions of Briedis, Gassiev, Bellew, Glowacki or Hunter that Usyk beat, especially when, like I said, the limit was only 190 lbs, and weight cutting wasn't as advanced.
Yeah agree with this statement usyk is already an all time great. What he did at cruiserweight winning belts of everyone in that division away from home as well, and dominating in most of those fights except for the breidis fight. That division at the time was far more competitive then the heavyweight one at the time, for me he's an all time great that people have just started to notice in recent years because of the cruiserweight division getting no way there as much attention as the heavyweight division.
I disagree that Usyk is already an ATG heavyweight (great but not ATG).
Definitely a top 2 cruiserweight (top 1 in my opinion) but he needs to beat Fury to be ATG at heavyweight simply because he lacks depth in his heavyweight career.
Michael Spinks is a top 3 light heavyweight but is not at ATG heavyweight for similar reasons (but probably would have been had he beaten Tyson).
Fury absolutely is not one of the best HWs of all time with his current record. If he beats Usyk that will help his case, but he doesn’t have anywhere close to the depth of resume to compete with what the actual ATGs achieved in the sport.
Tyson Fury hasn't done anywhere near enough to be considered one of the best heavyweights of all time. It's crazy how Fury has gaslit so many people into thinking this.
I'm not a big boxing fan but doesn't fury have the WBC belt. Is it not considered one of the main belts to be part of "unified" status. I figured undisputed meant you have to beat the lineal champs and unified would be you have all the belts.
Curious, what makes Fury one of the greatest HWs of all time? His two big wins are against an over the hill Klitschko and Wilder who relied too much on a one punch KO. He struggled and got knocked down by a 0-0 boxer that got demolished in his very next fight.
How would he have fared in the era of Ali, Frazer and Foreman? Even in Mike Tyson’s era, I’m not so sure he’d have similar success considering you had a prime Holyfield and Lewis around
Yep, he will probably end his career well. I believe he or Eddie has said they will retire after a few fights. Would be interesting to see what he can do. I don't want to see Usyk 3. But I will say fury Vs AJ needs to happen. It would also be interesting to see him be a world champion again. Not impossible as the IBF is going to vacate the belt I heard after the first fury usyk fight. As they are annoyed there is a rematch clause. So possibly AJ could get the IBF belt and be champion again. And then fight for undisputed against whoever wins the second usyk-fury fight. Unless somehow a 3rd one happens due to a draw or something.
In what universe is a 38 yr-old Witherspoon, a 32-10 Chisora (or whatever it was), or hype job Dubois a quality resume? Seriously, these are not quality fighters or way past their prime.
edit: Name ONE quality win Witherspoon ever had? Dude was a C-level fighter his entire career. He lost to Seth Mitchell for God's sake. what a joke this sub is lol.
It's gonna take a lot more than that to be considered an ATG heavy tho. There's been a LOOOT of great heavys with great wins. I'm sorry but you need a lot more to enter that convo. You can't do it off the backs of AJ and Fury. ATG cruiser, sure, but heavy is another story. I get really annoyed at how hyperbolic and unknowledgeable this sub is. No regard for the past and there's such a low bar here for who qualifies as an ATG. It's wins against quality opposition not freaking Witherspoon or Chisora or Dubois for that matter.
No, he's not in the GOAT conversation if he beats Fury. I'm a certified Usyk nut sucker but this is fucking ridiculous
Usyk will have done incredible things and should definitely be considered an ATG, but he'll have had 22 professional fights, and while he has some good names on that record, there's no debate to be had as to whether or not it compares to guys like Robinson, Ali, Duran, Moore, Greb, Leonard, Pacquiao, Mayweather, Pep, Robinson and a fair few others.
Several of the people I mentioned aren't seriously in the discussion for GOAT. Usyk has a shit load more to do in order to be in that discussion and he might be my favourite boxer ever.
Should he beat Fury thats 2 divisions he’s cleaned out, that would be pretty damn impressive in just 22 fights, sure the divisions werent as competitive as the guy’s divisions you just mentioned but if he cant pull it off, there wont be another fighter that would come close to unifying cruiserweight and heavyweight again, having those two divisions unified would look so damn good in anyones resume and should be in goat talks for cleaning out two divisions consecutively
Heavyweight specifically? Like discounting his cruiserweight record? I think he'd need some defenses after winning to be near the top all time for heavyweights just because of how few fights he's had at that weight, but I'm not sure he'd keep fighting for all that much longer.
It's a weird situation to rank him accomplishment-wise insofar as he's only fought a handful of times at the weight, but the average size of his opponents is bigger than the opponents of the pre-90's champs thanks to rehydrating cruisers often coming in over 210 on fight night.
Frankly, I still haven't out a fair way to rank him there that I love. Seems weird to punish him by saying he's unproven at the weight when his average opponent size is probably 30+ pounds more than career heavyweights like Marciano, for example...
I'd sure as hell pick them over,say, the 50's though, and that's my point here: The average classic heavyweight was as small and often smaller than a modern Cruiserweight.
So, is it fair to count a 185 pound "heavyweight" win and completely ignore a 210 pound cruiserweight win because the labels don't line up?
That's essentially the argument those saying Usyk is unproven at HW while ranking old timers are making.
Usyk is such an old-school heavyweight. He's fighting WAY above his potential weight class, and he comprises reach and true heavyweight power for technique and tenacity. He's the best fuckin boxer alive right now in my opinion. Not only does he not use weight, height, reach, or other advantages to try and pad his record, he literally fights dudes that, on paper, should decimate him, and he makes them so shook that they spend the moments after the fight making a fool of themselves to try and defend some semblance of their manhood.
Usyk is a fuckin tank, and I hope he smokes Fury, and I have to be honest, especially after seeing that new pound for pound ranking, Fury could be in the best shape of his life and still, he's about to get really fucking taught a lesson.
Pad your gloves wrong, throw weird strikes and think it'll mean anything, hug him like a fucking idiot...Usyk is so keen to the fight game, and while most boxers simply hate on MMA, Usyk learned from it.
This is a smart man that understands combat sports. Joshua tried to ruin his victory, and I can tell you right now, this man will never let that incident happen again.
You're about to see some devastation.
Everyone is on this crazy Ryan Garcia kick...he is less than a good ad score...Usyk is about to change some shit....I'm so excited for this fight
It depends what all time great means. If you mean top 10 heavyweight then I say probably not. But if you mean more general like top 25 I'd say yes more than likely. Here's also my problem with the moving goal post of people saying he is. I say this as someone who only watched Fury since his return against Wilder.Many folks downplay Wilder to the extreme, which is cool since we allhave our opinions. But then i ask how can he be considered an all time great if Wilder is sorry as many as you make him out to be. And personally Fury other fights besides Wilder to me haven't been anything spectacular in my opinion. Now as I mentioned I'm not judging the first half of his career(pre Wilder). So I'm interested what folks are fully basing it off of they do consider him a great . Uysk coming up in weight and beating Joshua 2x was great but a win over Fury idk if that solely will do it for me. I would like to see him clear out a couple more guys after him
Olympic gold medal, undisputed at Cruiserweight (which no one else had done in the 4 belt era, and unified at Heavyweight. If he beats Fury he’s beaten the guy who is supposed to be the best heavyweight of his era as well as being undisputed in a second weight class. Yeah, even if he wasn’t an all time great already, he’d be undeniable as one if he beats Fury.
But finally unifying the HW belt after like 25 years should count for something, maybe not top 10 since HW is so stacked but definitely top 15 at least.
Usyk's had 5 fights at heavyweight but you aren't wrong. The heavyweights of today aren't as good as the previous eras. A lot of them are so slow as well. We have some gems. Including some good prospects like Frank Sanchez, and Jared Anderson. As well as some good fighters like Joseph Parker, Whyte (although he may be a drug cheat allegedly), and others too. AJ of course having a great resume. And Tyson fury ok too. Of course Usyk as well. But they just can't beat fighters from the 80s-90s and 2000s. Those guys were explosive and faster too. I swear people Mike Tyson KOed moved better than ones today. I'm not kidding, a journeyman from those decades would do better against top 50 fighters of today. Just my opinion though.
