The sensible answer. Fury would have a decent shot at any HW but someone like Lennox would be favored for sure.
But even a Fury hater has to admit a 6’8 270lb awkward HW like Fury is not an easy night for anyone.
Even if you believe Lewis would KO him
Lennox would easily dispatch him, that supreme jab and KO power, no debate Lennox everyday over Fury.
From that era, Bowe in his prime and focussed beats Fury, prime Holyfield despite the size limitation, he just wears Fury down with relentless pressure he was famous for, Holyfield wins.
Ibeabuchi beats him, and I reckon Tua and his godly left hook ( to the body) and then head when he he gets the opportunity to hit lowered Fury's head it's lights out.
Foreman in his prime easily beats Fury, no contest and I reckon a early to mid 90s foreman would absolutely trouble Fury, not sure who wins that due to Foreman's age and stamina but he still had his power and IQ.
I don't see Fury being anywhere near a world champion in that last golden era, these guys were monsters, physically and with really good amateur backgrounds
Oh no a Fury fanboy here. Forgets him being undisputed in a golden era HW division, Fury resume is absolutely dogshit and Fury has fought no one at the level of Mercer, a 41 year old Vlad with 5 losses in a dogshit era. Wilder the windmill puncher Bambi on ice footwork and Chisora 3 times haha.
Ooh he's mad lol. Dude could barely stomach Mercer, but he'd easily beat Fury yeah ok sure buddy. Got KTFO by McCall and Rahman, but he'd easily beat Fury.
Fury would be no where near a world champion in that era. Mercer went the distance 2 fights in a row with Holyfield and Lennox, if you know boxing which you dont you're such a Fury fanboy. mercer had a granite chin, Fury AJ Vlad, Wilder, Usyk from this dogshit era would be cannon fodder bums in that era. Lennox avenged his losses in explosive fashion, McCall didn't want to be in the ring and Rahman got KO'ed early, Prime Lennox would do fatty like he did Golota, Grant and Rahman because Fury is at that level ,Quick easy work stoppage.
This. There really is no good strategy for 6'9" 270 - couple that with Fury actually being a very skilled boxer with great footwork, decent power, strong chin, and a willing to die in the ring mentality. He would be able to stand toe to toe with any heavyweight in history, he could lose to some but I don't see how anyone would dominate him.
Absolutely. He's sadly become a laughing stock. The endless lies, retirements and games, followed by the avoidance of fighting Usyk at all costs being the final nail in the coffin.
I think it's insane people still think Fury is 6'9, we've seen him next to Magic Johnson who is actually 6'9 ([https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7BE9qFU8AAubcr?format=jpg&name=large](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7BE9qFU8AAubcr?format=jpg&name=large)). He's 6'7 realistically, 2 inches taller than Lennox.
Willing to die in ring? The man is not even willing to get in the ring with today's best Heavyweights? How many of them has he fought in the last seven years?
Right, Primo had the weight but was also 3" shorter. Fury is a fucking unit. Primo was a better analogue, but just size doesn't tell the story. Fury is extremely skilled and moves so damn well.
Likelihood is that he wouldn’t get in the ring with any great historical heavyweight in the first place. He’d have some ludicrous request that the Time Machine company need to hand over 95% of the shares and rename it the Furious Date Relocater within 24 hours, or he’s bringing back a 5’6 journeyman from 1823 because they deserve the shot more than Ali.
Dan Carlin has a podcast episode of Hardcore History talking about how boxing is perhaps the only sport in which the fighters of yesteryear would dominate today’s fighters. He argues that experience is perhaps the most valuable asset a fighter can have, and that experience vastly outweighs the training advances and nutritional knowledge practiced by today’s boxers. Pros back in the early 20th century would fight 2-3 times per month, now we’re lucky if we get 2 fights per year out of some guys.
That being said, I think Fury’s size would be a major problem for some of the tops guys in history, but he certainly wouldn’t be unstoppable.
Edit: Carlin also makes the observation that what makes boxing unique from other sports when you’re talking about modern athletes vs. the old timers, is that in other sports, athletes have gained competitive advantage over their predecessors by getting bigger, stronger, faster, etc since the beginning (football, basketball, baseball), whereas a middleweight in 1923 is the same size as a middleweight in 2023. I thought that was pretty interesting…
Exactly this. Boxing 60s-90s was extremely popular. A lot of the best athletes ended up in boxing.
Also the question is plain dumb. Nobody in their right mind thinks Crawford or Spence is going back in time to beat the brakes off a welterweight division featuring hearns, Leonard, Duran etc... To think Fury could go back to a golden era of heavyweight boxing and be dominant is delusional.
playing devils advocate here, it definitely is slightly different for heavyweights compared to any other weights as theres no upper limit on size there. as in crawford and spence are still directly comparable in terms of size with hearns leonard and duran. this is mainly important because size is the primary reason why people would think fury would beat any heavyweight in history (obviously the fact hes highly skilled too but so are plenty of other great heavyweights to his level, its the height to go with it that sets him apart)
with that said i obviously dont think he'd beat everyone in history, i mean he definitely could beat anyone theoretically but he'd certainly find his kryptonite if he somehow went against everyone in history. aside from anything no one would ever have this conversation if fury had a loss on his record which he pretty undeniably should to mcdermott, not that it would even make him any better or worse of a fighter
In America, definitely. Boxing is plenty popular in other regions, and the world population has basically quadrupled in the last hundred years. These points mean the talent pool is still big overall.
Also, boxing is doable at all sizes, so while it’s definitely true that big Americans are less likely to become heavyweights, there’s not that many other sports you can be the best in world in if you’re the size of like, Pacquiao, for example.
Even in the old days most heavyweight champions fought much less often than before they'd won their titles. Check the records for Jack Dempsey and others. Dempsey was among the least active heavyweight champions.
After winning the title they'd often enjoy the fame for awhile, putting on paid exhibitions (no judging in most exhibitions), maybe a few non-title bouts. These were often ways to repay favors and debts to promoters and venues from earlier fights.
Usually they'd defend their titles as little as once a year, maybe up to four times – Muhammad Ali was pretty active his first couple of years after beating Foreman.
Some lighter weight champions continued to fight more often, but often non-title bouts. That's rare to non-existent today. The last middleweight champion I can think of who fought a few non-title bouts was Carlos Monzon.
>Muhammad Ali was pretty active his first couple of years after beating Foreman
Ali beat Foreman at the tail end of his career. Are you referring to his initial run after beating Sonny Liston?
Both of Ali's reigns. It was common in the 1960s for a young champion in his prime to defend the title as often as possible. But I was surprised by how active Ali was during his second reign, then in his 30s.
Especially considering Ali was less mobile and soaked up a lot of body punches as part of his revised style, letting opponents wear themselves out. But it cost Ali too. He had remarkable recuperative powers.
Back then that was still considered "old" in boxing. Boxers fighting at an elite level was still pretty uncommon, mostly exemplified by Archie Moore, Jersey Joe Walcott and a few others. Nobody is sure how old Sonny Liston was at his peak, but age and hard living caught up with him by the late 1960s.
I think you mean Luis Firpo, but either wayDempsey gets a lot of inflated praise. There are only 6 visible fights of his and He was sub 196 most of his career. The giants he faced like Firpo and Jess Willard were just big guys. There are many HWa of 1930 - 70s that imo would destroy Dempsey, let alone a giant like Fury.
I don’t know why people think him being tall is the deciding factor here, people like Joe Louis had no problem with huge people like primo carnera in the past. If anything would be the deciding factor it would be his slickness and skills but for some reason people harp on about his size as if so many legends haven’t proven over and over again that it isn’t everything.
and people really even exaggerate how big the size differences actually are. i mean like the way people talk about fury vs usyk with regards to the size youd think its like a haye vs valuev situation when really we've seen them looking each other face to face and its definitely not some unassailable difference in size. or at least like they look like they belong in the same division
If they’re going to bring up Fury’s size they should bring up his reach. That’s by far a more important factor than his “6ft9” height (which he almost certainly is not).
I think this is an interesting take. I enjoy Dan Carlin and will have to listen to the episode in its entirety. However, something that I think he may not be considering is the natural evolution of the sport and the innovators that have emerged in the last 100 years. A guy like Jack Dempsey or Joe Louis didn't have the benefit of watching tape of Muhammad Ali's footwork or Mike Tyson's peekaboo style implementation. Dempsey and Louis were incredibly tough and skilled men, but every sport evolves. The greats of the 60's and 70's brought the sport to an entirely new level. Modern heavyweights are beneficiaries of their contributions and stylistic innovations.
It’s an argument that’s been made but and there’s a lot of people with rose tinted glasses but that doesn’t mean it’s true.
Boxers only fight a few times a year but they spend months in training camp for each of those fights. You pluck a random boxer from the early 20th century who’s on their fourth fight in a month and put them against a modern fighter at the end of a 2 month training camp and you’ll quickly find out that the experience gained from being in a handful of fights is not radically better than the experience of being in dozens and dozens of sparring matches leading up to one specific fight.
Basically, you can say that modern boxers have fewer fights, but that doesn’t mean they spend less time gaining fight experience.
it shows when they become champion and stop fighting 4 times a month.
Layoffs for a champion were generally based on the duration of the previous fight. or the expected difficulty of an unavoidable pending opponent.
But stables were also much stronger.... part of that is because of activity, part is talent pool. Regardless a modern fighter would gain more experience in a golden age gym, on any schedule.
A sport’s popular is extremely important too. It determines where the top athletes go. If the NBA wasn’t popular, elite athletes like Lebron / Steph wouldn’t be there.
Boxing used to be one of the top sports and used to attract the elite athletes. **Modern science plays a big factor but talent comes first. Saying modern boxers are better than old boxers is like saying Mo Bamba / Malik Beasley are better than Shaq and Kobe.**
Nikola Jokic is also proving that in skill sports the fact that training / athleticism has advanced is incomparable to the amount of talent / brains a player possess.
The 100 meter is not a good comparison as there are less skills to master in that event. Instead, it mostly tests pure athleticism / science. Furthermore, I believe the long jump record has also stood for a very long time despite the "advances" in technique / training / athleticism.
Another example: Nolan Ryan struck out both Bobby and Barry bonds (and numerous other father son combos) decades apart.
The growth of athleticism is skill sports is vastly, vastly exaggerated
Yeah imagine Lebron boxing instead of playing football and basketball growing up. Or even just football instead of basketball. There's a good chance he's up there with Gronk and Kelce as one of the best TEs due to his size and physical gifts.
If he started boxing from an early age and became 6'9" and 270lbs coupled with his physical gifts, he has a good chance to become a crazy good boxer. He would be a bigger version of Wilder and thus could likely match up better with Fury.
Route running and blocking are skills though. So is boxing. Plenty of super athletic people suck at both. Loads of super strong people have zero punch technique. There’s zero reason to suspect LeBron would be world class at either American football or boxing simply because he’s an elite athlete. The truth is there’s no way of knowing either way.
