Is AJ legacy greater or worse than Wlad's?

Josh had a first stage where people thought he was the best by eye test, but not really fighting the creme de la creme, so it was based on potential. But since his Andy Ruiz loss, he never came back to fully recapture people's belief he was no1.on So although people thought he was the best on basis of having best resume, it revolved around best not fighting each other. Josh just needs to win rematch and beat fury, then he can be wlads equal

Worse than Wlads of course. 28-4 vs 64-5, and although Wlads level of opposition wasnt super eye catching i'd say guys like Byrd, Haye, Peter, prime Povetkin etc were on a comparable level to any of the guys AJ beat. Absolutely comparable. Beating mandatories never gets the credit it deserves. To beat mandatories you have to fight highly rated fighters whose style isn't necessarily right for you. Later career losses happen. In their primes Joshua had Ruiz and Klitschko had Brewster and Sanders. It happens in the heavyweight division. But Klitschko reigned absolutely and did it for a long time. Joshua didn't.

Worse than Wlads of course. 28-4 vs 64-5, and although Wlads level of opposition wasnt super eye catching i'd say guys like Byrd, Haye, Peter, prime Povetkin etc were on a comparable level to any of the guys AJ beat.

Geriatric 41 year old wlad dropped prime AJ. Now flip it and imagine a 41 year old AJ vs a prime Wlad ..... Freaking 34 year old AJ is already shot. There is your answer 'Prime' Joshua was in his 19th fight. Klitschko fought Cody Koch in his 19th fight. 19 fights isn't prime. I won't argue that Wlad's CV is not better... but some of the posts on here are getting a bit silly in search of making bigger and bigger anti-Joshua statements (see paulf's post that would be laughed out of any actual boxing discussion but somehow gets 'liked' in this weird place). Joshua has had an incredible career. Olympic champion, world titles, fought mandatories, unified belts, and generated huge interest in the sport when it was in a lull. Saying Klitschko had a greater career doesn't denigrate any of that. I still can't really understand why so many people feel they have to go further and dismiss one of the better heavyweight campaigns we've seen.

Wlad ofc both CV and career. He was proper athlete until age got him and in 34-35 he wipe the floor with all these guys, may be minus Usyk (questionable). We all know Fury got Wlad on his worst day during personal drama with wife and newborn, and run away from rematch into peds, cocke and retirement,

Wlad. Wlad seemed to improve when he lost. Josh seems to train a lot but not improve

Geriatric 41 year old wlad dropped prime AJ. Now flip it and imagine a 41 year old AJ vs a prime Wlad ..... Freaking 34 year old AJ is already shot. There is your answer

Prime Wlad would chew up all of these guys Usyk would give him problems

is this a joke thread? He barely survived a fight with elderly Klitschko and got KO'd by a fat little troll.

NSB could use a funny thread every now and then :lol1: !!!!!!

Joshua's legacy is that he was a huge money earner, his resume is pretty poor, mostly consisting of past prime 40 yr olds.

Wlad vs other world titlists (not counting WBA "Regular" or any interim) W vs Chris Byrd UD 12 W vs Ray Mercer TKO 6 (Mercer was WBO champ before any of the other 3 bodies recognized them; also ancient at this point) L vs Corrie Sanders TKO 2 L vs Lamon Brewster TKO 5 W vs Samuel Peter UD 12 W vs Chris Byrd TKO 7 W vs Lamon Brewster RTD 6 W vs Sultan Ibragimov UD 12 W vs Hasim Rahman TKO 7 W vs Ruslan Chagaev RTD 9 W vs Samuel Peter KO 10 W vs David Haye UD 12 L vs Tyson Fury UD 12 L vs Anthony Joshua TKO 11 Joshua vs other world titlists (again, no Regular or interim, sorry Povetkin) W vs Charles Martin KO 2 W vs Wladimir Klitschko TKO 11 W vs Joseph Parker UD 12 L vs Andy Ruiz TKO 7 W vs Andy Ruiz UD 12 L vs Oleksandr Usyk UD 12 L vs Oleksandr Usyk UD 12 L vs Daniel DuBois KO 5 A more honest comparison would be to look up the TBRB/Ring ratings and do it that way, but I'm a lazy man.

Worse, wlad was a great champion, wasn't far away from breaking the title defence record. Made a prime povetkin look like a novice. was a clear number 1 in the division for a long time. With aj not fighting the other 2 top heavyweights (fury/wilder) he was never nailed on as the number 1 guy David Haye and Povetkin both v good wins imo

Klitschko: 2 reigns as a world titlist including 1 reign as the unified, lineal heavyweight champion of the world Joshua: 2 reigns as a unified world titlist Klitschko was the champion. He was recognized broadly as the lineal champion and specifically the TBRB and Ring Champion. Being a two time unified titlist is an impressive accomplishment that Joshua is to be commended for, but he was never THE heavyweight champion. Klitschko was, then Fury, then Usyk. Period.

if he retires is his legacy better or worse than Wlad's? Not even close. AJ ducked the fighters we wanted to see him vs Fury and Wilder. Wlad was champ 11 years fought everyone he could even if it was a weak era he still fought whoever was rated top or mando in his run

Wlad by a mile. He was The Champion in the division. AJ was only ever a champion. Big difference.

Wlad has a stronger legacy. For 5+ years he was the clear ruler of the heavyweight division. He doesn't have big standout wins. It was a very weak era but he fought the top contenders and dominated his biggest rival (Haye) when they fought. AJ has some good wins but he wasn't ever the clear top guy because the Wilder fight never happened and then the Fury fight didn't happen. They both have bad losses but AJ's were in the middle of his best years. Whereas with Wlad you could argue that once he got with Steward he really improved. They had a long run without a defeat. So he was more dominant, more skilled, higher peak. When comparing them I also think Wlad's performance vs Peter is worth mentioning. Wlad was dropped multiple times but dug deep, found a way to win. AJ never had a performance like that.

His claim to fame is a W over Klitschko (literally the end of his career) He was never a consistent champion. Andy, Usyk, now Dubois. You have to be consistently winning to be considered an ATG. He's had his flashes here and there, but was never elite. To be honest, in the last decade, the heavyweight divison has been a subpar talent pool. AJ has been well marketed as a top celebrity athlete in the UK, with his TV, commercial appearances. That's always built this bigger than life image of him. Which is not the case in reality of the sport of boxing.

CV and Legacy are a bit different. You can't question Wlad's achievements. They're elite. ​​​​​​I think you can question Joshua's CV. Not in terms of him being a 'hype job' - his boxing achievements have been good enough to justify his career. But he never quite got to the super elite level. Lost twice to Usyk and never got the fights against Wilder and Fury. Wlad is his career defining win and it's just a bit short of true greatness. Legacy is huge though. He ignited the division around 2016/17. The Wilder v Joshua fight loomed and got everyone excited about the division. Then Fury re-emerged. Finally Usyk joins the party, shows himself to be the real class act and cleans up. It's been a brilliant 7-8 year era post Klitschko and it was Joshua who started it and was a huge feature throughout. By 2025 I don't think we'll have any of those 4 left in the sport. Half the supporting cast will be done too. Going into the Dubois fight I didn't see it as a handing over of the baton fight but I now think it was. Dubois is a 90s throwback fighter. He's going to be great to watch.

Worse, wlad was a great champion, wasn't far away from breaking the title defence record. Made a prime povetkin look like a novice. was a clear number 1 in the division for a long time. With aj not fighting the other 2 top heavyweights (fury/wilder) he was never nailed on as the number 1 guy