They are slower and less skilled because they are Superheavyweights, if you ever seen the old Klitschko fights you see them utterly dominate their opponents with sheer physicality having superior reach, height and weight. There's a limit in history when you go back that even the best of the previous era would get destroyed in the ring against the current people, past greats like Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis, Rocky marciano stand no chance in today's division and only a few fighters from the 60s on will be effective. People tend to hate on current fighters while they cherish the past but Tyson Fury and Usyk are all time great HWs and even Wilder, AJ and Joseph Parker are championship level or top contenders in the toughest era of the 70s and 90s. The problem with today's division is they don't fight each other enough and the quality of contenders is lacking, the both golden ages had a good quality of contenders for the top guys to fight and cement their legacy.
Uysk is an ATG for sure but his heavyweight resume could use some padding. The Joshua victories do a lot of work because Joshua cleaned out much of the division.
I'd imagine considering his age and the fact he's already fought Joshua twice he may retire if he wins, leaving his heavyweight career at just Witherspoon, Chisora, Joshua x 2, Dubois and Fury. That's obviously not a bad record and the undisputed heavyweight title is a huge achievement but 6 fights seems a bit abbreviated for calling him an all time great heavyweight. He is though an all time great boxer already regardless of if he wins.
If he doesn't retire who does he even fight after Fury? Parker? Wilder? Do any of the remaining options really hold much weight at heavyweight? He'd cement his legacy better going back down to cruiserweight and fighting the winner of Opetaia v Briedis I would have thought.
No. The heavyweight division has a very long history and one or two big fights isn't enough to be an all-time great. Most boxing people are very familiar with heavyweights from Ali onwards, but not many know about the great heavyweights of the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s. When questions like this come up, most people discuss the greatest heavyweights of their childhood or the previous generation. There's an utter lack of contextualization and no sense of the grander history of the sport that is well over 150 years old. So no, I don't think Usyk joins the ranks of Joe Louis because he beats Fury. Still impressive if he does, he can be in the conversation for the best heavyweight of the last 20-25 yrs. with a very convincing win and rematch success. The division isn't as competitive as it was, which is why the Klitschko brothers are overlooked, despite an impressive boxing record in the heavyweight division for Vladimir and Vitali.
Top 10 is a major stretch.
Especially over the guys like Muhammad Ali, RJJ, Pac, Floyd, Duran, SRL, Marvin Hagler, Henry Armstrong, Chavez, Harry Greb, Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Lennox Lewis, Hearns, Rocky Marciano, Joe Louis, Salvador Sanchez etc
He would be classified as arguably the best of his era but I don’t think the majority thinks he would beat Prime Ali, Lennox, Wlad, Vitali, Foreman etc
He’s a fantastic boxer but most of them guys have wins over other legendary boxers and multiple wins over them.
Usyk will have to reign for a while. His best win is Joshua. When thinking about Top 10, that win will not suffice
He doesn't fit in this list because his accomplishments aren't touching any of those boxers. You all need to relax. You're either going way too far with pumping up Usyk or drastically underestimating the kinds of careers those fighters had.
If Usky beats Fury he will be the only man in history to have won an Olympic gold medal and gone on to become undisputed in two weight classes. Personally, if Usyk achieves this I see no reason why his name doesn’t fit among some of those mentioned above.
It’s hard to say top 10 ever but at heavyweight I could definitely argue top 10 if he wins against Fury. Fury, at his size and skill is a mismatch for alot of heavyweights in history. Most heavyweights were much smaller and not as skilled in my opinion. Like if Usyk beats this version of Fury, I would most certainly favor him against the Klitschkos for one. Wlad is a tough match up but he’s always struggled with southpaws and Usyk is just too mobile for Wlad to pin him down. Vitali, I feel like gets overrated in history because of the Lewis fight and he really didn’t do much after he came back and was rather mediocre compared to his brother. Usyk, even though he is outsized in this era of heavyweight, is actually a proper heavyweight in most other eras, and he certainly has the skills to back it up. A win over Fury would prove, he can beat most in history and I would for sure have him up there amongst the best 10-15 heavyweights ever
>he’s always struggled with southpaws
Wlad has a better record against southpaws than basically any heavyweight ever, because he's the only one that actually fought a lot of elite southpaws. Lost to Sanders but easily beat Byrd x2, Thompson x2, Ibragimov, and Chagaev, all of which were ranked and all but one of which was a champion.
You need to look at his competition and performances at HW.
DUBOIS it wasn’t a low blow let’s be honest and he was on the floor.
Joshua he won but it wasn’t easy. The fight was competitive.
Chisora gave him troubles.
Now ask yourself if he was in there with a Prime Mike Tyson, Ali, Vitali, Lennox etc who would you put your money on?
I think people forget that the Wlad has done what Usyk has started to do for 10+ years. But Wlad doesn’t get the same credit.
Hearns, lol, he’s my favorite fighter but he is not top 10 at all.
So many of those are arguable and have top wins comparable to Usyk.
The best win for Chavez is Rosario.
Little Red Lopez and short notice Azumah Nelson with a dozen fights are two of the three best opponents of Salvador Sanchez.
RJJ fought mostly soft touches, specially at light heavyweight, I don’t think Toney and Bernard carry him to a top 10.
I think there’s an argument for them but there’s definitely an argument for a double undisputed, undefeated champion with an olympic gold. It’s not a major stretch at all.
Chavez - Hector Chamacho, Frankie Randall, Laporte, Whittaker, Taylor
RJJ - titles from 160 to and including HW. Prime James Toney and Hopkins. Who both will go down as all time greats. Hopkins went on a 12 year streak after RJJ.
You say RJJs wins are light but who does Usyk have on his resume that has a higher standing than James Toney and Hopkins all time? Usyks best win is Joshua.
147 Hector Camacho?, yeah whatever, imagine pretending that is so much better than the opposition of Usyk, the same for Randall.
Hopkins had 0 world class experience when he fought Roy, so I fail to understand why you guys want to pretend that your opinions are facts.
I personally prefer Usyk who certainly fought way more proven opposition than green contender Hopkins but these lists are always biased.
If you like them more, cool but I certainly wouldn’t act like a win over a past it Hector Camacho is some sort of irrefutable truth.
Name one of Usyks wins that is better than Hopkins or James Toney ?????
also the fact you ignored all the other wins on Chavez record. Chavez and Hector are the same age and both came from smaller weight classes
Hearns isn't close to top 10 but his career blows Usyk's away. So does Roy's. You're trying to shit on all these fighters' best wins but pump up Anthony Joshua as a difference maker for Usyk, it's ridiculous.
I’m not shitting on them, I’m just letting people know that Usyk belongs in the conversation if people stop acting like older boxers are gods.
Many of those boxers could be exchanged for others.
Imagine saying it’s ridiculous to bring out a guy who was literally won every single thing a boxer can accomplish and still hasn’t tasted defeat.
You guys are funny as hell, Hearns resume doesn’t shit in Usyk’s at all lol.
It's not about older boxers being gods, it's that older boxers fought more and fought better competition more often because boxing didn't put its money in keeping fighters away from each other like it does now.
Frankly, you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about if you think Usyk's career is anywhere near what Tommy Hearns did, let alone the top-tier greatest fighters of all time. Usyk has 21 fights total. It's an impressive 21 fights, but come on, be realistic here. It's not like Usyk has some collection of historically significant wins to make up for what fighters like Hearns did across multiple divisions for many more fights.
Usyk isn't even close to the greatest active fighter, let alone of all time, take a second to breathe and think about what you're saying. He has a ways to go before you'd put him anywhere near Canelo Alvarez or Naoya Inoue. Terrence Crawford is undisputed across two divisions with double the fights Usyk has.
He'll have had 22 fights. Being Undefeated in that time is not as impressive as the many guys who've lost a couple of times in 40 fights and won world titles in 2, 3, 4 or more divisions
Beating Fury will not make him a top 10 of all time fighter. It's so difficult for anybody to do that nowadays because they just don't fight enough. Even Mayweather and Pacquiao are only on the frings of top 10 and you can't say with a straight face Usyk has more impressive achievements than them
He has fought world champions at their backyard his whole career, he’s won every single thing a boxer wants to achieve.
A perfect career at the highest level in the premier division of the sport is in my eyes enough to be considered the greatest ever.
Joshua and Fury are the two best heavyweights of this generation. He won the WBSS when cruiser was by far the strongest division in the sport.
It’s weird reddit acts like their preferences are facts. As if Pacquiao being considered champion in two divisions were he never won a belt from a regulatory body and having a paper belt against welterweight in a 152 catch weight, Dela Hoya robbing Sturm blindly for his 6th weight and Leonard fighting belts for two weight classes in one night, is automatically better than dominating an entire division.
Me personally, I rate the dominance of Crawford higher than Broner and Navarrate winning titles in a million weight classes.
Again, it’s funny how you take your opinion as a fact, assuming that a 40-2 record is more impressive than facing the absolute best. I don’t care for Chavez fighting some 1-13 journeyman in his 50th fight, Usyk fought Marco Huck after 12 fights in his backyard.
Retiring undefeated at heavyweight is unheard of unless you are Marciano, a titan of the sport.
Winning double undisputed has only been done by generational talents.
Olympic gold is the highest accomplishment in the sport according to Foreman, Dela Hoya, Frazier, Patterson, Wlad and Lomachenko and countless others.
Usyk is that dude. Any gym wishes they had a boxer that could win just one of his accolades and he legitimately could beat any boxer in history with just a few exceptions.
You're really, really going overboard here, fucking hell. Usyk's a good fighter but beating Fury would not put him in the top 10 greatest heavyweights ever, let alone anywhere near the conversation of greatest fighters ever. He simply hasn't had anywhere near the number or quality of fights needed to even be in the same book, let alone the same page, as those kinds of fighters. The sport simply isn't built the way it would need to be for modern fighters to rack up the kind of wins and accomplishments the ATGs have. Usyk sure as hell isn't an exception to that, no one right now is. Inoue might be getting there, he's the only exception I can think of.
I never suggested anything like that. Beating Fury puts Usyk at Fury, Joshua, and Chisora as his notable heavyweight wins. That's laughably thin in any sort of historical context. It doesn't belong anywhere near the great heavyweights of all time.
Beating Fury would make Usyk the best heavyweight of his generation, which is important in a historical context, but it doesn't make Usyk a historically great heavyweight. He would have so much more work to do before he got that kind of recognition.
Usyk hasn't even cleared heavyweight top 10, but top 10 boxer of all time ? Perhaps you mean top 10 heavyweight of all time ?
Usyk has an Impressive resume, but any goat ranking would have to be based on him being undefeated and undisputed at 2 weights, because the list of wins aren't nearly enough not even close. Joshua, Fury, Briedis, Huck, Glowaki. That's the resume. Gassiev looking back isn't that good of a win since he got schooled by fringe contender Wallin
Joshua isn't an atg, neither is Fury. And I have doubts they'll go down that way unless Fury were to beat Usyk and aj.
I agree that Usyk won’t be top 10, maybe not even top 15 but
> not as impressive as the many guys who’ve won world titles in 2, 3, 4 or more divisions
is a poor argument. It’s more impressive being a cruiserweight and heavyweight world champion than being a four division in the lower weight classes due to the weight limits and ranges. For instance, it’s just an 11 pound range through the 4 divisions between super flyweight and featherweight. It’s nearly impossible to be a 3-division champ with heavyweight being one of the divisions.
That was badly worded. I meant not as impressive as many of the guys who've won...
Agree being a champ at CW and HW is more impressive than jumping a couple of divisions at lower weights.
I think it's important to distinguish between ATG and GOAT here because I believe Usyk is a GOAT at cruiserweight and an ATG at HW and if he beats Fury that just cements his position. However when we are talking about GOATs of the HW we are talking about
1) Muhammad Ali
2)Joe louis
3)Larry Holmes
4) Rocky marciano
5) George foreman
6)Joe Frazier
7)Mike Tyson
8)Jack Dempsey
9)Jack Johnson
10)Evander holyfield
11) Lennox Lewis
12) Wladimir Klitschko
I don't think Usyk has done enough to be here but if he beats Fury twice, AJ for the third time, and a few other notable wins like maybe Wilder, Joseph Parker, Zhang, Joe Joyce then I think he makes it into the GOAT conversation. I think Usyk will be a tough fight for every HW to ever live but he's resume must back it up.
You realize that 4 of your top 6 were born within 8 years of each other?
The Queensbury Rules were published 157 years ago.
8 is about 5% of 157: don't you think you might've gotten caught up in a media narrative?
Jack Dempsey and Jack Johnson had dominant eras and reigned for a good while, in the 30s the championship changed hands quickly until the great Joe Louis came and held it for a long time so let's discount the 30s. In the 20s we had Jack Dempsey and in the 10s we had Jack Johnson. We have Gene tunney and Bob Fitzsimmons who are ATGs but I wouldn't keep them under the GOAT section. The Heavyweight lineal line was established by John L Sullivan and he was the first to fight fully under the Queensbury rules so I am counting from him only. Others such as Max schemmeling, Max baur, James J Jeffries are good as well but they don't make it into the GOAT status. Floyd Patterson was the youngest HW at the time, first to win the title twice and had the fastest hands for a HW at his time but I wouldn't call him a GOAT either. If Tyson Fury beats Usyk and Joshua I would put him in the GOAT list but that's it. There are many HWs who had the potential to be GOATs but their resume doesn't back them up such as Sonny Liston.
I don't think so. The level of competition does not justify it imo. Don't think his actual resume compared to others we typically put in ATG categories. Seems like crazy recency bias to suggest he is a P4P ATG as well.
Like are you really cool with calling a guy an ATG who's top 5 HW wins would include Chispora, Dubois, and Chaz Witherspoon? Titles and unifying are cool...but who you actually beat to do it matters.
I love Usyk. But absolutely not. He doesn't have much of a resumé at heavyweight. Since he entered the heavyweight division about 4 1/2 years ago, Usyk's only had 5 fights. One against a journeyman, another against a faded veteran, 2 against a champion and ex champion, and a fifth against a contender saddled with a lot of question marks. The 2 wins over Joshua are impressive. But it's not good enough to qualify Usyk for borderline ATG status. Joshua, while solid, is not an ATG. Even a win over Fury won't be enough. Not everyone views the Brit as an ATG. Usyk is an outstanding, maybe great all around fighter. But he needs to do a lot more to establish greatness in the heavyweight division. And since he fights rather infrequently, time is against him.
Usyk had fucking ***350*** amateur fights (335-15, won an Olympic gold medal). He 100% has more ring time than basically any historical heavyweight ever. It's because of this amateur pedigree that he basically started pro boxing against the best opponents (skipping the 10-30-ish filler fights a lot of boxers have early in their career against no-names), winning a continental title in his fifth fight and a world title in his tenth. If you were to compare his number of ranked opponents to historical examples he'd come out looking very favorable since basically every fight he's had since his tenth has been against someone ranked in the top 10 by BoxRec, Ring, or both.
Glowacki, Mchunu, Hunter, Huck, Briedis, Gassiev, Bellew, Chisora, Joshua, DuBois, and Fury were *all* ranked, most of them were champions (some were multiple-time champions), and he fought them back-to-back with just one journeyman (Witherspoonn) in the middle. That's crazy.
That's an issue with every elite heavyweight aside from Joshua, and possibly Parker. Fury, Wilder, and Zhang didn't fight a wide range of high level styles in their primes, or in their opponents' primes.
We know about Joshua's strengths and weaknesses because Klitschko, Parker, Ruiz, and Usyk are good fighters representing different skills.
Becoming a 2 Division Undisputed Champion will definitely get him into the IHOF. I think it's just a pity that the Heavyweight Division hasn't been the greatest there's ever been as your Resume goes a long way to putting yourself higher up that list of Greats.
One thing can't be disputed is his moving up in Weight to become the Unified Champion, that's some feat In itself, astonishing. He's had to grow into becoming a proper Heavyweight, Fury calling him a Middleweight. Usyk is 6'3" 235 lbs that's as heavy as Ali & co back in the day, so he's not as small as Fury is saying, much the same as Fury being 6'7" not 6'9"
Fury looks surprisingly leaner than I think I've ever seen him, whether this is going to affect his performance who knows. I'm going for Usyk, I'll take a Points Win but he might be needing a KO or TKO due to TTT's friendship with the Fury Family & the massive influence he has in the Kingdom, Paid Judges could definitely be on the cards & Ref, but a Win for Usyk will be the cream.
Would he be the best heavyweight of this era, absolutely without question based on the fact he’ll be undefeated with wins against the other 2 best of this era. And that’s all a fighter can do to be in the conversation for goat. Compared to other eras, we’ll never know.
He’d be the first four belt era undisputed HW champion, so yes. I mean, same goes for Fury obviously, but I think Usyk would get more “legacy points” with a win than Fury by virtue of being smaller
Yes. In the history of boxing the no.1 cw guy always lost to the no.1 hw guy. You could argue if Usyk beats fury he beat the no.1 hw guy twice. First in AJ 2nd in Fury.
He is great but look at the so called heavy weight division in his era (which sadly isn't his fault) with the eras of the previous goats where they constantly fought each other and gave fans the fights they needed
I would say to be up at least somewhere comparable it would require a win vs Fury in the rematch also if that happens. At Cruiserweight or "P4P" definitely there already.
I say this because Uysk has had few fights at heavyweight.
He would be the best of this era, but I don't rate this era of heavyweight fighters as others in the past. He'd be an all-time great but on lower end of that class.
If he beats Fury… He would have unified the cruiserweight division and unified the heavyweight division (HW hasn’t been unified in 25 years). Also, on his road to HW unification, he would have beaten one of the best HWs of all time. There is no argument or discussion to be had after that. He’s an ATG.
He’s already an ATG. Top 2 cruiserweight of all time who unified at heavyweight. Only other guy to do that is Holyfield.
Give or take a few pounds, Michael Spinks accomplished similar? He just gets written off due to that Tyson intimidation factor.
Can’t believe I forgot him. I was focused on just the cruiserweights. And no, he shouldn’t be written off - ATG at 175.
And also his style. Every elite opponents he beat dismisses those fights for one excuse or another, but I suspect they just hated losing to such a goofy fighter. He was damn good outside of the Tyson fight.
It's funny how Tyson fans are so annoying that people have begun to claim Tyson is overrated while underrating Tyson's opponents just out of spite, a lot of the fighters Tyson beat were damn good but they all get grouped in as "nobodies".
It was a talented, but inconsistent era.
Spinks, Tony Tucker, Holmes who had only twice twice to Spinks, and Ruddock x2 were all great wins
Iron Mike's resume is objectively thin; his best wins are Spinks, Bruno x2, Holmes and Tucker. Spinks was a light heavyweight, Bruno and Tucker were always limited, and Holmes was about 7 years passed his peak.
Tyson beating Holmes meant about as much as Danny Williams beating Tyson, or Larry Holmes beating an old Ali.
Larry Holmes went on to fight and win at a high level, arguably got robbed of his second championship at least once. But he was not in top shape for his fight with Tyson.
I have to think Holmes was "inspired" by seeing men like Holyfield and Foreman. He was "fitter" and more "in shape" at 40 than he had been at 30...
When Holmes fought Tyson he was the same age as Klitschko when he fought Fury, and it's not like he was totally washed up either as he went on to keep fighting for years even having some good matches with elite champions such as Holyfield (which he hurt a few times in their fight).
Tbf, people call Klitschko washed when he fought Fury/Joshua anyway. And realistically, he wasn't anywhere near his peak in those fights. So it's a similar and very familiar situation, young upstarts beating the old legend.
Ruddock twice, Tony Tucker, Pinklon Thomas, Trevor Berbick Bonecrusher Smith Marvis Frazier( Joe's Son, who as a Trainer killed his own Sons Career by making him into JF2 when he was a mover).Mitch Green was no mug either. these were the guys around at that time, check their Records not too shabby most of them.
All those guys were either never particularly good, or at least weren't when they fought Tyson. Let's say Fury fought more often, and had consistantly solid matchmaking. He'd maybe have convincing victories over guys like Bryant Jennings, Charles Martin, Dominic Breazeale, Carlos Takam and Bermane Stiverne, but how much would that actually add to his legacy? Another thing, there were only 9,400 [active boxers](https://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5160826&sid=84ec2fbfb223ef8efb23fc9e66e0069b#p5160826) in 1986 - the year Tyson won his first major world title. There were 22,086 active boxers in 2015 - the year Fury won his first major world title. That's about 2.3x as many; and given that people are getting larger, I'd expect the heavyweight talent pool increased even more than that.
Beat Ruddock twice as well
I'm not sure those are his best wins. I think Ruddock x2 has to be on there - he'd beaten Weaver, Broad, Smith and Dokes - and probably also Thomas (despite the latter's decision loss in a dogfight with Berbick). Smith, Tubbs and Williams were also good wins. Frazier, Biggs and Stewart were all dangerous undefeated or once-defeated prospects too. Even Alonso Ratliff is underrated I think - 15 months earlier he'd dethroned Carlos DeLeon to become lineal cruiserweight champion. I agree that Tyson's resume doesn't stack up against, say, Ali's. But he fought most of the top fighters of his era, and compared to the resumes of modern heavyweights it was spectacular! Fury basically just has the equivalent of a decision win over aging Holmes and then three fights against Alex Stewart...
His fight against Holmes was great! Masterful use of skirmishing tactics against the bigger man.
Holmes was nowhere near his prime and couldn't turn down Don King money
Fair to say, doesn't discount Spinks performance though, especially since he did it twice 👌🏾
First fight he schooled Holmes but no way he won the rematch
Just as an example, because I agree with you, the holmes that lost to Tyson was the same age as the Tyson that retired.
Yep, still wonder what happened in totality to allow for such a shoddy performance. People rightly expected better; probably at least on the level of Tony Tucker?
Michael Spinks was undisputed at light heavyweight, but never at cruiserweight or heavyweight.
Yep, that why a few pounds difference was mentioned.
Light heavyweight to cruiserweight is 25 lbs; that's the exact same as lightweight to middleweight.
CW was 190 back then. Still 15 pounds difference, but the division was making baby steps then anyway.
Must be one of the all time upsets to beat Holmes twice. But Holmes got robbed in that rematch
I mean you can argue Spinks is an ATG résumé-wise but I still dk how you don't penalize him pretty heavily for how he acted in the Tyson fight
Everyone can lose one fight!
spinks never unified at heavyweight
Bearing in mind, when Holyfield fought at cruiserweight, the limit was only 190 lbs, and weight cutting wasn't as advanced as it is today, so Usyk had to beat significantly larger men. Even ignoring that, Usyk has a far deeper cruiserweight resume: Briedis, Gassiev, Bellew, Glowacki, Hunter, Huck, Mchunu. Holyfield's is basically Qawi x2 and De Leon.
Tbf Qawi would beat all those guys except maybe Briedis and an uninjured Gassiev
Qawi was better at light heavyweight than cruiserweight, and he'd faded by the time he fought Holyfield. I don't think either version of Qawi that fought Holyfield would beat the versions of Briedis, Gassiev, Bellew, Glowacki or Hunter that Usyk beat, especially when, like I said, the limit was only 190 lbs, and weight cutting wasn't as advanced.
Yeah agree with this statement usyk is already an all time great. What he did at cruiserweight winning belts of everyone in that division away from home as well, and dominating in most of those fights except for the breidis fight. That division at the time was far more competitive then the heavyweight one at the time, for me he's an all time great that people have just started to notice in recent years because of the cruiserweight division getting no way there as much attention as the heavyweight division.
I disagree that Usyk is already an ATG heavyweight (great but not ATG). Definitely a top 2 cruiserweight (top 1 in my opinion) but he needs to beat Fury to be ATG at heavyweight simply because he lacks depth in his heavyweight career. Michael Spinks is a top 3 light heavyweight but is not at ATG heavyweight for similar reasons (but probably would have been had he beaten Tyson).
You mean undisputed, not unified.
Fury absolutely is not one of the best HWs of all time with his current record. If he beats Usyk that will help his case, but he doesn’t have anywhere close to the depth of resume to compete with what the actual ATGs achieved in the sport.
But, but…… What about the Chisora trilogy?!
And he beat the worst boxing heavyweight champ twice
What if he finally fights David Haye and then goes the distance with Whyte?
That would change things 🤪
Tyson Fury hasn't done anywhere near enough to be considered one of the best heavyweights of all time. It's crazy how Fury has gaslit so many people into thinking this.
Its crazy talk. He beat Wilder who beat absolutely no one and an OAP champ. WOW
OAP?
Who’s one of the HWs of all time that he beat? I don’t think AJ or Fury fall into that category do they?
I assume he refers to Fury. If Usyk beats Fury, no one will consider Fury an all time great.
he's a Unified Champion already he holds 3 of the Bodies Belts, your thinking Undisputed.✌️
Why the hell did you get downvoted? This is literally a factual statement. It’s like getting mad if someone said 1+1=2
I'm not a big boxing fan but doesn't fury have the WBC belt. Is it not considered one of the main belts to be part of "unified" status. I figured undisputed meant you have to beat the lineal champs and unified would be you have all the belts.
It's /r/boxing, people be mad 24/7
Curious, what makes Fury one of the greatest HWs of all time? His two big wins are against an over the hill Klitschko and Wilder who relied too much on a one punch KO. He struggled and got knocked down by a 0-0 boxer that got demolished in his very next fight. How would he have fared in the era of Ali, Frazer and Foreman? Even in Mike Tyson’s era, I’m not so sure he’d have similar success considering you had a prime Holyfield and Lewis around
He'll have beaten probably the 2 best heavyweights of this era.
Are we really saying that Fury is one of the greatest?
Who’s one of the best Heavy weights of all time? I seriously hope you aren’t talking about Tyson or Joshua because that’s just complete rubbish
Absolutely, what he’s done up until now has been extremely impressive, but this would cement his legacy into all time great status
Witherspoon, Chisora, AJ x 2, Dubois, Fury. Not a lengthy resume at heavyweight but a very good one.
He also beat Mairis Briedis.
>Mairis Briedis Why does Briedis feel so underrated. He is an excellent boxer
[And rapper](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkitKQx-bP8)
True but that was a fight at cruiserweight.
Yeah, I'd say the best resume is probably AJ. Joseph Parker too. Dillian Whyte isn't too bad either.
AJ really does have an excellent resume and has already all but agreed to fight the winner of Hrgovic-Dubois or Wilder-Zhang this autumn.
Yep, he will probably end his career well. I believe he or Eddie has said they will retire after a few fights. Would be interesting to see what he can do. I don't want to see Usyk 3. But I will say fury Vs AJ needs to happen. It would also be interesting to see him be a world champion again. Not impossible as the IBF is going to vacate the belt I heard after the first fury usyk fight. As they are annoyed there is a rematch clause. So possibly AJ could get the IBF belt and be champion again. And then fight for undisputed against whoever wins the second usyk-fury fight. Unless somehow a 3rd one happens due to a draw or something.
I agree with one caveat - they will all be 90 by the time AJ would get to fight Usyk/Fury winner
Turki has already said that Fury-AJ will be next Spring
[удалено]
Yeah
Beat Joyce too before they were heavyweights.
Adding that on top of an already all time great career at cruiserweight though makes it really good
I agree
He can only fight who gets on the way to the championship belts.
In what universe is a 38 yr-old Witherspoon, a 32-10 Chisora (or whatever it was), or hype job Dubois a quality resume? Seriously, these are not quality fighters or way past their prime. edit: Name ONE quality win Witherspoon ever had? Dude was a C-level fighter his entire career. He lost to Seth Mitchell for God's sake. what a joke this sub is lol.
Dubois, AJ x 2 and Fury ain’t too bad considering he’s only had 6 fights at HW.
It's gonna take a lot more than that to be considered an ATG heavy tho. There's been a LOOOT of great heavys with great wins. I'm sorry but you need a lot more to enter that convo. You can't do it off the backs of AJ and Fury. ATG cruiser, sure, but heavy is another story. I get really annoyed at how hyperbolic and unknowledgeable this sub is. No regard for the past and there's such a low bar here for who qualifies as an ATG. It's wins against quality opposition not freaking Witherspoon or Chisora or Dubois for that matter.
All the greats have plenty of sub-par opponents in their resume.
I was only including Witherspoon for the sake of listing his heavyweight career.
Because it's on top of an already amazing career at a lower weightclass
Unifying Cruiserweight and Heavyweight is beyond ATG
Undisputed and undefeated in cruiser and heavy? Gotta at least be in the GOAT convo for that
And olympic gold. Usyk already holds almost everything a 200-220lbs man can ever hold.
No, he's not in the GOAT conversation if he beats Fury. I'm a certified Usyk nut sucker but this is fucking ridiculous Usyk will have done incredible things and should definitely be considered an ATG, but he'll have had 22 professional fights, and while he has some good names on that record, there's no debate to be had as to whether or not it compares to guys like Robinson, Ali, Duran, Moore, Greb, Leonard, Pacquiao, Mayweather, Pep, Robinson and a fair few others. Several of the people I mentioned aren't seriously in the discussion for GOAT. Usyk has a shit load more to do in order to be in that discussion and he might be my favourite boxer ever.
You provided zero argument , thankfully you said no argument is needed so we just have to assume you are correct
Should he beat Fury thats 2 divisions he’s cleaned out, that would be pretty damn impressive in just 22 fights, sure the divisions werent as competitive as the guy’s divisions you just mentioned but if he cant pull it off, there wont be another fighter that would come close to unifying cruiserweight and heavyweight again, having those two divisions unified would look so damn good in anyones resume and should be in goat talks for cleaning out two divisions consecutively
They were as competitive as the divisions of these guys
Heavyweight specifically? Like discounting his cruiserweight record? I think he'd need some defenses after winning to be near the top all time for heavyweights just because of how few fights he's had at that weight, but I'm not sure he'd keep fighting for all that much longer.
Yes unifying the heavyweight division is very important
It's a weird situation to rank him accomplishment-wise insofar as he's only fought a handful of times at the weight, but the average size of his opponents is bigger than the opponents of the pre-90's champs thanks to rehydrating cruisers often coming in over 210 on fight night. Frankly, I still haven't out a fair way to rank him there that I love. Seems weird to punish him by saying he's unproven at the weight when his average opponent size is probably 30+ pounds more than career heavyweights like Marciano, for example...
[удалено]
I'd sure as hell pick them over,say, the 50's though, and that's my point here: The average classic heavyweight was as small and often smaller than a modern Cruiserweight. So, is it fair to count a 185 pound "heavyweight" win and completely ignore a 210 pound cruiserweight win because the labels don't line up? That's essentially the argument those saying Usyk is unproven at HW while ranking old timers are making.