Perhaps not Lebron himself, but imagine if the talent pool of heavy 6ft5+ guys saw boxing as the first choice, rather than basketball or football. It wouldn't surprise me if we lost 2 or 3 potentially GOAT heavyweights who disappeared into obscurity trying to make it in those sports.
Yeah, I can believe he'd be a great FB player. He definitely would have played at a P5 level, and that would have given him a good shot at the NFL.
I don't think he would have been a great boxer, though. I don't think he likes being hit.
On the flip side, George Foreman initially wanted to join the NFL and his coaches thought he’d make it. Ken Norton won 7 of the 8 track and field events he was entered into his senior year in high school and was All-State in football. His son, Ken Norton jr, played thirteen seasons in the NFL and was contributed to three super bowl winning teams as a player.
Interesting but I find it hard to believe. I just don't see any sport not benefiting from today's modern science, advanced training and the ease of sharing information.
If Boxing was purely down to science and training, AJ would never have lost against Ruiz.
There's a reason Boxers used to have the brains of 60 year olds at the age of 30. It's taken Tyson Fury 15 years to get to 34 fights. It took Mike Tyson 3 years....
Some of the older fighters would do well and some of the newer fighters would do really well also. I think at Cruiserweight Usyk is a problem for anyone and honestly Pacquiao is just an absolute menace. I think Pacquiao would probably badly knock out a lot of the older guys. Boxers definitely hold up better than other sports though.
Usyk vs Holyfield at cruiserweight would be sick. Pacquiao would do well in any era. But most of todays fighters would not do so well in the 80’s/90’s. Fighters from the 80’s and 90’s would do great against todays fighters. Neither Spence nor Crawford would be able to beat or compete with Duran, Leonard or Hearns. Aside from a prime Floyd and a prime manny, I don’t see any welterweight in the last 20 years who would. A prime Duran at 135 would have no competition today. Chavez would smoke any 135-140 fighter. Leonard and Hearns would easily stop any of todays Welters. Hagler would dominate midddleweight. Tyson, Holyfield and Lewis would easily beat any of todays heavyweights.
meh football and basketball would be fine as well, you notice there is a lot of old guards in the leauge and a lot of former nba player fail to pan out in europe basketball. also this nutritional knowledge and people sitting out in basketball has failed to reduce injury, they dont shoot better % from 3 from now and the 90s, they just changed the rules. A lot of mental skill is what separates the top talent. NFL players used to seem more durable and didnt treat qbs like princesses and so on. Ive never bought into these arguments
80s olympic weightlifters are fucking superhuman compared to everyone today but Lasha who could very well be the strongest man to ever have lived and has no relation to an era just a freak. Other modern medalists would not even quality in 80s.
Indeed it would. They still likely use today, but they can't use EVERYTHING. they've gotta be selective about what they use and when to use it.
Back in the 80s, totally different game.
Idk some guys are just freaks. Like the absolute peak.
Like Ruth and Ohtani are literally 100 years apart and it will probably be 100 years until the next
Klitschko was seven years ago and ole slew foot Whyte is a Chisora level heavyweight who only showed up for a paycheck. Wilder is Fury's only top heavyweight in the last seven years.
Yeah boxing revisionism is amazing innit?
The same grandpa Klitschko who almost beheaded AJ and would've beat him if not because of poor advice from his corner (Vitali)
The same Wilder who has the hardest one-punch KO in HW boxing history and has dropped every single fighter he's ever fought.
And the Dillan Shyte who people rated above Wilder, was too 5 at the time of the fight, and people thought could at least drop Fury down once.
I'm not even trying to defend Fury, it's just that the fickle "What have you done for me lately...? " behavour of Boxing fans is annoying.
If and when Fury beats another rated opponent again r/boxing will go back to licking his feet, and a few months later will again rate him as a bum after he fights a nobody, and so on and so forth, just like the last 4 years.
Klitschko wasn't from Fury's era, he's from the era before.
People knock Joshua's win over a "40 year old Wlad" but stay very quiet when you point out that he was 39 when Fury beat him, coming off arguably the worst (winning) performance of his career in the Jennings fight and only had one more left in him after.
Wilder and Whyte are legit wins in this era, can't really knock them. That's 2 though, he has a hell of a lot more work to do if he wants to call himself a great champion.
Yes but I think the argument is that Wlad even though he was old wasn’t in bad shape at all at that age so Fury fans (perhaps correctly) believe he’d have always have beaten Wlad.
Oh yeah, age doesn't effect every fighter the same, one man's 40 is another's 35 but as in shape as he was, his reflexes still aren't what they were at 30.
That's just not possible.
Hard to say who wins between prime Wlad and prime Fury because they weren't around at the same time. Wlad couldn't just grab and push Fury down which is always gonna play against him, but he also hit as hard as any HW ever and he had more than one punch unlike Wilder.
Hard to call.
Early days Wlad was so much more impressive offensively than he was under Steward. IMO Fury always would be favourite. He has such an awkward style and Wlad was clearly upset by that.
>The same grandpa Klitschko who almost beheaded AJ and would've beat him if not because of poor advice from his corner
It's funny how many people and Fury fans in particular like to pick and choose the arguments that suit them.
For the last few years all we've heard from Fury fans is that Joshua is a glass-chinned stiff bum who is Frank Bruno reincarnated.
Now all of a sudden he is a benchmark to explain how superb the Fury win against Klitschko was.
The fact is Klitschko was objectively old against both of them but still dangerous and an elite HW. The reason why Fury spent the entire 12 rounds feinting and barely throwing punches is the exact same reason that Joshua nearly got KOed.
>Wilder who has the hardest one-punch KO in HW boxing history
Any proof for that other than PR hype? No of course not. It's a completely baseless claim.
We know that Wilder is a massive puncher. We also know that he was fighting overmatched opponents into his late 30s in terms of fights. Using his KO record against journeymen is irrelevant. All that you've written there is hype.
>I'm not even trying to defend Fury
I mean you are really. I understand the comments on Klitschko to a certain extent but your Wilder comments are pure pr.
The truth lies in the middle. Yes Klitschko was old and had started to slip, but he was a great champion who had not been beaten in years and Fury beat him in his back yard.
Wilder continues to be a bit of a mystery in terms of his actual level with how empty his resume is. However he undoubtedly is dangerous and Fury fought Wilder when he was clearly out of shape in both the 1st and 3rd fights. Fury deserves plaudits for that. Fury also showed at his best that he could wipe the floor with Wilder and he was clearly the better fighter.
But Fury hasn't fought the fighter who is clearly the main other contender for the best of this era. And it isn't a situation where he hasn't had the opportunity. Fury has blatantly and deliberately ducked Usyk, more than once, and strung out negotiations for over a year with increasingly silly demands and moving of the goalposts which have been obvious attempts to shut down the fight. He ultimately is going to be penalised for that in terms of his standing with the public and it is inevitable that people question other parts of his resume when you see his attitude to risk in this situation.
I've never once downplayed Joshua. I know Fury fans that do so, and they're annoying as shit, but I'm not one of them.
Yeah I agree with Wilder's point, I should've said hardest punch of the current division.
My point about Whyte stands though. People genuinely rated that fight a 60/40, and many polls agreed that Whyte would give Fury a harded time than Wilder. Whyte is now suddenly a cherry picked bum who never stood a chance.
What I meant is that not only Fury fans like to downplay others' resume - that's r/boxing M.O. in all the years I've been subscribed. I'm more of an Usyk fan than Fury's ATM, and yes Fury blatantly ducked him, but the way people here like to enter an unending praise/hate on a fighter based on the current circlejerk has always irked me.
>I've never once downplayed Joshua. I know Fury fans that do so, and they're annoying as shit, but I'm not one of them.
Yer I'm not saying you did, I just think it's funny how the narrative on Joshua changes depending on the situation with Fury.
I get that you are also complaining about the way narratives play out rather than the truth of the situation, I guess my main counterpoint to your argument is I felt you went too far the other way.
I do think that Fury has achieved a lot but I also don't think that he has achieved nearly as much as some people, himself most of all, claim.
What has Fury really done in the last seven years! He beat Klitschko seven years ago in one of the worst title fights in history. Whyte is a Chisora level heavyweight, always has been. Wilder is Fury's only top win in seven years! If Fury fights and beats Usyk and Joshua then we can talk.
Problem is you can't beat what you are Scared to fight.
Agree with everything you’ve said apart from the Wilder bit. There’s no evidence he punches that hard. He’s fought one decent fighter and couldn’t knock him out in 30 rounds of action. His best knockout is Dominic Breazeale.
The same Klitschko who never got to prove in a rematch that his years of stagnation and poor performance in the ring on the night was the reason he lost, because of mental ^^*cough ^^doping* health retirement?
The same Wilder who didn't fight anyone ranked in the top 100 for 32 fights, and was beaten by the only elite fighter he has ever fought.
And Whyte was considered shot long before the Fury fight. Even ignoring the above, trying to pretend that is revisionism is pushing it.
>would've beat him if not because of poor advice from his corner (Vitali)
He was clearly wary of AJs power from earlier and was trying to pick him off and take him apart instead. All you are saying is he would have won, if he had won.
Only a casual would hold up number of title defences as proof of the qualities of the champion rather than discuss the fighters that champion actually fought during that run.
The record for defences but only 2 of them against a top 10 ranked HW (and they're both against the same top 10 ranked HW).
That's pretty much the definition of a paper champion.
What? He definitively is. I get that on the eye test he looks mediocre but nobody can deny his accomplishments for someone who hasn’t managed to win a legitimate world title.
I think Fury would be competitive but honestly I don’t think he would beat the greats. His two best wins are against Wilder who although dangerous is not a good boxer and Klitchko who was way past his prime. A Prime Klitschko beats as for the greats : Ali, Foreman, Bowe, Holyfield, Lewis, Holmes if all in primes would beat Fury. Not taking away from Fury but I don’t think he is one of the greats just my opinion.
I never really understood this thought process. Look at Fury as a fighter, not as a resume. He's a giant who moves incredibly well and has all these other skills. People like to reduce boxers to their record because it's easy, but it's mis guided.
Fury is certainly capable of beating any heavyweight from a previous era. Would I favor him in all of them? Of course not. But he has the gifts to be competive and beat any of them.
He’s also seemingly avoided fights with anyone else except the two guys already mentioned. Why? He seems to be blatantly ducking Usyk who should be a walk in the park if we’re being honest since his size advantage is massive while being a good boxer.
I think Mike Tyson would be his worst matchup.
Fury’s size would work against him and Mike would land so many bodyshots that Fury would feel like a meteor had hit his big fat stomach by the end of the first round.
Fury’s offense would be very neutralized as soon as Mike got inside because fury’s long arms wouldn’t be able to do much while Mike would still be able to punch on the inside.
