Does Fury get a "Historical Bump" for this KO?

[Willow The Wisp]

I don't believe it a skill - I do believe lists gain credibility with knowledge.

My negativity come from two complaints:

. . . Posters who ridiculously believe their list (READ opinion) somehow has more value than the other guy's list, and then become rude about it.

. . . As I mentioned in my original complaint, the manner in which they attack one another's criteria, e.g. see method v resume ETC. As if one actually has more value than the other.

In short, list making can be an exploration but seems more often to become a road to hubris.

Maybe it belongs more in Fantasy Fights than history.

I don't understand your use of the word 'skill' here - as I said above, I realize greater knowledge will affect the value of a list but it's still just conjecture.

What skill?

Stop making me the example of crappy lists dammit! Lol.

[Willow The Wisp]

So back a step to the main discussion thrust......maybe we can begin that process of assigning "historical rank" or "level of greatness", if indeed that body of work is complete. Many fans prefer to see a champion go out on their shield and pass the torch. Understandable. Moreso if we had any sense that the title claims that followed would remin one, instead of resulting in a protracted tourney.
He sounds like he really means it. "The fans will always want more, they are always baying for more blood. But at the end of the day I don’t have anything more to give. I’ve given everything I’ve got. I’ve been a professional for 14 years, I’ve been boxing over 20 years. I just wanted to walk out on top, go out with a ****. Nearly 100,000 at Wembley, with a knockout performance – they will not forget the Gypsy King in a hurry, and no amount of material assets or money will make me come back out of retirement because I’m very happy".
Personally, I'll miss him allot. Another great character and great warrior embedded in the 300+ year lineage. A shining and wholly unique part of the longest, richest recorded history of any sport. Thats a very big deal, as big as the man himself. I'm sorry he wont get his turn with Joshua, Usyk. I'm sorry we don't get to credit him as a unification champion (important only if those fly-by-night Sanctioning Bodies still hold any real meaning for you).
Historically, when we assess the real, dominant greats of, say the past 40 years, we generally look to Holmes, Tyson, Holyfield, Foreman, Lewis, W. Klitschko and Fury, with little regard for who was truly "undisputed ", aware of how cheaply these belts can be stripped and how absurdly those Alphabet soup ratings can be rigged. So given the absence of another strong claim to being champion, observing Joshua's W-L-W-L career and Usyk's anemic resume at the weight; Fury can bounce out with a strong sense of having little left to prove, and join Marciano in Very Elite company, with his health intact. Had Joshua done his part and dispatched Ruiz and Usyk the first time & last time he was calledon to do that, and allowed Fury to perform the heavy lifting by getting through Wilder (very likely the next WBC Champion - You can quote me later) in a best of three series; Tyson Fury might have had a true blockbuster to stick around for, as some unfinished business. But that did not come to pass as the very good, charming and built A.J. proved to be but a media creation, alas.
So, Fury is a great one, if not by the gross tonnage of his work, then by the command by which he made his long, gangly frame work for him as the tallest and the heaviest superb-level boxer who has yet lived.

[billeau2]

I don't believe it a skill - I do believe lists gain credibility with knowledge.

My negativity come from two complaints:

. . . Posters who ridiculously believe their list (READ opinion) somehow has more value than the other guy's list, and then become rude about it.

. . . As I mentioned in my original complaint, the manner in which they attack one another's criteria, e.g. see method v resume ETC. As if one actually has more value than the other.

In short, list making can be an exploration but seems more often to become a road to hubris.

Maybe it belongs more in Fantasy Fights than history.

I don't understand your use of the word 'skill' here - as I said above, I realize greater knowledge will affect the value of a list but it's still just conjecture.

What skill?

The skill is in taking information and comparing it in a meaningful way. So we have these random fighters... all with different qualities, fighting in different eras, etc... Someone can take, condense and draw a conclusion of relative merit in a hierarchical fashion... in a meaningful way. Like what a good appraiser for real estate does: Bad appraisers will sometimes say things like: "this house is worth two million and fifty dollars." Anyone with any sense understands that "fifty dollars" is silly and that no one can absolutely predict what a house will sell for down to the tens lol. NO, what you want are homes similar so you can bracket a homes value with a series of house values that give you a meaningful point of comparison... lets say 3 homes slightly different, but similar enough to show a meaningful range of values where the appraised home should fall.

Its the same with a great list: instead of looking at a fighter per se, you bracket a fighters value based on comparing them to other fighters of similar quality. What often emerges is a real understanding of what separates one class of fighters, or even a particular fighter from others. the value is in the brackets, the total organization of the whole...not in the individual fighter.

I hope this makes sense and is not overly pedantic lol.

[Nash out]

And besides Fury likely being on peds, Wlad was 40 years old and clearly past it as seen in his previous fight against Jennings where he looked washed up. The version of Wlad that fought Fury was very far from ‘very good’.

Wrong fight. Fury needed the Peds for Hammer, how could he beat Hammer otherwise? He passed a million tests for the Wlad fight, trust Nash, Nash knows. Wlad was in his 30s and absolute prime! Of course he needed spiked water, hammer gloves, a disloyal trainer, and voodoo to beat Wilder though.

Don't make Nash mentor you as well, Nash has enough on their plate with Queensbury Rules and Stuntman Mike, the finest stuntman of them all, but not a boxing expert like the Great Nash. Nash out.