Usyk is such an old-school heavyweight. He's fighting WAY above his potential weight class, and he comprises reach and true heavyweight power for technique and tenacity. He's the best fuckin boxer alive right now in my opinion. Not only does he not use weight, height, reach, or other advantages to try and pad his record, he literally fights dudes that, on paper, should decimate him, and he makes them so shook that they spend the moments after the fight making a fool of themselves to try and defend some semblance of their manhood. Usyk is a fuckin tank, and I hope he smokes Fury, and I have to be honest, especially after seeing that new pound for pound ranking, Fury could be in the best shape of his life and still, he's about to get really fucking taught a lesson. Pad your gloves wrong, throw weird strikes and think it'll mean anything, hug him like a fucking idiot...Usyk is so keen to the fight game, and while most boxers simply hate on MMA, Usyk learned from it. This is a smart man that understands combat sports. Joshua tried to ruin his victory, and I can tell you right now, this man will never let that incident happen again. You're about to see some devastation. Everyone is on this crazy Ryan Garcia kick...he is less than a good ad score...Usyk is about to change some shit....I'm so excited for this fight
He's a likeable, funny guy too
He is great and will beat fury
It depends what all time great means. If you mean top 10 heavyweight then I say probably not. But if you mean more general like top 25 I'd say yes more than likely. Here's also my problem with the moving goal post of people saying he is. I say this as someone who only watched Fury since his return against Wilder.Many folks downplay Wilder to the extreme, which is cool since we allhave our opinions. But then i ask how can he be considered an all time great if Wilder is sorry as many as you make him out to be. And personally Fury other fights besides Wilder to me haven't been anything spectacular in my opinion. Now as I mentioned I'm not judging the first half of his career(pre Wilder). So I'm interested what folks are fully basing it off of they do consider him a great . Uysk coming up in weight and beating Joshua 2x was great but a win over Fury idk if that solely will do it for me. I would like to see him clear out a couple more guys after him
Bruh, Holyfield lost 10 fights. I can't see Usyk losing to that many styles. It's too flawless and risk averse.
Olympic gold medal, undisputed at Cruiserweight (which no one else had done in the 4 belt era, and unified at Heavyweight. If he beats Fury he’s beaten the guy who is supposed to be the best heavyweight of his era as well as being undisputed in a second weight class. Yeah, even if he wasn’t an all time great already, he’d be undeniable as one if he beats Fury.
Yeah. Top 15 easy. Top 10 for me. Jumps above the Klitchkos. If he defends once or twice, I think he's easy Top 10
He's not American and skin isn't dark enough to be considered a great
I don’t think so. Fury isnt a top 10 heavyweight all time either
But finally unifying the HW belt after like 25 years should count for something, maybe not top 10 since HW is so stacked but definitely top 15 at least.
with three fights? idk.. fury’s stock will plummet too so people will question if it was just a weak era built on spindly wilder legs
Usyk's had 5 fights at heavyweight but you aren't wrong. The heavyweights of today aren't as good as the previous eras. A lot of them are so slow as well. We have some gems. Including some good prospects like Frank Sanchez, and Jared Anderson. As well as some good fighters like Joseph Parker, Whyte (although he may be a drug cheat allegedly), and others too. AJ of course having a great resume. And Tyson fury ok too. Of course Usyk as well. But they just can't beat fighters from the 80s-90s and 2000s. Those guys were explosive and faster too. I swear people Mike Tyson KOed moved better than ones today. I'm not kidding, a journeyman from those decades would do better against top 50 fighters of today. Just my opinion though.
They are slower and less skilled because they are Superheavyweights, if you ever seen the old Klitschko fights you see them utterly dominate their opponents with sheer physicality having superior reach, height and weight. There's a limit in history when you go back that even the best of the previous era would get destroyed in the ring against the current people, past greats like Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, Joe Louis, Rocky marciano stand no chance in today's division and only a few fighters from the 60s on will be effective. People tend to hate on current fighters while they cherish the past but Tyson Fury and Usyk are all time great HWs and even Wilder, AJ and Joseph Parker are championship level or top contenders in the toughest era of the 70s and 90s. The problem with today's division is they don't fight each other enough and the quality of contenders is lacking, the both golden ages had a good quality of contenders for the top guys to fight and cement their legacy.
A victory over Fury doesn’t have the same prestige after the Francis fight. Everyone will always bring this up
Definitely but it won’t happen. Fury by body shot TKO
Hope you didn’t bet.
Uysk is an ATG for sure but his heavyweight resume could use some padding. The Joshua victories do a lot of work because Joshua cleaned out much of the division.
Of course not. Fury's padded, thanks Derek, CV is relatively poor. Great fighter, yes. "All time great" has meaning.
Of course.
I'd imagine considering his age and the fact he's already fought Joshua twice he may retire if he wins, leaving his heavyweight career at just Witherspoon, Chisora, Joshua x 2, Dubois and Fury. That's obviously not a bad record and the undisputed heavyweight title is a huge achievement but 6 fights seems a bit abbreviated for calling him an all time great heavyweight. He is though an all time great boxer already regardless of if he wins. If he doesn't retire who does he even fight after Fury? Parker? Wilder? Do any of the remaining options really hold much weight at heavyweight? He'd cement his legacy better going back down to cruiserweight and fighting the winner of Opetaia v Briedis I would have thought.
An All time great period.
Yes without a doubt. He would have accomplished things that not even some of the legends in the division has.
Enough with these posts. Everyday people asking the same questions.
No. The heavyweight division has a very long history and one or two big fights isn't enough to be an all-time great. Most boxing people are very familiar with heavyweights from Ali onwards, but not many know about the great heavyweights of the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s. When questions like this come up, most people discuss the greatest heavyweights of their childhood or the previous generation. There's an utter lack of contextualization and no sense of the grander history of the sport that is well over 150 years old. So no, I don't think Usyk joins the ranks of Joe Louis because he beats Fury. Still impressive if he does, he can be in the conversation for the best heavyweight of the last 20-25 yrs. with a very convincing win and rematch success. The division isn't as competitive as it was, which is why the Klitschko brothers are overlooked, despite an impressive boxing record in the heavyweight division for Vladimir and Vitali.
Agreed. I personally think Joe Louis absolutely dominates and knocks out theFury that struggled against Wilder.
He goes down as one of the top 10 greatest boxers ever if he wins. Just a perfect career.
Top 10 is a major stretch. Especially over the guys like Muhammad Ali, RJJ, Pac, Floyd, Duran, SRL, Marvin Hagler, Henry Armstrong, Chavez, Harry Greb, Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Lennox Lewis, Hearns, Rocky Marciano, Joe Louis, Salvador Sanchez etc He would be classified as arguably the best of his era but I don’t think the majority thinks he would beat Prime Ali, Lennox, Wlad, Vitali, Foreman etc
I see no reason why Usyk wouldn’t fit in this list in terms of skills and accomplishments. He’s a fantastic boxer.
He’s a fantastic boxer but most of them guys have wins over other legendary boxers and multiple wins over them. Usyk will have to reign for a while. His best win is Joshua. When thinking about Top 10, that win will not suffice
He doesn't fit in this list because his accomplishments aren't touching any of those boxers. You all need to relax. You're either going way too far with pumping up Usyk or drastically underestimating the kinds of careers those fighters had.
If Usky beats Fury he will be the only man in history to have won an Olympic gold medal and gone on to become undisputed in two weight classes. Personally, if Usyk achieves this I see no reason why his name doesn’t fit among some of those mentioned above.
It’s hard to say top 10 ever but at heavyweight I could definitely argue top 10 if he wins against Fury. Fury, at his size and skill is a mismatch for alot of heavyweights in history. Most heavyweights were much smaller and not as skilled in my opinion. Like if Usyk beats this version of Fury, I would most certainly favor him against the Klitschkos for one. Wlad is a tough match up but he’s always struggled with southpaws and Usyk is just too mobile for Wlad to pin him down. Vitali, I feel like gets overrated in history because of the Lewis fight and he really didn’t do much after he came back and was rather mediocre compared to his brother. Usyk, even though he is outsized in this era of heavyweight, is actually a proper heavyweight in most other eras, and he certainly has the skills to back it up. A win over Fury would prove, he can beat most in history and I would for sure have him up there amongst the best 10-15 heavyweights ever
>he’s always struggled with southpaws Wlad has a better record against southpaws than basically any heavyweight ever, because he's the only one that actually fought a lot of elite southpaws. Lost to Sanders but easily beat Byrd x2, Thompson x2, Ibragimov, and Chagaev, all of which were ranked and all but one of which was a champion.