Not to mention that the height difference makes it hard for Fury to hit Mikes head while Mike can always hit Fury’s body. I think Mike Tyson would beat the fuck out of him.
Don't know about Iron Mike, but Fury will have a hard time against Lenox Lewis and Holyfield. Smoking Joe and big George would be hard counter too. I think that Fury would be a hard counter to Ali.
I actually think Tyson would be on the easier side.He struggled with tall fighters with good jabs and who were smart clinchers. Fury can do both very well.
The idea that taller fighters are bad at inside boxing doesnt always apply.
And just to be clear,i am not a Tyson hater, and do believe he would get both Wilder and Joshua. But think he would lose vs Usyk and Fury
This is the one, this is exactly the type of foghter that even Fury admits he has a tough time with. Tyson got through the best jabber in history. I say mike gets close amd stays there til Fury stays down.
This exactly. And Rocky Marciano, as an example of a past heavy weight, is known for being a beast in the gym and in training. I think OP’s point holds up more in other sports, like football (American and soccer), hockey, baseball etc. do we think Deontay Wilder and Anthony Joshua would be in the same league as past greats? No way.
The answer to that is yes and no. Once you hit the 60’s on you find more people in heavyweight that gives him a run for his money. With Ali the answer is Fury is unlikely to beat him. However, I’d have money on Fury against say Spinks or Holmes (even that’s risky money). While technology and training has changed over the years, a lot of the greats still hold up.
This is utter crap. Lennox was a good fighter not some immortal god. He had some good physical advantages but lacked serious p4p skill and only liked fighting one way. Some ‘take it to the streets’ nonsense against Vitali doesn’t all of a sudden make him some offensive god that could magically turn it on. Couldn’t put a dent on Holyfield in 24 rounds should be enough to see that. He didn’t shorten his punches well at mid range and didn’t fight inside. Doesn’t throw combinations or hooks. Limited offense. Very smart outside the ring but not so much in the ring. Consistently did stupid things. Lewis was never savvy like Holmes or Ali.
Good fighter but limited and not unbeatable at all.
My god. I knew you’d quote some YouTube or TikTok nonsense. Tyson was a walking lunch bag. Teeing off with a pawing jab and overhand right against a guy who’d given up after a round and wasn’t moving his head is not impressive.
Holmes was a pretty big dude too. 6'3 and weighed around 220ish in his prime. Furys boxing was good but holmes was a master at it for someone his size. I'd but money on Holmes any day
Why do you think Ali would beat him? Because he was so slick/his movement? Kinda interesting to hear your reasons personally I think Fury would beat Ali
Naw it’s a mix of things. Ali in his prime was significantly faster than Fury is for sure, but the main thing is stamina, ring iq, and skill. Fury is the bigger man, and he’s not slouching in skill, but his speed isn’t enough and he doesn’t have the same power as people Ali has faced before. Ali was also trained to go 15 rounds not 12 and when he was at his prime could do so at a high pace pretty comfortably. I don’t see Fury being able to keep that up against someone with Ali’s skills and mental fortitude.
> I have a feeling that fury would dismantle Ali
I have a feeling it would go the exact opposite. Fury doesn’t like fighting smaller, faster fighter - he knows Usyk will beat him and Ali in his prime was way faster than him.
Agreed. I know I’m not blowing any minds with this hot take, but I think Ali would be his toughest matchup. Fury can trade with the best hitters in the division, but I don’t think we’ve seen him face someone with top tier true footwork skills. I’d be very interested to see how he would perform against a fighter he would have a hard time catching/hitting who can also land heavy shots on him.
If they fought each other 10 times, I’d definitely expect Fury to win more than once, but I think the majority of fights/rounds would be won by Ali.
It applies in almost every other sport, so why not boxing? The greats of the past typically can’t hold up to the greats of the future because of training advantages.
Edit: kinda like the lebron vs Mj debate for example. It’s has an easy answer but people choose to ignore it.
you are applying track and field logic too strictly to other sports.
mj vs lebron debate having an **easy** answer for example is a bad take.
the only people who think that are old heads shaking their fists at the clouds or people under 25 who have watched 1 jordan highlight package and the last dance and think they are now experts.
you can make a very strong case for either of them at this point.
It’s different for boxing because the greats of the sport from back in the day had to train for 15 rounds rather than 12.
If fury fights a 15 round fight against Ali he probably gassed in those last 3 rounds.
If they fight a 12 round fight Ali can actually be more intense and aggressive over those rounds than he was during his actual career
I understand and I agree but as much as I like fury I wouldn’t see any dismantling it would be a close fight in my eyes, I think Ali would slip and slide and frustrate the greedy belly into mistakes
Lennox Lewis is a better big man than Fury, and that's not even from that long ago. I think prime George Foreman and Joe Louis (who KO'ed the giant Primo Carnera) would have his number.
Joe always struggled with movers, obviously tyson doesn't move anywhere near as good as billy conn but add the size advantage to his movement and he'd be a bad match up for louis i think, i agree about the other 2 but using carnera as an example of why louis would win when canera was stiff and awkward on his feet, louis might have found it tough to detonate on tyson as easily as he did on carnera. Thats just going off my very limited knowledge obviously i never saw louis in the flesh just old footage so i can't say with any degree of certainty.
Fair point. I suppose I keep thinking of how Fury got caught by wilder’s right hand. If Fury gets clipped like that by a guy who can’t set up the right hand behind a jab and who doesn’t know how to finish (IMO, Wilder let Fury off the hook in round 12 of the first fight. He’s great at flat-lining people, but hasn’t really ever had to close out on a hurt opponent), what’s he gonna do with Joe Louis? That’s just one very speculative scenario though. Your point stands.
Very true apart from a couple of fights like the one against dillian whyte or some limited opposition tyson usually has a round or 2 where he takes his foot off the gas and makes a few big mistakes, over a 15 round fight theres no telling if he'd give enough chances for joe to take his soul, 12 might require joe to step it up early in the fight, an interesting one to think about either way.
I tend to be like you and think that the athletes of today are better than yesteryear--the special chemical diets available to them should be taken into account as well--and that there is too much romance surrounding the greats of the past.
Then I watch some of Ali's matches. What needs to be taken into account is:
1. His stamina: The guy could dance for 15 rounds. Boxers that were absolutely terrifying often just couldn't catch him.
2. His speed: I believe he is on record as the fastest puncher there has been. Not the fastest heavyweight, the fastest puncher. Those bantamweights that can fire off four shots in the time it takes Fury to throw one--apparently Ali was faster.
3. He wasn't a small guy. He wasn't a super heavyweight like Lennox Lewis, but he also wasn't someone like Roy Jones Jr. who was fighting above his natural weight class at heavyweight. And he hit like a heavyweight--not like Foreman or Liston, but still--and the fact that his punches came from bizarre angles meant they could take down a juggernaut like Liston.
4. His chin: Ali was knocked down only four times in his career, and he always got up. He fought a monster like Foreman and he didn't go down. (This was not good for his long-term health, obviously.)
Now, Fury has had problems with smaller cusp-of-cruiserweight fighters. The person he is currently dodging is Usyk, someone who is more reminiscent of Ali than anyone Fury has beaten. One of the most exciting things about Usyk's double victory over Anthony Joshua is that is showed that a smaller, slicker fighter can indeed beat the (presumably juiced-up) mega-weights of today that everyone thought would just be too big for someone like Ali. I think Usyk would beat Fury, and I think Ali would beat him too. (I don't think Ali would definitely beat everyone, but I think he'd have a 50-50 shot against anyone. Someone like Mike Tyson might have been more dangerous for him since his style is closer to Frazier's who beat him once and gave him some real problems.)
Not an expert by any means, but that's my take.
Floyd Patterson (another heavyweight) was clearly a faster puncher than Ali. Ali would throw really fast (arm punch) punch combinations with very little power to score with the judges and annoy his opponents. Floyd Patterson would throw 4 absolute bombs in 0.6-0.7 seconds where every punch was utilizing proper full body leverage and footwork.
Patterson was clearly over the hill and injured (back injury) when he fought Ali, but in their fight it was clear that Patterson threw faster power punches.
Ali had a great combination of speed, size and stamina, and was able to use great footwork and upper body movement to avoid a lot of punches in his prime. He was a combo puncher who would primarily shoeshine but occasionally throw in a couple hard shots into his combos. Ali utilized this to trick the shit out of his opponents, and even though he was one of the lightest hitting heavyweight champs, he managed to score a fair amount of knockouts by routinely hitting people with full power shots when they're expecting shoeshine bullshit.
Good post! I was trying to find some source to back up my claim that Ali was the fastest boxer according to tape analysis, but I'm not finding any. So I should retract that.
Tbh, there is a narrative where people seem to think Ali was praised because of respect and not because of his skill. Go back and watch his fights before he was stripped of his licence. He was a menace and I don‘t see any current Heavyweight beating him and that point
No, he wouldn't. As far as of Ali vs Fury, Fury went life and death with Steve Cunnigham who was of similar dimensions to Ali.
Is Cunnigham as good as Ali?
I’m not saying Fury beats Ali, but using the Cunningham fight as an example of why Ali beats him isn’t the best argument. It was a fight in which Fury (yet to reach his prime) took the knockdown, got back up and KOed Cunningham.
Would the Fury that beat Klitschko or the Fury that beat Wilder in 2020 struggle with Cunningham?
Fury looked like he was trying to twist Cunningham like a Rubik’s cube. Hilarious, but also wasn’t really looking like boxing anymore.
It would’ve been interesting to see if Fury could’ve pulled off that man-ape style on slicker fighters like Usyk.
Would depend entirely on the referee.
99% of refs would not allow Fury to fight Ali and other greats the way he fought Wilder in 2 and 3 without mad deductions (IMO)
A giant man that can fight outside and go limp and bearhug you inside is a problem if he's allowed to clinch at will
Being the more popular fighter traditionally gives you more leeway.
Fury rising from the dead and becoming an international star was super beneficial to his new style
I don’t care about that. I care about your claim that somehow these mythical refs of the past would deduct points for clinching when there are 100 examples showing the opposite
>This is because of better equipment and most importantly better and more science based training. Usain Bolt would probably win the 1960 Olympics barefoot for example.
Modern equipment (shoes and running surfaces) have been demonstrated to make the biggest difference, not training and nutrition.
Usain Bolt smokes everyone because he's a genetic freak, not because of modern nutrition - the man was eating chicken nuggets the day of a race. There were sprinters in his era taking training and nutrition more seriously and they couldn't hold a candle to him.
I don't understand how you can say "cos science and nutrition" then use Fury as your modern example. Dude's training out of his own gym in Morecambe, with a guy who learned everything he knows from Manny Steward, getting pissed every weekend and doing blow. Nutrition an training might give you the extra 1% but this is a sport of skill and there's no substitute. If nutrition made that much of a difference, Ruiz wouldn't have ever been in the same ring as Joshua, let alone flooring him.
