Fury as an ATG

[Nash out]

This happens a lot with boxing, especially when we analyze the past with rose-colored-glasses. We tend to look at things with a positive-sum-game, especially with fighters who beat each other:
Fighter-A is great, I know this because he once beat Fighter-B who is also great. How do I know Fighter-B is great, he once beat Fighter-A.

It is an insulated, circular logic, that few question; you get one win against a great fighter and then from then on out anyone who beats you also becomes great. Sadly, people will also do the opposite, a negative sum game, towards eras they want to diminish- Fighter-A lost to Fighter-B, ergo he could never be great.

And thats not saying I agree with your specific examples completely, but said biases could be used with them.

It was just an example of how easy it is to spin things. He says Tyson had great wins, if Fury had those same wins, he wouldn't think the same. It would just be, oh but he was this, or he was that. If Tyson beat the same Wilder, he wouldn't downplay it. If Tyson beat the same Wlad, he wouldn't say over the hill Wlad. Nash out.

[The Old LefHook]

Actually, wrong. If Whyte KO's Fury the galoot's legacy will never recover. Period.

DEMPSEY! Please tend to your charge Nash. She is in the thread acting erratically, to use police lingo. Police her, please!

[JAB5239]

I've said it before and I'll say it again....Fury's place in history will be determined by his competition. Great and emphat win tonight, but to be amongst the best you either need crazy longevity, a stellar resume or a signature win against another prime great. The man has not cleaned the division, has not beat a prime ATG and has not logged enough defensed to be in the upper echelon. Give him credit though....based on the eye test he is getting it done. For me though, the eye test doesn't Trump the other things I've named. I will say this, I didn't think Fury would amount to squat 7 or 8 years ago. He's come along way and certainly has a chance to put his name amongst the best to ever do it.

[GhostofDempsey]

Fury will never be an ATG IMO. At best he can be a HOF’er. For one thing, there isn’t enough talent in the HW division to measure his wins against. Even if he becomes undisputed by defeating Usyk or Joshua, they aren’t great fighters, though one could make an argument in favor of Usyk, I don’t think cleaning out a mediocre cruiserweight division qualifies him as a great HW.

How he stacks up against other ATG HW champions is speculative. We don’t know how he stacks up against them because he was and will never be tested against other great fighters. We also can’t dismiss his size advantage over a division that is lacking in talent.

[Ivich]

Pointless defences mean nothing. And Wilder knocks out anybody else from history, and Wlad is an ATG that was 11 year unbeaten, tons of defences too which seems to be your thing. Viva La Fury. Nash out.

What exactly is pointless about defending your title against top ten ranked contenders? How else are we to measure fighters?By your "eye test?"lol

Tyson faced 13 men who were either top ten ranked or champion.
Lewis beat 14.


Fury has faced 4 , 3 of which fights were against the same man!

Spot the difference?

[Ivich]

It was just an example of how easy it is to spin things. He says Tyson had great wins, if Fury had those same wins, he wouldn't think the same. It would just be, oh but he was this, or he was that. If Tyson beat the same Wilder, he wouldn't downplay it. If Tyson beat the same Wlad, he wouldn't say over the hill Wlad. Nash out.

What part of my post was "spin".
You're now mind reading ? In as much as you know what I would say in a given hypothetical situation? Ridiculous!

Here is my earlier post that you claimed was biased and makes me an idiot,
Tyson beat many ranked contenders and several champions.Spinks was not a LHVy when he fought Holmes and his last few fights had been at heavyweight. Ali has the deepest resume of any heayweight champion.Lewis has a great resume.Holyfield was a ranked heavyweight for over 12 years!
Please point out the bias in my statement? Please point out the inaccuracies in it?
I haven't been here long but reading your recent posts I formed the erroneous impression that you were just playing for laughs.Imagine my surprise when I realised you are actually serious and believe what you write!

[Ivich]

Even if he ****s Whyte out in dominate style?

This is the time for Fury to Wow us if he wants a legacy that will live on.

P.S. Are you in the cheap seats? Lol can't imagine how much ringside seats must be going for.

You're six hours ahead of us sun wise so it must be getting close to late afternoon.

Enjoy! Take pic!

[Ivich]

Even if he ****s Whyte out in dominate style?

This is the time for Fury to Wow us if he wants a legacy that will live on.

P.S. Are you in the cheap seats? Lol can't imagine how much ringside seats must be going for.

You're six hours ahead of us sun wise so it must be getting close to late afternoon.

Enjoy! Take pic!

[QueensburyRules]

I've said it before and I'll say it again....Fury's place in history will be determined by his competition. Great and emphat win tonight, but to be amongst the best you either need crazy longevity, a stellar resume or a signature win against another prime great. The man has not cleaned the division, has not beat a prime ATG and has not logged enough defensed to be in the upper echelon. Give him credit though....based on the eye test he is getting it done. For me though, the eye test doesn't Trump the other things I've named. I will say this, I didn't think Fury would amount to squat 7 or 8 years ago. He's come along way and certainly has a chance to put his name amongst the best to ever do it.

- - Hey, 2x Ring champ for a collective 6 years with 2 defenses vs Wilder then Whyte. If that ain't great, well what is?

[Willie Pep 229]

Look at all those security barriers - very few get very close - damn terorist.