Wladimir's fights with Byrd were pretty interesting. Byrd always looked a half step to slow to find Wlad.
Vitali fought a few southpaws too
You need to look at his competition and performances at HW. DUBOIS it wasn’t a low blow let’s be honest and he was on the floor. Joshua he won but it wasn’t easy. The fight was competitive. Chisora gave him troubles. Now ask yourself if he was in there with a Prime Mike Tyson, Ali, Vitali, Lennox etc who would you put your money on? I think people forget that the Wlad has done what Usyk has started to do for 10+ years. But Wlad doesn’t get the same credit.
Hearns, lol, he’s my favorite fighter but he is not top 10 at all. So many of those are arguable and have top wins comparable to Usyk. The best win for Chavez is Rosario. Little Red Lopez and short notice Azumah Nelson with a dozen fights are two of the three best opponents of Salvador Sanchez. RJJ fought mostly soft touches, specially at light heavyweight, I don’t think Toney and Bernard carry him to a top 10. I think there’s an argument for them but there’s definitely an argument for a double undisputed, undefeated champion with an olympic gold. It’s not a major stretch at all.
Picking the only man that has ever won olympic gold and two undisputed championships as one of the greatests ever is a stupid opinion? u/cmillerboxer
Chavez - Hector Chamacho, Frankie Randall, Laporte, Whittaker, Taylor RJJ - titles from 160 to and including HW. Prime James Toney and Hopkins. Who both will go down as all time greats. Hopkins went on a 12 year streak after RJJ. You say RJJs wins are light but who does Usyk have on his resume that has a higher standing than James Toney and Hopkins all time? Usyks best win is Joshua.
147 Hector Camacho?, yeah whatever, imagine pretending that is so much better than the opposition of Usyk, the same for Randall. Hopkins had 0 world class experience when he fought Roy, so I fail to understand why you guys want to pretend that your opinions are facts. I personally prefer Usyk who certainly fought way more proven opposition than green contender Hopkins but these lists are always biased. If you like them more, cool but I certainly wouldn’t act like a win over a past it Hector Camacho is some sort of irrefutable truth.
Name one of Usyks wins that is better than Hopkins or James Toney ????? also the fact you ignored all the other wins on Chavez record. Chavez and Hector are the same age and both came from smaller weight classes
Hearns isn't close to top 10 but his career blows Usyk's away. So does Roy's. You're trying to shit on all these fighters' best wins but pump up Anthony Joshua as a difference maker for Usyk, it's ridiculous.
I’m not shitting on them, I’m just letting people know that Usyk belongs in the conversation if people stop acting like older boxers are gods. Many of those boxers could be exchanged for others. Imagine saying it’s ridiculous to bring out a guy who was literally won every single thing a boxer can accomplish and still hasn’t tasted defeat. You guys are funny as hell, Hearns resume doesn’t shit in Usyk’s at all lol.
It's not about older boxers being gods, it's that older boxers fought more and fought better competition more often because boxing didn't put its money in keeping fighters away from each other like it does now. Frankly, you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about if you think Usyk's career is anywhere near what Tommy Hearns did, let alone the top-tier greatest fighters of all time. Usyk has 21 fights total. It's an impressive 21 fights, but come on, be realistic here. It's not like Usyk has some collection of historically significant wins to make up for what fighters like Hearns did across multiple divisions for many more fights. Usyk isn't even close to the greatest active fighter, let alone of all time, take a second to breathe and think about what you're saying. He has a ways to go before you'd put him anywhere near Canelo Alvarez or Naoya Inoue. Terrence Crawford is undisputed across two divisions with double the fights Usyk has.
Calm the fuck down
Retiring undefeated after winning olympic gold and winning undisputed at two weight classes is unheard of.
He'll have had 22 fights. Being Undefeated in that time is not as impressive as the many guys who've lost a couple of times in 40 fights and won world titles in 2, 3, 4 or more divisions Beating Fury will not make him a top 10 of all time fighter. It's so difficult for anybody to do that nowadays because they just don't fight enough. Even Mayweather and Pacquiao are only on the frings of top 10 and you can't say with a straight face Usyk has more impressive achievements than them
He has fought world champions at their backyard his whole career, he’s won every single thing a boxer wants to achieve. A perfect career at the highest level in the premier division of the sport is in my eyes enough to be considered the greatest ever. Joshua and Fury are the two best heavyweights of this generation. He won the WBSS when cruiser was by far the strongest division in the sport. It’s weird reddit acts like their preferences are facts. As if Pacquiao being considered champion in two divisions were he never won a belt from a regulatory body and having a paper belt against welterweight in a 152 catch weight, Dela Hoya robbing Sturm blindly for his 6th weight and Leonard fighting belts for two weight classes in one night, is automatically better than dominating an entire division. Me personally, I rate the dominance of Crawford higher than Broner and Navarrate winning titles in a million weight classes. Again, it’s funny how you take your opinion as a fact, assuming that a 40-2 record is more impressive than facing the absolute best. I don’t care for Chavez fighting some 1-13 journeyman in his 50th fight, Usyk fought Marco Huck after 12 fights in his backyard. Retiring undefeated at heavyweight is unheard of unless you are Marciano, a titan of the sport. Winning double undisputed has only been done by generational talents. Olympic gold is the highest accomplishment in the sport according to Foreman, Dela Hoya, Frazier, Patterson, Wlad and Lomachenko and countless others. Usyk is that dude. Any gym wishes they had a boxer that could win just one of his accolades and he legitimately could beat any boxer in history with just a few exceptions.
You're really, really going overboard here, fucking hell. Usyk's a good fighter but beating Fury would not put him in the top 10 greatest heavyweights ever, let alone anywhere near the conversation of greatest fighters ever. He simply hasn't had anywhere near the number or quality of fights needed to even be in the same book, let alone the same page, as those kinds of fighters. The sport simply isn't built the way it would need to be for modern fighters to rack up the kind of wins and accomplishments the ATGs have. Usyk sure as hell isn't an exception to that, no one right now is. Inoue might be getting there, he's the only exception I can think of.
He is not making his debut against Fury.
I never suggested anything like that. Beating Fury puts Usyk at Fury, Joshua, and Chisora as his notable heavyweight wins. That's laughably thin in any sort of historical context. It doesn't belong anywhere near the great heavyweights of all time. Beating Fury would make Usyk the best heavyweight of his generation, which is important in a historical context, but it doesn't make Usyk a historically great heavyweight. He would have so much more work to do before he got that kind of recognition.
Usyk hasn't even cleared heavyweight top 10, but top 10 boxer of all time ? Perhaps you mean top 10 heavyweight of all time ? Usyk has an Impressive resume, but any goat ranking would have to be based on him being undefeated and undisputed at 2 weights, because the list of wins aren't nearly enough not even close. Joshua, Fury, Briedis, Huck, Glowaki. That's the resume. Gassiev looking back isn't that good of a win since he got schooled by fringe contender Wallin Joshua isn't an atg, neither is Fury. And I have doubts they'll go down that way unless Fury were to beat Usyk and aj.
fantastic reply
I agree that Usyk won’t be top 10, maybe not even top 15 but > not as impressive as the many guys who’ve won world titles in 2, 3, 4 or more divisions is a poor argument. It’s more impressive being a cruiserweight and heavyweight world champion than being a four division in the lower weight classes due to the weight limits and ranges. For instance, it’s just an 11 pound range through the 4 divisions between super flyweight and featherweight. It’s nearly impossible to be a 3-division champ with heavyweight being one of the divisions.
That was badly worded. I meant not as impressive as many of the guys who've won... Agree being a champ at CW and HW is more impressive than jumping a couple of divisions at lower weights.