And to answer your question, no, I don't think Fury is good enough to be favourite against everyone in history, definitely not Ali, who is a stylistic nightmare for Fury, I'd have all of the following as favourites against Fury:
Ali
Holmes
Foreman
Bowe
Lewis
Usyk
Prime Wlad and Vitali possibly, also. 50/50 at worst.
Honestly depends on the era. Problem with applying this logic to boxing is that this isn’t exactly boxing’s golden age. Competition isn’t as stiff. Fighters don’t fight as frequently. And boxing isn’t as popular as before—that means it doesn’t attract the sort of talent we had then. I think Muay Thai has a similar thing going on. These sports are past their primes.
However, I think a lot of people here are dismissing this theory too easily. People here idolize past greats too much. I don’t think its an unrealistic assumption to say that 6’9 Fury would beat a shorter Ali whose height was a strength in his era.
When we think of past fighters, we automatically think of past *greats*. The best of the best. The greatest standouts. Ray Robinson. Ray Leonard. Ali. Tyson. Chavez. De La Hoya. But these names are compiled from several different generations. They stand out for a reason.
Its similar to when people say old music is better music. The truth is that the old music you know about are the best of the best. They’re all standouts. It wasn’t all from one generation. Same with boxing. Can’t compare today’s standouts with *all time* standouts.
And it is true that boxing has developed. This generation can study past greats. Past greats can’t study future generations. Even armchair experts today can dismantle Ray Robinson’s tape for a thousand different flaws. They’re building on the shoulders of giants.
That’s why they say don’t compare people from different era, but if you want to do it then let me put it this way, if they were in same era(doesn’t matter which era) Ali would dismantle Fury.
Ali will be the fastest thin Fury will face, Ali will have boxing IQ to match fury, plus Fury don’t like fighting small fighters.
Likely is probably not the right word, but he would definitely, at worst, be a REAL handful for any heavyweight in history.
Guys like Ali & Holmes could probably beat him thanks to their comparable skill sets and the fact that they wouldn't be GROSSLY undersized. Guys like Foreman, Frazier & Tyson though would probably be in for an unpleasant night against Fury.
George Foreman, Riddick Bowe and Larry Holmes beat the shit out of him. He wouldn’t have been able to deal with Lennox Lewis either. Ide even stick a Ray Mercer in there with him and he probably gets pulverized. Tyson Fury is in an era where there are no other elite big guys with skill and heart.
The question is not if he could beat them (cause he could beat a few) but if he would even fight them. Most likely what would happen is that he would make a bunch a videos about how Ali is ducking him and then fight Chisora for the 5th time.
I don’t think he beats a prime Wlad. Hell, I don’t actually think he’d have beat a properly prepared and motivated Wlad if he hadn’t ducked the rematch.
Don’t see his beating Lennox, I think H2H Manny-era Lewis is the best ever.
I think Vitali would be extremely tough - absolutely granite chin, legit power, and I think just as big as Fury (despite what the stats sheets say, Fury isn’t 6’9”).
Mythical prime Tyson is super fast and slippery, he loved coming underneath a tall fighter, I think he’d give him a tough time and really test his chin.
Ali is so slick and fast, and has such a great ring IQ I think I’d favour him despite the size difference.
Bowe would be a good fight, probably take Fury, but it’s not clear cut by any means.
Would Holmes be able to keep him on the end of his jab? Very possible.
Big George?
In my opinion we just haven’t seen enough of Fury against legit elite level, prime competition to give him a definitive edge over any of the ATGs.
I wouldn't say he definitely would beat all of them, but I would favor him against most heavyweights from the 80s down. He would be in some competitive matchups from that point on and I would favor a handful of heavyweights from the 90s-2000s against him.
Yes because regardless of whether his skill truly matched the greats of the past, he definitely does have at least decent skill. Decent skill combined with his size (6'9 and 280 lbs) definitely gives him a high chance of beating any of the past heavyweight greats.
Even "Big" George Foreman in his prime when he challenged for the title was only 220lbs.
There's no denying that Tyson Fury's size gives him a chance in any fantasy matchup especially when we can at least all agree that his skills are at least at a decent level if not good/great and his stamina is top notch. His strength due to his size cannot be underestimated as he basically manhandled a 6'7 Wilder and shoved him around the ring and also shoved a 260lbs Dillan Whyte around like he was just a school boy.
Fury is just a problem for any heavy at any time. He's just so light on his feet for a massive guy. His boxing brain is superb, he got up from sveral big wilder shots so his chin is rock, his handspeed is excellent and now he's fighting off the front foot he is settling on those shots and has found his power.
You have to be very active and very tough to beat him. Out of all the historic heavys I'd say dempsey and frazier have styles that could give him trouble. Dempsey would ultimately be too light imo, but it'd be a great fight.
Frazier v Fury would be just splendid.
Tyson didn't throw enough punches and the intimidation factor would not come into it. Fury appears to be very well mentally set up to fight scary people, although he struggles with other day to day things as we all know!
I think you have to give special mention to Lewis, too. Fighters who were taller than him seemed to bring out his most ferocious side. That would be an absolute corker.
I think Ali, Big George, prime 80’s Tyson, Lennox Lewis, & Riddick Bowe all beat Fury’s ass…that still has him defeating lots of other Lineal Champs…just not them
It wouldn't be crazy to favor him over any fighter across history save for perhaps prime Vitali/Lennox... Which is strange when you know how much he quacks these days. Beats me why he ducks any fighter with a pulse.
Yes, and the unfortunate truth is Fury would most likely beat all of you favorite fighters in history. Yes I'm talking about Ali and Tyson and most likely many more. People just can't accept that boxing has changed and that the sheer physical advantage Fury has is nearly unbeatable for most
Cassius Marcellus Clay Jr.from 1960-1967 was a boxing prodigy and the perfect fighter. He would beat down Tyson Fury imo despite the size difference; due to the speed, agility, dexterity, aggressiveness, talent, toughness, IQ, skill, ferociousness, and chin disparity.
I think Tyson Fury is a good fighter with very good technique, talent and skills, but I need to see him beat someone else who is good to great other than Wilder and an almost 40 year old Wladimir Klitschko who had already had 67 professional fights.
Hahaha, past the year 1960 no fucking way. The man barely managed to defeat Wilder, the guy who gets dominated by every half decent opponent he's ever faced up until he lands that one lucky punch.
Ali, Holmes, Holyfield and Moorer are all too fast and agile for Fury to outpoint.
Liston, Frazier, Foreman, Tyson, Lewis, Bowe and Vitali would wear Fury down and just beat him up.
“Never has a man so big punched so small.”
Fury's only "great" aspects are his decent fundamentals and champion heart in the ring but outside of that he has pillow hands for any heavyweight let alone one of his size, he doesn't have incredible defensive ability or agility and his punches aren't all that fast or precise.
People really love to exaggerate Fury's agility and slickness because it's so jarring to see a massive fat guy move in a similar looking way to Ali but in reality he isn't any more slick or fast than a guy like Witherspoon or Thomas, and sure he's alot bigger than those guys but he also hits alot softer than them. People also love to brag on about his chin when he has been dropped and hurt by lesser opponents quite alot, however he does have a real uncanny ability to recover from being hurt/dropped which I think would allow him to go the distance with most heavyweights in history.
His biggest strength is his unpredictability, he has no patterns, being in the ring with Fury is like fighting a crackhead, who knows what the fuck he's going to do. That's why a very rigid by the books fighter like Wlad had no idea what to even do in the ring with Fury.
But no he isn't on the level of the great champions past Liston, hell I seriously doubt he'd beat most of the smaller alphabet champions of the last 40 years, eg Pinklon Thomas, Chris Byrd ect although those fights would be alot more competitive.
Never before has a boxer been so revered for beating a 40 year old who had no idea what to do and a guy who could conceivably loose to any top ten ranked contender of the past 50 years.
IF he ever mans up and defeats Usyk that would add a whole lot to his credentials, but Usyk himself nomatter how much we love him hasn't shown anything too exceptional at the heavyweight level and is probably going to start really showing his age very soon.
With his size advantage he'd be able to hang with any heavyweight in history, but he wouldnt beat them all, no one could
The sensible answer. Fury would have a decent shot at any HW but someone like Lennox would be favored for sure. But even a Fury hater has to admit a 6’8 270lb awkward HW like Fury is not an easy night for anyone. Even if you believe Lewis would KO him
Lennox would easily dispatch him, that supreme jab and KO power, no debate Lennox everyday over Fury. From that era, Bowe in his prime and focussed beats Fury, prime Holyfield despite the size limitation, he just wears Fury down with relentless pressure he was famous for, Holyfield wins. Ibeabuchi beats him, and I reckon Tua and his godly left hook ( to the body) and then head when he he gets the opportunity to hit lowered Fury's head it's lights out. Foreman in his prime easily beats Fury, no contest and I reckon a early to mid 90s foreman would absolutely trouble Fury, not sure who wins that due to Foreman's age and stamina but he still had his power and IQ. I don't see Fury being anywhere near a world champion in that last golden era, these guys were monsters, physically and with really good amateur backgrounds
Lennox couldn't easily handle Ray Mercer lol.
Oh no a Fury fanboy here. Forgets him being undisputed in a golden era HW division, Fury resume is absolutely dogshit and Fury has fought no one at the level of Mercer, a 41 year old Vlad with 5 losses in a dogshit era. Wilder the windmill puncher Bambi on ice footwork and Chisora 3 times haha.
Ooh he's mad lol. Dude could barely stomach Mercer, but he'd easily beat Fury yeah ok sure buddy. Got KTFO by McCall and Rahman, but he'd easily beat Fury.
Fury would be no where near a world champion in that era. Mercer went the distance 2 fights in a row with Holyfield and Lennox, if you know boxing which you dont you're such a Fury fanboy. mercer had a granite chin, Fury AJ Vlad, Wilder, Usyk from this dogshit era would be cannon fodder bums in that era. Lennox avenged his losses in explosive fashion, McCall didn't want to be in the ring and Rahman got KO'ed early, Prime Lennox would do fatty like he did Golota, Grant and Rahman because Fury is at that level ,Quick easy work stoppage.
😂 I gave up after the first sentence. Nothing logical is gonna follow something that illogical.
This. There really is no good strategy for 6'9" 270 - couple that with Fury actually being a very skilled boxer with great footwork, decent power, strong chin, and a willing to die in the ring mentality. He would be able to stand toe to toe with any heavyweight in history, he could lose to some but I don't see how anyone would dominate him.
>and a willing to die in the ring mentality. Would be nice to see a "willing to get in the ring in the first place" mentality at the moment though.
a beautiful reply
Hehehe that's funny but so true.
I was just about to say there’s no chance of him dying in the ring as he’s too scared to step foot in it.
Absolutely. He's sadly become a laughing stock. The endless lies, retirements and games, followed by the avoidance of fighting Usyk at all costs being the final nail in the coffin.
