Not to mention that cruiserweight has always been the weakest division in terms of talent depth. That doesn’t take away from Usyk unifying the belts there, but it also shouldn’t be exaggerated. As I’ve said before, the number of titles, even unifications, means nothing unless you look at the level of opposition behind them. It’s easy to hide behind belts and call objectivity “hating,” but that doesn’t change the reality.
Olympic medals are irrelevant here - we’re talking about professional boxing. It has always been professional boxing that measures legendary status and boxers.
As for the “top 10 all‑time greats” claims - Usyk isn’t even in the top 20 at heavyweight. Fighters like Muhammad Ali, Joe Louis, Larry Holmes, Lennox Lewis, George Foreman, Evander Holyfield, Wladimir Klitschko, Vitali Klitschko, Mike Tyson, Joe Frazier, Rocky Marciano, Riddiсk Bowe, Sonny Liston, Ken Norton, Floyd Patterson, Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, and Gene Tunney all built far deeper résumés. Many of them never had the chance to unify the belts, yet they fought two, three, or four times as many heavyweight bouts as Usyk. If anything, that makes Usyk’s path to unification easier, not harder.
What matters is how many top fighters you beat in the division where you want to be remembered as a legend. Almost all of the names above have more title defences at heavyweight, often several times more than Usyk has across cruiserweight and heavyweight combined.
- - Yo, not to mention that most of Usyks cruiser titlist fights were against top champs and contenders who would whoop most heavy champs until the Heavy Division moved to 200lb+
But of course this forum chock full of bummed out slackers and wan kers!:bottle: