What is the Historical Implications associated with Usyk Versus Joshua II ?

[JAB5239]

- - Neither one would be allowed in the ring vs Ruiz who's heavy record also exceeds Vander.

AJ/Andy/Usyk, none will lose 10 fights and AJ/Andy already with more KOs.

How many x U gonna be born yesterday ever day before self awareness becomes apparent?

So let me get this straight. Are you saying a fighter can't be great if he has a bunch of losses? Are you saying you don't use a fighters resume to establish where in history he ranks? Are you really that much of an imbecile?

[Willow The Wisp]

With respect, there’s no way Joshua belongs in this top 20 and there’s even less way that Wilder belongs in any top 50 during this period

Fans normally fall into two camps. Those who hate on fighters from the past, and those who disrespect fighters of the present. The third camp of course, are the knowledgeable people. I guess you've announced which group you're comfortable being in. No worries. That's why I'm here. Share a little story. In 1975, leading up to the Thriller in Manila, I wrote a short piece for one of the 40 largest circulation daily newspapers in America, back when that meant something. The gist was that Ali was being overrated during the age when he was winning over the last of his critics and was settling into filling those shoes befitting "The Greatest of all Times!" In the minds of the global public. Moving beyond simply being a " controversial figure" and seguing into a timeless cultural icon (Time magazine 100 most important people in history and the like). My article focussed on the close Doug Jones fight, the Sonny Banks knockdown, the age of Archie Moore, Cleveland Williams, Zora Folley and Sonny Liston, the Terrell thumbing, the first Frazier fight...anything negative that I could find to dredge up. All of it correct in a context, and the sum total of it 100% meaningless in the big picture. What a ****-wad!
So the thrust here is simply that I was foolish then, and you are foolish now.
The truth is, regardless entirely of whether or not anyone chooses to except it; is that of the tens of billions of people to have ever lived on earth, no more than perhaps 25 of them could have beaten either Deontay Wilder or Anthony Joshua in a contest of unarmed combat govered by the Only set of rules that long view history gives a ****e about. And that distiction, not up for debate, trumps anything that anybody ever did playing a Mary Sport or collecting a paycheck in the work force.
Anyone who doesn't agree ain't no fan of THIS sport.

[P to the J]

Fans normally fall into two camps. Those who hate on fighters from the past, and those who disrespect fighters of the present. The third camp of course, are the knowledgeable people. I guess you've announced which group you're comfortable being in. No worries. That's why I'm here. Share a little story. In 1975, leading up to the Thriller in Manila, I wrote a short piece for one of the 40 largest circulation daily newspapers in America, back when that meant something. The gist was that Ali was being overrated during the age when he was winning over the last of his critics and was settling into filling those shoes befitting "The Greatest of all Times!" In the minds of the global public. Moving beyond simply being a " controversial figure" and seguing into a timeless cultural icon (Time magazine 100 most important people in history and the like). My article focussed on the close Doug Jones fight, the Sonny Banks knockdown, the age of Archie Moore, Cleveland Williams, Zora Folley and Sonny Liston, the Terrell thumbing, the first Frazier fight...anything negative that I could find to dredge up. All of it correct in a context, and the sum total of it 100% meaningless in the big picture. What a ****-wad!
So the thrust here is simply that I was foolish then, and you are foolish now.
The truth is, regardless entirely of whether or not anyone chooses to except it; is that of the tens of billions of people to have ever lived on earth, no more than perhaps 25 of them could have beaten either Deontay Wilder or Anthony Joshua in a contest of unarmed combat govered by the Only set of rules that long view history gives a ****e about. And that distiction, not up for debate, trumps anything that anybody ever did playing a Mary Sport or collecting a paycheck in the work force.
Anyone who doesn't agree ain't no fan of THIS sport.

Full respect to you for your knowledge, experience and your career, and you’re right, I’m nowhere near as knowledgable as some, but my main point of contention is that Wilder is a terrible boxer, and Joshua, though better, is also not great, and may even get sparked by Wilder.

I really don’t know who belongs in a top 20, and don’t fall victim to nostalgia or modernist snobbery often, but surely it cannot be two fighters who don’t even understand the fundamentals of boxing?

[The Old LefHook]

I will never understand why people still respond to Queensbree's halfwittedness.

[Willow The Wisp]

Full respect to you for your knowledge, experience and your career, and you’re right, I’m nowhere near as knowledgable as some, but my main point of contention is that Wilder is a terrible boxer, and Joshua, though better, is also not great, and may even get sparked by Wilder.

I really don’t know who belongs in a top 20, and don’t fall victim to nostalgia or modernist snobbery often, but surely it cannot be two fighters who don’t even understand the fundamentals of boxing?

My respect to you also my friend.

[Willow The Wisp]

I will never understand why people still respond to Queensbree's halfwittedness.

Meh, I think he's fun. He's a gifted troll, and knows more than he chooses to share in his posts, I'd wager. The nomenclature is sometimes a bit too cryptic to wade through. But not always.

[Willie Pep 229]

Meh, I think he's fun. He's a gifted troll, and knows more than he chooses to share in his posts, I'd wager. The nomenclature is sometimes a bit too cryptic to wade through. But not always.

It took me some time to figure it out, but Lefty is a Queenie alt.

Think about it, you'll see the clues.

Notice how their screen names both misspell common boxing terms.

They are the Yin and Yang of the same schizo personality. I certain of it.

[Willow The Wisp]

It took me some time to figure it out, but Lefty is a Queenie alt.

Think about it, you'll see the clues.

Notice how their screen names both misspell common boxing terms.

They are the Yin and Yang of the same schizo personality. I certain of it.

Lol. Hmmmmm.

[QueensburyRules]

So let me get this straight. Are you saying a fighter can't be great if he has a bunch of losses? Are you saying you don't use a fighters resume to establish where in history he ranks? Are you really that much of an imbecile?

- - No, that's what U just said, not moi.

I know it must be painful to find out U can't carry AJ/Usyk jockstraps back for Vander.

It's U as the addled lad unable to follow fighter timelines, ie resumes, not moi. I doubt any heavy will be able to replicate Vander 10-7-2, 4 KO title record.

[Clegg]

Fans normally fall into two camps. Those who hate on fighters from the past, and those who disrespect fighters of the present. The third camp of course, are the knowledgeable people. I guess you've announced which group you're comfortable being in. No worries. That's why I'm here. Share a little story. In 1975, leading up to the Thriller in Manila, I wrote a short piece for one of the 40 largest circulation daily newspapers in America, back when that meant something. The gist was that Ali was being overrated during the age when he was winning over the last of his critics and was settling into filling those shoes befitting "The Greatest of all Times!" In the minds of the global public. Moving beyond simply being a " controversial figure" and seguing into a timeless cultural icon (Time magazine 100 most important people in history and the like). My article focussed on the close Doug Jones fight, the Sonny Banks knockdown, the age of Archie Moore, Cleveland Williams, Zora Folley and Sonny Liston, the Terrell thumbing, the first Frazier fight...anything negative that I could find to dredge up. All of it correct in a context, and the sum total of it 100% meaningless in the big picture. What a ****-wad!
So the thrust here is simply that I was foolish then, and you are foolish now.
The truth is, regardless entirely of whether or not anyone chooses to except it; is that of the tens of billions of people to have ever lived on earth, no more than perhaps 25 of them could have beaten either Deontay Wilder or Anthony Joshua in a contest of unarmed combat govered by the Only set of rules that long view history gives a ****e about. And that distiction, not up for debate, trumps anything that anybody ever did playing a Mary Sport or collecting a paycheck in the work force.
Anyone who doesn't agree ain't no fan of THIS sport.

Where is Andy Ruiz on your list?