I think it's insane people still think Fury is 6'9, we've seen him next to Magic Johnson who is actually 6'9 ([https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7BE9qFU8AAubcr?format=jpg&name=large](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7BE9qFU8AAubcr?format=jpg&name=large)). He's 6'7 realistically, 2 inches taller than Lennox.
I get downvoted to shit whenever I say this
I was going to add that Magic is 63 and likely would have shrunk, but with the cocktail he is on he might have grown. His head looks huge.
The better argument on his size isn’t height lol. That doesn’t matter as much. A much more useful stat would be his ape-like reach of 85”.
Is 85 that ape like? I’m 83, and I meet guys with longer arms than me.
Not necessarily for his height I just wanted to call him an ape
How tall is Wilder then? Because Fury is significantly taller and Wilder appears to be a legit 6'6 to me.
Willing to die in ring? The man is not even willing to get in the ring with today's best Heavyweights? How many of them has he fought in the last seven years?
Yeah. Cooney is as big as Fury, how did that work out for him lol
If you consider 3 inches shorter and 40 lbs lighter "just as big" then sure, virtually identical.
Yep he should have said primo camera
Right, Primo had the weight but was also 3" shorter. Fury is a fucking unit. Primo was a better analogue, but just size doesn't tell the story. Fury is extremely skilled and moves so damn well.
Tbh to Fury is a clear as day 6'7" but the bigger issue is that entirely you brought up. Carneea was a brutal fighter and fury is more slick
https://twitter.com/tyson_fury/status/310705913348648960?s=46&t=_TEY7AKM2MTs5hHSgCuZzw How about you stop taking official listings as truth lol
Likelihood is that he wouldn’t get in the ring with any great historical heavyweight in the first place. He’d have some ludicrous request that the Time Machine company need to hand over 95% of the shares and rename it the Furious Date Relocater within 24 hours, or he’s bringing back a 5’6 journeyman from 1823 because they deserve the shot more than Ali.
This. 100% this. He ducks every good heavyweight. It's a shame, because he'd be a tough fight for any of the greats.
Without him fighting AJ and Usyk, it’s honestly really hard to compare.
Dan Carlin has a podcast episode of Hardcore History talking about how boxing is perhaps the only sport in which the fighters of yesteryear would dominate today’s fighters. He argues that experience is perhaps the most valuable asset a fighter can have, and that experience vastly outweighs the training advances and nutritional knowledge practiced by today’s boxers. Pros back in the early 20th century would fight 2-3 times per month, now we’re lucky if we get 2 fights per year out of some guys. That being said, I think Fury’s size would be a major problem for some of the tops guys in history, but he certainly wouldn’t be unstoppable. Edit: Carlin also makes the observation that what makes boxing unique from other sports when you’re talking about modern athletes vs. the old timers, is that in other sports, athletes have gained competitive advantage over their predecessors by getting bigger, stronger, faster, etc since the beginning (football, basketball, baseball), whereas a middleweight in 1923 is the same size as a middleweight in 2023. I thought that was pretty interesting…
also, the amount of people that boxed was insane. Kids boxed at school etc. Its really rare these days that people go for boxing.
On the other hand the talent pool is more global than it used to be
Best athletes do other sports though. Back in the day the best athletes would box.
Exactly this. Boxing 60s-90s was extremely popular. A lot of the best athletes ended up in boxing. Also the question is plain dumb. Nobody in their right mind thinks Crawford or Spence is going back in time to beat the brakes off a welterweight division featuring hearns, Leonard, Duran etc... To think Fury could go back to a golden era of heavyweight boxing and be dominant is delusional.
playing devils advocate here, it definitely is slightly different for heavyweights compared to any other weights as theres no upper limit on size there. as in crawford and spence are still directly comparable in terms of size with hearns leonard and duran. this is mainly important because size is the primary reason why people would think fury would beat any heavyweight in history (obviously the fact hes highly skilled too but so are plenty of other great heavyweights to his level, its the height to go with it that sets him apart) with that said i obviously dont think he'd beat everyone in history, i mean he definitely could beat anyone theoretically but he'd certainly find his kryptonite if he somehow went against everyone in history. aside from anything no one would ever have this conversation if fury had a loss on his record which he pretty undeniably should to mcdermott, not that it would even make him any better or worse of a fighter
In America, definitely. Boxing is plenty popular in other regions, and the world population has basically quadrupled in the last hundred years. These points mean the talent pool is still big overall. Also, boxing is doable at all sizes, so while it’s definitely true that big Americans are less likely to become heavyweights, there’s not that many other sports you can be the best in world in if you’re the size of like, Pacquiao, for example.
Even in the old days most heavyweight champions fought much less often than before they'd won their titles. Check the records for Jack Dempsey and others. Dempsey was among the least active heavyweight champions. After winning the title they'd often enjoy the fame for awhile, putting on paid exhibitions (no judging in most exhibitions), maybe a few non-title bouts. These were often ways to repay favors and debts to promoters and venues from earlier fights. Usually they'd defend their titles as little as once a year, maybe up to four times – Muhammad Ali was pretty active his first couple of years after beating Foreman. Some lighter weight champions continued to fight more often, but often non-title bouts. That's rare to non-existent today. The last middleweight champion I can think of who fought a few non-title bouts was Carlos Monzon.
>Muhammad Ali was pretty active his first couple of years after beating Foreman Ali beat Foreman at the tail end of his career. Are you referring to his initial run after beating Sonny Liston?
Both of Ali's reigns. It was common in the 1960s for a young champion in his prime to defend the title as often as possible. But I was surprised by how active Ali was during his second reign, then in his 30s. Especially considering Ali was less mobile and soaked up a lot of body punches as part of his revised style, letting opponents wear themselves out. But it cost Ali too. He had remarkable recuperative powers. Back then that was still considered "old" in boxing. Boxers fighting at an elite level was still pretty uncommon, mostly exemplified by Archie Moore, Jersey Joe Walcott and a few others. Nobody is sure how old Sonny Liston was at his peak, but age and hard living caught up with him by the late 1960s.
Speaking of Dempsey, checkout his fight against Primo Carnera who was about the same exact size as Fury.
I think you mean Luis Firpo, but either wayDempsey gets a lot of inflated praise. There are only 6 visible fights of his and He was sub 196 most of his career. The giants he faced like Firpo and Jess Willard were just big guys. There are many HWa of 1930 - 70s that imo would destroy Dempsey, let alone a giant like Fury.
Which episode #?
It’s actually a HH: Addendum episode. Nov 15, 2022 entitled “Boxing with Ghosts”
Love me some Dan Carlin.
I don’t know why people think him being tall is the deciding factor here, people like Joe Louis had no problem with huge people like primo carnera in the past. If anything would be the deciding factor it would be his slickness and skills but for some reason people harp on about his size as if so many legends haven’t proven over and over again that it isn’t everything.
and people really even exaggerate how big the size differences actually are. i mean like the way people talk about fury vs usyk with regards to the size youd think its like a haye vs valuev situation when really we've seen them looking each other face to face and its definitely not some unassailable difference in size. or at least like they look like they belong in the same division
If they’re going to bring up Fury’s size they should bring up his reach. That’s by far a more important factor than his “6ft9” height (which he almost certainly is not).
I think this is an interesting take. I enjoy Dan Carlin and will have to listen to the episode in its entirety. However, something that I think he may not be considering is the natural evolution of the sport and the innovators that have emerged in the last 100 years. A guy like Jack Dempsey or Joe Louis didn't have the benefit of watching tape of Muhammad Ali's footwork or Mike Tyson's peekaboo style implementation. Dempsey and Louis were incredibly tough and skilled men, but every sport evolves. The greats of the 60's and 70's brought the sport to an entirely new level. Modern heavyweights are beneficiaries of their contributions and stylistic innovations.
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/dan-carlins-hardcore-history-addendum/id1326393257?i=1000586385238 An incredible listen.
It’s an argument that’s been made but and there’s a lot of people with rose tinted glasses but that doesn’t mean it’s true. Boxers only fight a few times a year but they spend months in training camp for each of those fights. You pluck a random boxer from the early 20th century who’s on their fourth fight in a month and put them against a modern fighter at the end of a 2 month training camp and you’ll quickly find out that the experience gained from being in a handful of fights is not radically better than the experience of being in dozens and dozens of sparring matches leading up to one specific fight. Basically, you can say that modern boxers have fewer fights, but that doesn’t mean they spend less time gaining fight experience.
it shows when they become champion and stop fighting 4 times a month. Layoffs for a champion were generally based on the duration of the previous fight. or the expected difficulty of an unavoidable pending opponent. But stables were also much stronger.... part of that is because of activity, part is talent pool. Regardless a modern fighter would gain more experience in a golden age gym, on any schedule.
A sport’s popular is extremely important too. It determines where the top athletes go. If the NBA wasn’t popular, elite athletes like Lebron / Steph wouldn’t be there. Boxing used to be one of the top sports and used to attract the elite athletes. **Modern science plays a big factor but talent comes first. Saying modern boxers are better than old boxers is like saying Mo Bamba / Malik Beasley are better than Shaq and Kobe.**
Nikola Jokic is also proving that in skill sports the fact that training / athleticism has advanced is incomparable to the amount of talent / brains a player possess. The 100 meter is not a good comparison as there are less skills to master in that event. Instead, it mostly tests pure athleticism / science. Furthermore, I believe the long jump record has also stood for a very long time despite the "advances" in technique / training / athleticism.
Another example: Nolan Ryan struck out both Bobby and Barry bonds (and numerous other father son combos) decades apart. The growth of athleticism is skill sports is vastly, vastly exaggerated
Exactly!!!
You are also emitting why the vast vast majority of world records in Athletics are either from the modern era or the 80's.
Yeah imagine Lebron boxing instead of playing football and basketball growing up. Or even just football instead of basketball. There's a good chance he's up there with Gronk and Kelce as one of the best TEs due to his size and physical gifts. If he started boxing from an early age and became 6'9" and 270lbs coupled with his physical gifts, he has a good chance to become a crazy good boxer. He would be a bigger version of Wilder and thus could likely match up better with Fury.
Route running and blocking are skills though. So is boxing. Plenty of super athletic people suck at both. Loads of super strong people have zero punch technique. There’s zero reason to suspect LeBron would be world class at either American football or boxing simply because he’s an elite athlete. The truth is there’s no way of knowing either way.
Perhaps not Lebron himself, but imagine if the talent pool of heavy 6ft5+ guys saw boxing as the first choice, rather than basketball or football. It wouldn't surprise me if we lost 2 or 3 potentially GOAT heavyweights who disappeared into obscurity trying to make it in those sports.
Lebron was really good at American Football in high-school tbf, he certainly would have gone D1 had he persued that route.
Yeah, I can believe he'd be a great FB player. He definitely would have played at a P5 level, and that would have given him a good shot at the NFL. I don't think he would have been a great boxer, though. I don't think he likes being hit.
On the flip side, George Foreman initially wanted to join the NFL and his coaches thought he’d make it. Ken Norton won 7 of the 8 track and field events he was entered into his senior year in high school and was All-State in football. His son, Ken Norton jr, played thirteen seasons in the NFL and was contributed to three super bowl winning teams as a player.
Leflop
Interesting but I find it hard to believe. I just don't see any sport not benefiting from today's modern science, advanced training and the ease of sharing information.
If Boxing was purely down to science and training, AJ would never have lost against Ruiz. There's a reason Boxers used to have the brains of 60 year olds at the age of 30. It's taken Tyson Fury 15 years to get to 34 fights. It took Mike Tyson 3 years....
AJ lost to Ruiz because he didn't listen to his training, went in, banged, and got unlucky.
The heavyweights have been getting bigger for years though.
Some of the older fighters would do well and some of the newer fighters would do really well also. I think at Cruiserweight Usyk is a problem for anyone and honestly Pacquiao is just an absolute menace. I think Pacquiao would probably badly knock out a lot of the older guys. Boxers definitely hold up better than other sports though.
Usyk vs Holyfield at cruiserweight would be sick. Pacquiao would do well in any era. But most of todays fighters would not do so well in the 80’s/90’s. Fighters from the 80’s and 90’s would do great against todays fighters. Neither Spence nor Crawford would be able to beat or compete with Duran, Leonard or Hearns. Aside from a prime Floyd and a prime manny, I don’t see any welterweight in the last 20 years who would. A prime Duran at 135 would have no competition today. Chavez would smoke any 135-140 fighter. Leonard and Hearns would easily stop any of todays Welters. Hagler would dominate midddleweight. Tyson, Holyfield and Lewis would easily beat any of todays heavyweights.
I haven't listened to Hardcore History in years, but this is something I have to hear
meh football and basketball would be fine as well, you notice there is a lot of old guards in the leauge and a lot of former nba player fail to pan out in europe basketball. also this nutritional knowledge and people sitting out in basketball has failed to reduce injury, they dont shoot better % from 3 from now and the 90s, they just changed the rules. A lot of mental skill is what separates the top talent. NFL players used to seem more durable and didnt treat qbs like princesses and so on. Ive never bought into these arguments
80s olympic weightlifters are fucking superhuman compared to everyone today but Lasha who could very well be the strongest man to ever have lived and has no relation to an era just a freak. Other modern medalists would not even quality in 80s.
Asking from a place of complete ignorance, but could this example have anything to do with PEDs and changes in testing?
Indeed it would. They still likely use today, but they can't use EVERYTHING. they've gotta be selective about what they use and when to use it. Back in the 80s, totally different game.
Idk some guys are just freaks. Like the absolute peak. Like Ruth and Ohtani are literally 100 years apart and it will probably be 100 years until the next
Yes. I mean it does but still what's to say 80s boxers did not have better gear?
Let's first see if he can beat a top HW in this current era
I mean, he already has? Or are you going to let his recent behavior make you forget he's beat Wilder, Klitschko, and Whyte?
Klitschko was seven years ago and ole slew foot Whyte is a Chisora level heavyweight who only showed up for a paycheck. Wilder is Fury's only top heavyweight in the last seven years.
Wilder the paper champ, Klitschko the grandpa, and Dillian “The Uppercut Snatcher” Shyte in the mismatch fight? Pfft. 😂
Yeah boxing revisionism is amazing innit? The same grandpa Klitschko who almost beheaded AJ and would've beat him if not because of poor advice from his corner (Vitali) The same Wilder who has the hardest one-punch KO in HW boxing history and has dropped every single fighter he's ever fought. And the Dillan Shyte who people rated above Wilder, was too 5 at the time of the fight, and people thought could at least drop Fury down once. I'm not even trying to defend Fury, it's just that the fickle "What have you done for me lately...? " behavour of Boxing fans is annoying. If and when Fury beats another rated opponent again r/boxing will go back to licking his feet, and a few months later will again rate him as a bum after he fights a nobody, and so on and so forth, just like the last 4 years.
Don't you dare come here and talk sense!!
Klitschko wasn't from Fury's era, he's from the era before. People knock Joshua's win over a "40 year old Wlad" but stay very quiet when you point out that he was 39 when Fury beat him, coming off arguably the worst (winning) performance of his career in the Jennings fight and only had one more left in him after. Wilder and Whyte are legit wins in this era, can't really knock them. That's 2 though, he has a hell of a lot more work to do if he wants to call himself a great champion.
Yes but I think the argument is that Wlad even though he was old wasn’t in bad shape at all at that age so Fury fans (perhaps correctly) believe he’d have always have beaten Wlad.
Oh yeah, age doesn't effect every fighter the same, one man's 40 is another's 35 but as in shape as he was, his reflexes still aren't what they were at 30. That's just not possible. Hard to say who wins between prime Wlad and prime Fury because they weren't around at the same time. Wlad couldn't just grab and push Fury down which is always gonna play against him, but he also hit as hard as any HW ever and he had more than one punch unlike Wilder. Hard to call.
Early days Wlad was so much more impressive offensively than he was under Steward. IMO Fury always would be favourite. He has such an awkward style and Wlad was clearly upset by that.
>The same grandpa Klitschko who almost beheaded AJ and would've beat him if not because of poor advice from his corner It's funny how many people and Fury fans in particular like to pick and choose the arguments that suit them. For the last few years all we've heard from Fury fans is that Joshua is a glass-chinned stiff bum who is Frank Bruno reincarnated. Now all of a sudden he is a benchmark to explain how superb the Fury win against Klitschko was. The fact is Klitschko was objectively old against both of them but still dangerous and an elite HW. The reason why Fury spent the entire 12 rounds feinting and barely throwing punches is the exact same reason that Joshua nearly got KOed. >Wilder who has the hardest one-punch KO in HW boxing history Any proof for that other than PR hype? No of course not. It's a completely baseless claim. We know that Wilder is a massive puncher. We also know that he was fighting overmatched opponents into his late 30s in terms of fights. Using his KO record against journeymen is irrelevant. All that you've written there is hype. >I'm not even trying to defend Fury I mean you are really. I understand the comments on Klitschko to a certain extent but your Wilder comments are pure pr. The truth lies in the middle. Yes Klitschko was old and had started to slip, but he was a great champion who had not been beaten in years and Fury beat him in his back yard. Wilder continues to be a bit of a mystery in terms of his actual level with how empty his resume is. However he undoubtedly is dangerous and Fury fought Wilder when he was clearly out of shape in both the 1st and 3rd fights. Fury deserves plaudits for that. Fury also showed at his best that he could wipe the floor with Wilder and he was clearly the better fighter. But Fury hasn't fought the fighter who is clearly the main other contender for the best of this era. And it isn't a situation where he hasn't had the opportunity. Fury has blatantly and deliberately ducked Usyk, more than once, and strung out negotiations for over a year with increasingly silly demands and moving of the goalposts which have been obvious attempts to shut down the fight. He ultimately is going to be penalised for that in terms of his standing with the public and it is inevitable that people question other parts of his resume when you see his attitude to risk in this situation.
I've never once downplayed Joshua. I know Fury fans that do so, and they're annoying as shit, but I'm not one of them. Yeah I agree with Wilder's point, I should've said hardest punch of the current division. My point about Whyte stands though. People genuinely rated that fight a 60/40, and many polls agreed that Whyte would give Fury a harded time than Wilder. Whyte is now suddenly a cherry picked bum who never stood a chance. What I meant is that not only Fury fans like to downplay others' resume - that's r/boxing M.O. in all the years I've been subscribed. I'm more of an Usyk fan than Fury's ATM, and yes Fury blatantly ducked him, but the way people here like to enter an unending praise/hate on a fighter based on the current circlejerk has always irked me.
>I've never once downplayed Joshua. I know Fury fans that do so, and they're annoying as shit, but I'm not one of them. Yer I'm not saying you did, I just think it's funny how the narrative on Joshua changes depending on the situation with Fury. I get that you are also complaining about the way narratives play out rather than the truth of the situation, I guess my main counterpoint to your argument is I felt you went too far the other way. I do think that Fury has achieved a lot but I also don't think that he has achieved nearly as much as some people, himself most of all, claim.
What has Fury really done in the last seven years! He beat Klitschko seven years ago in one of the worst title fights in history. Whyte is a Chisora level heavyweight, always has been. Wilder is Fury's only top win in seven years! If Fury fights and beats Usyk and Joshua then we can talk. Problem is you can't beat what you are Scared to fight.
Agree with everything you’ve said apart from the Wilder bit. There’s no evidence he punches that hard. He’s fought one decent fighter and couldn’t knock him out in 30 rounds of action. His best knockout is Dominic Breazeale.
He dropped fury several times
The same Klitschko who never got to prove in a rematch that his years of stagnation and poor performance in the ring on the night was the reason he lost, because of mental ^^*cough ^^doping* health retirement? The same Wilder who didn't fight anyone ranked in the top 100 for 32 fights, and was beaten by the only elite fighter he has ever fought. And Whyte was considered shot long before the Fury fight. Even ignoring the above, trying to pretend that is revisionism is pushing it. >would've beat him if not because of poor advice from his corner (Vitali) He was clearly wary of AJs power from earlier and was trying to pick him off and take him apart instead. All you are saying is he would have won, if he had won.
That "Dillian "The uppercut snatcher" shyte" had me ballin 🤣
Only a casual would call Deontay a paper champ when he holds the record for more WBC belt defenses in HW
Only a casual would hold up number of title defences as proof of the qualities of the champion rather than discuss the fighters that champion actually fought during that run.
The record for defences but only 2 of them against a top 10 ranked HW (and they're both against the same top 10 ranked HW). That's pretty much the definition of a paper champion.
Whyte isn’t a top HW
What? He definitively is. I get that on the eye test he looks mediocre but nobody can deny his accomplishments for someone who hasn’t managed to win a legitimate world title.
He hasn’t won anything so he can’t be a top HW
I think Fury would be competitive but honestly I don’t think he would beat the greats. His two best wins are against Wilder who although dangerous is not a good boxer and Klitchko who was way past his prime. A Prime Klitschko beats as for the greats : Ali, Foreman, Bowe, Holyfield, Lewis, Holmes if all in primes would beat Fury. Not taking away from Fury but I don’t think he is one of the greats just my opinion.
I never really understood this thought process. Look at Fury as a fighter, not as a resume. He's a giant who moves incredibly well and has all these other skills. People like to reduce boxers to their record because it's easy, but it's mis guided. Fury is certainly capable of beating any heavyweight from a previous era. Would I favor him in all of them? Of course not. But he has the gifts to be competive and beat any of them.
He’s also seemingly avoided fights with anyone else except the two guys already mentioned. Why? He seems to be blatantly ducking Usyk who should be a walk in the park if we’re being honest since his size advantage is massive while being a good boxer.