[billeau2]

I will add something else about Lists here: For those of us who live in a world where we see things more in relation to each other than absolute objective things... its very daunting to have to find points to consider and compare because there are just soooo many things one can look at. Thats one of the problems with trying to determine idiocyncratic things that affect a fight, without knowing how other fights were affected: So when BATTS tells us "aww Fury was juicin' thats why he beat Vlad" How do we know Roy Jones wasn't when he beat Toney? or if any particular fighter was doing something? unless it is proved as a fact.

It is IMO the height of ignorance to advance an agenda by excusing a fighter's loss/victory away. It is something that casuals do and perhaps one of the reasons Pep's BS detector was triggered... and frankly I don't blame him under the circumstances.

[StarshipTrooper]

I will add something else about Lists here: For those of us who live in a world where we see things more in relation to each other than absolute objective things... its very daunting to have to find points to consider and compare because there are just soooo many things one can look at. Thats one of the problems with trying to determine idiocyncratic things that affect a fight, without knowing how other fights were affected: So when BATTS tells us "aww Fury was juicin' thats why he beat Vlad" How do we know Roy Jones wasn't when he beat Toney? or if any particular fighter was doing something? unless it is proved as a fact.

It is IMO the height of ignorance to advance an agenda by excusing a fighter's loss/victory away. It is something that casuals do and perhaps one of the reasons Pep's BS detector was triggered... and frankly I don't blame him under the circumstances.

I think you can safely assume if the heart of their career was from the '90s forward that they're pretty much ALL juicing with one PED or another. Primarily HGH and blood doping (which is really difficult to detect or prove).

[billeau2]

I think you can safely assume if the heart of their career was from the '90s forward that they're pretty much ALL juicing with one PED or another. Primarily HGH and blood doping (which is really difficult to detect or prove).

Ill tell you what: WHATEVER they are doing? I think they are ALL doing it! No athlete, or fighter I can think of ever turned down a way to perform better. Steriods when used medically often allow someone to heal faster. If your older this is an tremendous advantage in itself.

there is also a grey area where a lot of stuff related to proteins, synthesis of oxygen, and nutrition are part of advances and somewhat related to doping. I actually have friends who know Victor Conte. Believe it or not, his major advancement to athletes was a very very specialized and exspensive machine and lab set up that was cutting edge about nutritional things like micro amounts of different enzymes, etc... stuff that was small but made a gigantic difference in how a person metabolised nutrition... things that most equipment would never detect.

I believe that the playing field is level so to speak, lol.

[billeau2]

No. Tell me why its ******.


Edit: I think you of course are aware that Fury was positive for nandrolone for the Hammer fight? Since nothing happened with that wouldn't it then be a reasonable assumption that since Fury felt juicing was necessary to beat Hammer, then it surely would be needed against Klitschko? But you think i sound ******?

yeah which is why you went directly into another song and dance about Klitskos age, etc. You don't honor a fighter by making excuses for them... James Toney is one of my favorite fighters... Only Iron Dan has more love for Toney than me!!! but what can I say? Jones totally outclassed Toney, and he lost to Tiberi... that was an outrageous decision. No excuses see? Maybe Toney had a good reason for losing I don't know... anymore than you know that Fury taking some magic pill allowed him to feint Vlad out of his shoes for 12 rounds.

[QueensburyRules]

I think you can safely assume if the heart of their career was from the '90s forward that they're pretty much ALL juicing with one PED or another. Primarily HGH and blood doping (which is really difficult to detect or prove).

- - U a confessed juicer is it now? U part of the Viagra pollution of worldwide waterways too?

[Willow The Wisp]

The skill is in taking information and comparing it in a meaningful way. So we have these random fighters... all with different qualities, fighting in different eras, etc... Someone can take, condense and draw a conclusion of relative merit in a hierarchical fashion... in a meaningful way. Like what a good appraiser for real estate does: Bad appraisers will sometimes say things like: "this house is worth two million and fifty dollars." Anyone with any sense understands that "fifty dollars" is silly and that no one can absolutely predict what a house will sell for down to the tens lol. NO, what you want are homes similar so you can bracket a homes value with a series of house values that give you a meaningful point of comparison... lets say 3 homes slightly different, but similar enough to show a meaningful range of values where the appraised home should fall.

Its the same with a great list: instead of looking at a fighter per se, you bracket a fighters value based on comparing them to other fighters of similar quality. What often emerges is a real understanding of what separates one class of fighters, or even a particular fighter from others. the value is in the brackets, the total organization of the whole...not in the individual fighter.

I hope this makes sense and is not overly pedantic lol.

Good synopsis, as is your follow-up and I appreciate you. If I make a list or a post, I do it was a deep and meaningful background on this subject (Boxing/Boxing History/Combat Sports/Hand to Hand Combat, in context here). That doesn't make me special or better than anyone else, and it doesn't imply that I'm good at anything else in the world. It means simply and narrowly that I'm claiming a deep and meaningful background on this subject, and that I'm looking to share what I believe to be true, in the posable event that anyone might care to exchange thoughts. If I went on about who I've debated this kind of thing with or where my seats were for famous fight, I would be interpreted as a blow hard, and quite rightly, I'd add. So I normally let my writing tell the story, and whoever reads things will read. Square deal.
Team sports have leagues and rankings based on every team getting to play each other, first in regular season, and then the best of the sub divisions meeting in the playoffs.
Individual sports like boxing don't have that luxury. To understand the hierarchy in boxing, where the 12,000-15,000 some odd active participants do not all meet up with each other, we use RANKING LISTS which must, in the absence of complete head to head match-ups; contain Informed Subjective Supposition. The very same ISS can be applied to cross-era or All-Time rankings.
In these I bo my best.
Thats all I've got to give. I've got the thick skin.