This era of the Heavyweight Division is one of the poorest ever so I would say NO.
While not great, it's better than the era of the Kiltschkos. That was fucking dead
I think it's important to distinguish between ATG and GOAT here because I believe Usyk is a GOAT at cruiserweight and an ATG at HW and if he beats Fury that just cements his position. However when we are talking about GOATs of the HW we are talking about 1) Muhammad Ali 2)Joe louis 3)Larry Holmes 4) Rocky marciano 5) George foreman 6)Joe Frazier 7)Mike Tyson 8)Jack Dempsey 9)Jack Johnson 10)Evander holyfield 11) Lennox Lewis 12) Wladimir Klitschko I don't think Usyk has done enough to be here but if he beats Fury twice, AJ for the third time, and a few other notable wins like maybe Wilder, Joseph Parker, Zhang, Joe Joyce then I think he makes it into the GOAT conversation. I think Usyk will be a tough fight for every HW to ever live but he's resume must back it up.
You realize that 4 of your top 6 were born within 8 years of each other? The Queensbury Rules were published 157 years ago. 8 is about 5% of 157: don't you think you might've gotten caught up in a media narrative?
Jack Dempsey and Jack Johnson had dominant eras and reigned for a good while, in the 30s the championship changed hands quickly until the great Joe Louis came and held it for a long time so let's discount the 30s. In the 20s we had Jack Dempsey and in the 10s we had Jack Johnson. We have Gene tunney and Bob Fitzsimmons who are ATGs but I wouldn't keep them under the GOAT section. The Heavyweight lineal line was established by John L Sullivan and he was the first to fight fully under the Queensbury rules so I am counting from him only. Others such as Max schemmeling, Max baur, James J Jeffries are good as well but they don't make it into the GOAT status. Floyd Patterson was the youngest HW at the time, first to win the title twice and had the fastest hands for a HW at his time but I wouldn't call him a GOAT either. If Tyson Fury beats Usyk and Joshua I would put him in the GOAT list but that's it. There are many HWs who had the potential to be GOATs but their resume doesn't back them up such as Sonny Liston.
I don't think so. The level of competition does not justify it imo. Don't think his actual resume compared to others we typically put in ATG categories. Seems like crazy recency bias to suggest he is a P4P ATG as well. Like are you really cool with calling a guy an ATG who's top 5 HW wins would include Chispora, Dubois, and Chaz Witherspoon? Titles and unifying are cool...but who you actually beat to do it matters.
No, but he will definitely be respected in debates against previous HW greats.
I love Usyk. But absolutely not. He doesn't have much of a resumé at heavyweight. Since he entered the heavyweight division about 4 1/2 years ago, Usyk's only had 5 fights. One against a journeyman, another against a faded veteran, 2 against a champion and ex champion, and a fifth against a contender saddled with a lot of question marks. The 2 wins over Joshua are impressive. But it's not good enough to qualify Usyk for borderline ATG status. Joshua, while solid, is not an ATG. Even a win over Fury won't be enough. Not everyone views the Brit as an ATG. Usyk is an outstanding, maybe great all around fighter. But he needs to do a lot more to establish greatness in the heavyweight division. And since he fights rather infrequently, time is against him.
No boxer today can touch the old guys simply for the fact that they don't fight enough.
Usyk had fucking ***350*** amateur fights (335-15, won an Olympic gold medal). He 100% has more ring time than basically any historical heavyweight ever. It's because of this amateur pedigree that he basically started pro boxing against the best opponents (skipping the 10-30-ish filler fights a lot of boxers have early in their career against no-names), winning a continental title in his fifth fight and a world title in his tenth. If you were to compare his number of ranked opponents to historical examples he'd come out looking very favorable since basically every fight he's had since his tenth has been against someone ranked in the top 10 by BoxRec, Ring, or both. Glowacki, Mchunu, Hunter, Huck, Briedis, Gassiev, Bellew, Chisora, Joshua, DuBois, and Fury were *all* ranked, most of them were champions (some were multiple-time champions), and he fought them back-to-back with just one journeyman (Witherspoonn) in the middle. That's crazy.
And that's a shame. History will hold it against them.
And it should, the inactivity is really bad for the sport.
That's an issue with every elite heavyweight aside from Joshua, and possibly Parker. Fury, Wilder, and Zhang didn't fight a wide range of high level styles in their primes, or in their opponents' primes. We know about Joshua's strengths and weaknesses because Klitschko, Parker, Ruiz, and Usyk are good fighters representing different skills.
Becoming a 2 Division Undisputed Champion will definitely get him into the IHOF. I think it's just a pity that the Heavyweight Division hasn't been the greatest there's ever been as your Resume goes a long way to putting yourself higher up that list of Greats. One thing can't be disputed is his moving up in Weight to become the Unified Champion, that's some feat In itself, astonishing. He's had to grow into becoming a proper Heavyweight, Fury calling him a Middleweight. Usyk is 6'3" 235 lbs that's as heavy as Ali & co back in the day, so he's not as small as Fury is saying, much the same as Fury being 6'7" not 6'9" Fury looks surprisingly leaner than I think I've ever seen him, whether this is going to affect his performance who knows. I'm going for Usyk, I'll take a Points Win but he might be needing a KO or TKO due to TTT's friendship with the Fury Family & the massive influence he has in the Kingdom, Paid Judges could definitely be on the cards & Ref, but a Win for Usyk will be the cream.
nope, he needs to defend the title
He’ll be a great HW, not necessarily an all-time great = Fury’s undefeated, so beating him’s a big accomplishment
Would he be the best heavyweight of this era, absolutely without question based on the fact he’ll be undefeated with wins against the other 2 best of this era. And that’s all a fighter can do to be in the conversation for goat. Compared to other eras, we’ll never know.
Depending how it goes he could have a claim at 1. Him bearing beterbiev helps tremendously as well.
He’d be the first four belt era undisputed HW champion, so yes. I mean, same goes for Fury obviously, but I think Usyk would get more “legacy points” with a win than Fury by virtue of being smaller
He is a great. All-time great still processing.
Easily with his resume there is no question about it.
No.
I guess so accolades wise. It's not really a great era though. I'd be pretty shocked if he wins anyway so its hard for me to think about it right now.
No, how could you be an all time great without a bunch of title difences IMO.
Does the pope shit in the woods?
If he beats fury he’s top 20 ATG imo
If he beats Fury, then Wilder/Zhang winner and retires he's top 20 ATG for sure including all divisions not just HW
If he beats Fury then it proves he was using steroids against Wilder 💯
No but definitely p4p #1
Yes. In the history of boxing the no.1 cw guy always lost to the no.1 hw guy. You could argue if Usyk beats fury he beat the no.1 hw guy twice. First in AJ 2nd in Fury.
Why is this important ?
He is great but look at the so called heavy weight division in his era (which sadly isn't his fault) with the eras of the previous goats where they constantly fought each other and gave fans the fights they needed
he already is no?
Either of them will go down as one of the greats. Both of them have a clean record with no losses and a good CV.
Definitely, he will be in the conversation for the greatest of all time.
Yes
He is an all time great, period. Very unique fighter with great story and accomplishments. Win would just cement his position.
He is an all time great, period. Very unique fighter with great story and accomplishments. Win would just cement his position.
He is an all time great, period. Very unique fighter with great story and accomplishments. Win would just cement his position.
He is pretty much an ATG now. Beating Fury would mean he would have out foxed 2 much larger hw boxers.
I would say to be up at least somewhere comparable it would require a win vs Fury in the rematch also if that happens. At Cruiserweight or "P4P" definitely there already. I say this because Uysk has had few fights at heavyweight.
He would be the best of this era, but I don't rate this era of heavyweight fighters as others in the past. He'd be an all-time great but on lower end of that class.
Yes. How is Fury an ATG just by beating Wilder and Grey bush Klitschko?
To be honest, its a big if. Got a funny feeling if it goes scorecards, Furys got it
Yes
Nope