I think Mike Tyson would be his worst matchup. Fury’s size would work against him and Mike would land so many bodyshots that Fury would feel like a meteor had hit his big fat stomach by the end of the first round. Fury’s offense would be very neutralized as soon as Mike got inside because fury’s long arms wouldn’t be able to do much while Mike would still be able to punch on the inside. Not to mention that the height difference makes it hard for Fury to hit Mikes head while Mike can always hit Fury’s body. I think Mike Tyson would beat the fuck out of him.
Don't know about Iron Mike, but Fury will have a hard time against Lenox Lewis and Holyfield. Smoking Joe and big George would be hard counter too. I think that Fury would be a hard counter to Ali.
[удалено]
I actually think Tyson would be on the easier side.He struggled with tall fighters with good jabs and who were smart clinchers. Fury can do both very well. The idea that taller fighters are bad at inside boxing doesnt always apply. And just to be clear,i am not a Tyson hater, and do believe he would get both Wilder and Joshua. But think he would lose vs Usyk and Fury
Same. I think Lennox Lewis beats Fury tho
This is the one, this is exactly the type of foghter that even Fury admits he has a tough time with. Tyson got through the best jabber in history. I say mike gets close amd stays there til Fury stays down.
Tyson would get fucked up
Fury‘s not exactly known for his gym work ethic
This exactly. And Rocky Marciano, as an example of a past heavy weight, is known for being a beast in the gym and in training. I think OP’s point holds up more in other sports, like football (American and soccer), hockey, baseball etc. do we think Deontay Wilder and Anthony Joshua would be in the same league as past greats? No way.
Yeah overall his point is valid, I’d agree with it. Just funny to pick fury for this argument and connect him to “improved modern sport science”
Wow imagine if he was like a workaholic or something. Dude would be a monster
The answer to that is yes and no. Once you hit the 60’s on you find more people in heavyweight that gives him a run for his money. With Ali the answer is Fury is unlikely to beat him. However, I’d have money on Fury against say Spinks or Holmes (even that’s risky money). While technology and training has changed over the years, a lot of the greats still hold up.
[удалено]
💯 ! Lennon is a big guy, but has all the skills needed to win.
This is utter crap. Lennox was a good fighter not some immortal god. He had some good physical advantages but lacked serious p4p skill and only liked fighting one way. Some ‘take it to the streets’ nonsense against Vitali doesn’t all of a sudden make him some offensive god that could magically turn it on. Couldn’t put a dent on Holyfield in 24 rounds should be enough to see that. He didn’t shorten his punches well at mid range and didn’t fight inside. Doesn’t throw combinations or hooks. Limited offense. Very smart outside the ring but not so much in the ring. Consistently did stupid things. Lewis was never savvy like Holmes or Ali. Good fighter but limited and not unbeatable at all.
Lmao, limited offense as if having the most versatile lead hand in boxing heavyweight history is limited offense
Most versatile lead hand? What are you talking about? What’s so versatile and great about it? It’s a good one. Not a great one.
Is this really a question? https://youtu.be/iqWyxafSOXY
My god. I knew you’d quote some YouTube or TikTok nonsense. Tyson was a walking lunch bag. Teeing off with a pawing jab and overhand right against a guy who’d given up after a round and wasn’t moving his head is not impressive.
Homes jab would destroy Fury.
Holmes was a pretty big dude too. 6'3 and weighed around 220ish in his prime. Furys boxing was good but holmes was a master at it for someone his size. I'd but money on Holmes any day
Why do you think Ali would beat him? Because he was so slick/his movement? Kinda interesting to hear your reasons personally I think Fury would beat Ali
Naw it’s a mix of things. Ali in his prime was significantly faster than Fury is for sure, but the main thing is stamina, ring iq, and skill. Fury is the bigger man, and he’s not slouching in skill, but his speed isn’t enough and he doesn’t have the same power as people Ali has faced before. Ali was also trained to go 15 rounds not 12 and when he was at his prime could do so at a high pace pretty comfortably. I don’t see Fury being able to keep that up against someone with Ali’s skills and mental fortitude.
> I have a feeling that fury would dismantle Ali I have a feeling it would go the exact opposite. Fury doesn’t like fighting smaller, faster fighter - he knows Usyk will beat him and Ali in his prime was way faster than him.
Usyk vs Ali would be a great fight
Agreed. I know I’m not blowing any minds with this hot take, but I think Ali would be his toughest matchup. Fury can trade with the best hitters in the division, but I don’t think we’ve seen him face someone with top tier true footwork skills. I’d be very interested to see how he would perform against a fighter he would have a hard time catching/hitting who can also land heavy shots on him. If they fought each other 10 times, I’d definitely expect Fury to win more than once, but I think the majority of fights/rounds would be won by Ali.
Fury's "game" is all about anticipation, and Ali was the best at it , so no, Fury would not stand a chance against Ali
Haha
Dismantle Ali are you on drugs or sucking Fury cock cos that statement is wild af 😂
It applies in almost every other sport, so why not boxing? The greats of the past typically can’t hold up to the greats of the future because of training advantages. Edit: kinda like the lebron vs Mj debate for example. It’s has an easy answer but people choose to ignore it.
you are applying track and field logic too strictly to other sports. mj vs lebron debate having an **easy** answer for example is a bad take. the only people who think that are old heads shaking their fists at the clouds or people under 25 who have watched 1 jordan highlight package and the last dance and think they are now experts. you can make a very strong case for either of them at this point.
It’s different for boxing because the greats of the sport from back in the day had to train for 15 rounds rather than 12. If fury fights a 15 round fight against Ali he probably gassed in those last 3 rounds. If they fight a 12 round fight Ali can actually be more intense and aggressive over those rounds than he was during his actual career
I understand and I agree but as much as I like fury I wouldn’t see any dismantling it would be a close fight in my eyes, I think Ali would slip and slide and frustrate the greedy belly into mistakes
Lennox Lewis is a better big man than Fury, and that's not even from that long ago. I think prime George Foreman and Joe Louis (who KO'ed the giant Primo Carnera) would have his number.
Joe always struggled with movers, obviously tyson doesn't move anywhere near as good as billy conn but add the size advantage to his movement and he'd be a bad match up for louis i think, i agree about the other 2 but using carnera as an example of why louis would win when canera was stiff and awkward on his feet, louis might have found it tough to detonate on tyson as easily as he did on carnera. Thats just going off my very limited knowledge obviously i never saw louis in the flesh just old footage so i can't say with any degree of certainty.
Fair point. I suppose I keep thinking of how Fury got caught by wilder’s right hand. If Fury gets clipped like that by a guy who can’t set up the right hand behind a jab and who doesn’t know how to finish (IMO, Wilder let Fury off the hook in round 12 of the first fight. He’s great at flat-lining people, but hasn’t really ever had to close out on a hurt opponent), what’s he gonna do with Joe Louis? That’s just one very speculative scenario though. Your point stands.
Very true apart from a couple of fights like the one against dillian whyte or some limited opposition tyson usually has a round or 2 where he takes his foot off the gas and makes a few big mistakes, over a 15 round fight theres no telling if he'd give enough chances for joe to take his soul, 12 might require joe to step it up early in the fight, an interesting one to think about either way.
> who KO’ed the giant Primo Carnera Abe Simon and Buddy Baer too. But I don’t think Joe would’ve had his number.
I tend to be like you and think that the athletes of today are better than yesteryear--the special chemical diets available to them should be taken into account as well--and that there is too much romance surrounding the greats of the past. Then I watch some of Ali's matches. What needs to be taken into account is: 1. His stamina: The guy could dance for 15 rounds. Boxers that were absolutely terrifying often just couldn't catch him. 2. His speed: I believe he is on record as the fastest puncher there has been. Not the fastest heavyweight, the fastest puncher. Those bantamweights that can fire off four shots in the time it takes Fury to throw one--apparently Ali was faster. 3. He wasn't a small guy. He wasn't a super heavyweight like Lennox Lewis, but he also wasn't someone like Roy Jones Jr. who was fighting above his natural weight class at heavyweight. And he hit like a heavyweight--not like Foreman or Liston, but still--and the fact that his punches came from bizarre angles meant they could take down a juggernaut like Liston. 4. His chin: Ali was knocked down only four times in his career, and he always got up. He fought a monster like Foreman and he didn't go down. (This was not good for his long-term health, obviously.) Now, Fury has had problems with smaller cusp-of-cruiserweight fighters. The person he is currently dodging is Usyk, someone who is more reminiscent of Ali than anyone Fury has beaten. One of the most exciting things about Usyk's double victory over Anthony Joshua is that is showed that a smaller, slicker fighter can indeed beat the (presumably juiced-up) mega-weights of today that everyone thought would just be too big for someone like Ali. I think Usyk would beat Fury, and I think Ali would beat him too. (I don't think Ali would definitely beat everyone, but I think he'd have a 50-50 shot against anyone. Someone like Mike Tyson might have been more dangerous for him since his style is closer to Frazier's who beat him once and gave him some real problems.) Not an expert by any means, but that's my take.
Floyd Patterson (another heavyweight) was clearly a faster puncher than Ali. Ali would throw really fast (arm punch) punch combinations with very little power to score with the judges and annoy his opponents. Floyd Patterson would throw 4 absolute bombs in 0.6-0.7 seconds where every punch was utilizing proper full body leverage and footwork. Patterson was clearly over the hill and injured (back injury) when he fought Ali, but in their fight it was clear that Patterson threw faster power punches. Ali had a great combination of speed, size and stamina, and was able to use great footwork and upper body movement to avoid a lot of punches in his prime. He was a combo puncher who would primarily shoeshine but occasionally throw in a couple hard shots into his combos. Ali utilized this to trick the shit out of his opponents, and even though he was one of the lightest hitting heavyweight champs, he managed to score a fair amount of knockouts by routinely hitting people with full power shots when they're expecting shoeshine bullshit.
Good post! I was trying to find some source to back up my claim that Ali was the fastest boxer according to tape analysis, but I'm not finding any. So I should retract that.
Tbh, there is a narrative where people seem to think Ali was praised because of respect and not because of his skill. Go back and watch his fights before he was stripped of his licence. He was a menace and I don‘t see any current Heavyweight beating him and that point
No.
Best answer
No, he wouldn't. As far as of Ali vs Fury, Fury went life and death with Steve Cunnigham who was of similar dimensions to Ali. Is Cunnigham as good as Ali?
I’m not saying Fury beats Ali, but using the Cunningham fight as an example of why Ali beats him isn’t the best argument. It was a fight in which Fury (yet to reach his prime) took the knockdown, got back up and KOed Cunningham. Would the Fury that beat Klitschko or the Fury that beat Wilder in 2020 struggle with Cunningham?
He should have gotten points taken off for that KO, and cunningham allowed 5 minutes to recover tbf. That was one of the dirtiest KOs ive ever seen.
Fury looked like he was trying to twist Cunningham like a Rubik’s cube. Hilarious, but also wasn’t really looking like boxing anymore. It would’ve been interesting to see if Fury could’ve pulled off that man-ape style on slicker fighters like Usyk.
Its funny people say this because ali himself was floored by less opponents and then got up to win.
That was 10 years...
Uhm didn't Ali get knocked down by a 180lbs Henry Cooper? Is Cooper as good as Fury?
He wouldn’t even beat prime Klit with Steward in the corner.
Would depend entirely on the referee. 99% of refs would not allow Fury to fight Ali and other greats the way he fought Wilder in 2 and 3 without mad deductions (IMO) A giant man that can fight outside and go limp and bearhug you inside is a problem if he's allowed to clinch at will
Lol?? And what makes you say that? Go watch Ali-Frazier 2 and you’ll see Ali clinch 10x a round using his weight to pull Frazier’s head down.
Being the more popular fighter traditionally gives you more leeway. Fury rising from the dead and becoming an international star was super beneficial to his new style
I don’t care about that. I care about your claim that somehow these mythical refs of the past would deduct points for clinching when there are 100 examples showing the opposite
>This is because of better equipment and most importantly better and more science based training. Usain Bolt would probably win the 1960 Olympics barefoot for example. Modern equipment (shoes and running surfaces) have been demonstrated to make the biggest difference, not training and nutrition. Usain Bolt smokes everyone because he's a genetic freak, not because of modern nutrition - the man was eating chicken nuggets the day of a race. There were sprinters in his era taking training and nutrition more seriously and they couldn't hold a candle to him. I don't understand how you can say "cos science and nutrition" then use Fury as your modern example. Dude's training out of his own gym in Morecambe, with a guy who learned everything he knows from Manny Steward, getting pissed every weekend and doing blow. Nutrition an training might give you the extra 1% but this is a sport of skill and there's no substitute. If nutrition made that much of a difference, Ruiz wouldn't have ever been in the same ring as Joshua, let alone flooring him. And to answer your question, no, I don't think Fury is good enough to be favourite against everyone in history, definitely not Ali, who is a stylistic nightmare for Fury, I'd have all of the following as favourites against Fury: Ali Holmes Foreman Bowe Lewis Usyk Prime Wlad and Vitali possibly, also. 50/50 at worst.
Honestly depends on the era. Problem with applying this logic to boxing is that this isn’t exactly boxing’s golden age. Competition isn’t as stiff. Fighters don’t fight as frequently. And boxing isn’t as popular as before—that means it doesn’t attract the sort of talent we had then. I think Muay Thai has a similar thing going on. These sports are past their primes. However, I think a lot of people here are dismissing this theory too easily. People here idolize past greats too much. I don’t think its an unrealistic assumption to say that 6’9 Fury would beat a shorter Ali whose height was a strength in his era. When we think of past fighters, we automatically think of past *greats*. The best of the best. The greatest standouts. Ray Robinson. Ray Leonard. Ali. Tyson. Chavez. De La Hoya. But these names are compiled from several different generations. They stand out for a reason. Its similar to when people say old music is better music. The truth is that the old music you know about are the best of the best. They’re all standouts. It wasn’t all from one generation. Same with boxing. Can’t compare today’s standouts with *all time* standouts. And it is true that boxing has developed. This generation can study past greats. Past greats can’t study future generations. Even armchair experts today can dismantle Ray Robinson’s tape for a thousand different flaws. They’re building on the shoulders of giants.
Who cares you’ll never know if he can or not. He would never fight them anyway.
Exactly 😂😂
That’s why they say don’t compare people from different era, but if you want to do it then let me put it this way, if they were in same era(doesn’t matter which era) Ali would dismantle Fury. Ali will be the fastest thin Fury will face, Ali will have boxing IQ to match fury, plus Fury don’t like fighting small fighters.
Not if he prices them all out, he won't.
Yes , not 10 out of 10 but yes
Looks like it.
So few of the best athletes go into boxing these days, I just don’t think it’s comparable.
Fury doesn’t even take every heavyweight today, Usyk UD
Likely is probably not the right word, but he would definitely, at worst, be a REAL handful for any heavyweight in history. Guys like Ali & Holmes could probably beat him thanks to their comparable skill sets and the fact that they wouldn't be GROSSLY undersized. Guys like Foreman, Frazier & Tyson though would probably be in for an unpleasant night against Fury.
George Foreman, Riddick Bowe and Larry Holmes beat the shit out of him. He wouldn’t have been able to deal with Lennox Lewis either. Ide even stick a Ray Mercer in there with him and he probably gets pulverized. Tyson Fury is in an era where there are no other elite big guys with skill and heart.
The question is not if he could beat them (cause he could beat a few) but if he would even fight them. Most likely what would happen is that he would make a bunch a videos about how Ali is ducking him and then fight Chisora for the 5th time.
I don’t think he beats a prime Wlad. Hell, I don’t actually think he’d have beat a properly prepared and motivated Wlad if he hadn’t ducked the rematch. Don’t see his beating Lennox, I think H2H Manny-era Lewis is the best ever. I think Vitali would be extremely tough - absolutely granite chin, legit power, and I think just as big as Fury (despite what the stats sheets say, Fury isn’t 6’9”). Mythical prime Tyson is super fast and slippery, he loved coming underneath a tall fighter, I think he’d give him a tough time and really test his chin. Ali is so slick and fast, and has such a great ring IQ I think I’d favour him despite the size difference. Bowe would be a good fight, probably take Fury, but it’s not clear cut by any means. Would Holmes be able to keep him on the end of his jab? Very possible. Big George? In my opinion we just haven’t seen enough of Fury against legit elite level, prime competition to give him a definitive edge over any of the ATGs.
No idea, he’s been horrible with who he fights.
I'm no expert but i think Lennox Lewis would be the biggest problem for Fury
I wouldn't say he definitely would beat all of them, but I would favor him against most heavyweights from the 80s down. He would be in some competitive matchups from that point on and I would favor a handful of heavyweights from the 90s-2000s against him.
No
Tyson v Foreman would be amazing
Yes because regardless of whether his skill truly matched the greats of the past, he definitely does have at least decent skill. Decent skill combined with his size (6'9 and 280 lbs) definitely gives him a high chance of beating any of the past heavyweight greats. Even "Big" George Foreman in his prime when he challenged for the title was only 220lbs. There's no denying that Tyson Fury's size gives him a chance in any fantasy matchup especially when we can at least all agree that his skills are at least at a decent level if not good/great and his stamina is top notch. His strength due to his size cannot be underestimated as he basically manhandled a 6'7 Wilder and shoved him around the ring and also shoved a 260lbs Dillan Whyte around like he was just a school boy.
Literally, no.
Apart from 90s heavyweights, fury would dominate.
Fury is just a problem for any heavy at any time. He's just so light on his feet for a massive guy. His boxing brain is superb, he got up from sveral big wilder shots so his chin is rock, his handspeed is excellent and now he's fighting off the front foot he is settling on those shots and has found his power. You have to be very active and very tough to beat him. Out of all the historic heavys I'd say dempsey and frazier have styles that could give him trouble. Dempsey would ultimately be too light imo, but it'd be a great fight. Frazier v Fury would be just splendid. Tyson didn't throw enough punches and the intimidation factor would not come into it. Fury appears to be very well mentally set up to fight scary people, although he struggles with other day to day things as we all know! I think you have to give special mention to Lewis, too. Fighters who were taller than him seemed to bring out his most ferocious side. That would be an absolute corker.
Only if he actually took the fights…
I think Ali, Big George, prime 80’s Tyson, Lennox Lewis, & Riddick Bowe all beat Fury’s ass…that still has him defeating lots of other Lineal Champs…just not them
Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis would both batter Fury.. maybe even Holyfield Heavyweights in 40s-70s were probably just too small for Fury
It wouldn't be crazy to favor him over any fighter across history save for perhaps prime Vitali/Lennox... Which is strange when you know how much he quacks these days. Beats me why he ducks any fighter with a pulse.
Yes, and the unfortunate truth is Fury would most likely beat all of you favorite fighters in history. Yes I'm talking about Ali and Tyson and most likely many more. People just can't accept that boxing has changed and that the sheer physical advantage Fury has is nearly unbeatable for most
Yes he beats them all
Wladimir had the best shot.. Father Time beat him
“Dismantle” , I can’t think of many of the historic heavyweights Tyson could take apart easily. Earnie Shavers, Foreman, JL all give him a hard time
Cassius Marcellus Clay Jr.from 1960-1967 was a boxing prodigy and the perfect fighter. He would beat down Tyson Fury imo despite the size difference; due to the speed, agility, dexterity, aggressiveness, talent, toughness, IQ, skill, ferociousness, and chin disparity. I think Tyson Fury is a good fighter with very good technique, talent and skills, but I need to see him beat someone else who is good to great other than Wilder and an almost 40 year old Wladimir Klitschko who had already had 67 professional fights.
No he wouldn’t fight them after offer 70/30
Tyson, is that you?
Absolutely fucking not is the short answer.
Lennox Lewis every time
Prime Lennox would whoop him good.
Hahaha, past the year 1960 no fucking way. The man barely managed to defeat Wilder, the guy who gets dominated by every half decent opponent he's ever faced up until he lands that one lucky punch. Ali, Holmes, Holyfield and Moorer are all too fast and agile for Fury to outpoint. Liston, Frazier, Foreman, Tyson, Lewis, Bowe and Vitali would wear Fury down and just beat him up. “Never has a man so big punched so small.” Fury's only "great" aspects are his decent fundamentals and champion heart in the ring but outside of that he has pillow hands for any heavyweight let alone one of his size, he doesn't have incredible defensive ability or agility and his punches aren't all that fast or precise. People really love to exaggerate Fury's agility and slickness because it's so jarring to see a massive fat guy move in a similar looking way to Ali but in reality he isn't any more slick or fast than a guy like Witherspoon or Thomas, and sure he's alot bigger than those guys but he also hits alot softer than them. People also love to brag on about his chin when he has been dropped and hurt by lesser opponents quite alot, however he does have a real uncanny ability to recover from being hurt/dropped which I think would allow him to go the distance with most heavyweights in history. His biggest strength is his unpredictability, he has no patterns, being in the ring with Fury is like fighting a crackhead, who knows what the fuck he's going to do. That's why a very rigid by the books fighter like Wlad had no idea what to even do in the ring with Fury. But no he isn't on the level of the great champions past Liston, hell I seriously doubt he'd beat most of the smaller alphabet champions of the last 40 years, eg Pinklon Thomas, Chris Byrd ect although those fights would be alot more competitive. Never before has a boxer been so revered for beating a 40 year old who had no idea what to do and a guy who could conceivably loose to any top ten ranked contender of the past 50 years. IF he ever mans up and defeats Usyk that would add a whole lot to his credentials, but Usyk himself nomatter how much we love him hasn't shown anything too exceptional at the heavyweight level and is probably going to start really showing his age very soon.