So it appears that Whyte is now the man to defeat Tyson Fury

[removed]

Your making way more sense than that other guy Lmao.

You can't address any of the points I make, you just come out with stuff like 'Fury needs to prove it' despite him already dethroning two long reigning world champions..

Anyway I'm bored of this debate, you can't win with haters like you and Plunger.

After Fury beats Whyte and Usyk no doubt you'll claim that he needs to beat Hrgovic or whoever else is flavour of the month.

[removed]

I don't think so. So why don't they get one of Frank's refs for the Whyte fight. Or maybe see if they can rope in Mick Hennessey's ref that was used in the first McDermott fight. Have you heard yourself lately? I think your afternoon meds are wearing off.

Yeah, Fury was very fortunate to get a decision against McDermott. Thanks for proving my point.

You're not very bright are you?

[Rodtang]

He has proven it, that's why he's ranked #1 by the panels of experts who compiled all those rankings.

Some random guys opinion on boxingscene doesn't change the fact that Fury is #1

He has a case for current no1. He's not in my opinion, but he has a case. But he has not proven he is without a doubt the best heavyweight in the division. Largely due to the fact that he has only fought one guy and has yet to fight the rest. That's the part your clearly not getting. If Josh Taylor beats Terence Crawford can he say he is the best WW? No. He has to fight the rest. If Rolly Romero beats Gervonta Davies, is he the best lightweight? No. Has to prove it against the rest. When Mike Tyson beat Trevor Berbick, was he undoubtedly the best at that point? No. He still had to go on and prove it by cleaning out the division and beating the best. I get that you idolize Fury and fair play to you, but you must recognize he still has work to do. I'm a Joshua fan. And prior to his first defeat I felt he was the number 1 heavyweight. But I could at least recognize the fact that he has to go out there and continually prove himself by beating the best guys. Not just say "Oh well he beats Wilder and Fury, so doesn't need to fight them, so that's that then ". Fury still has plenty to do. Maybe he will, maybe he won't. But he has to make the fights and prove so.

[Rodtang]

You can't address any of the points I make, you just come out with stuff like 'Fury needs to prove it' despite him already dethroning two long reigning world champions..

Anyway I'm bored of this debate, you can't win with haters like you and Plunger.

After Fury beats Whyte and Usyk no doubt you'll claim that he needs to beat Hrgovic or whoever else is flavour of the month.

Fury needs to prove it is the point lol. And after he beats Whyte I'll say he has to fight Usyk/Joshua winner for undisputed. Not sure where your pulling hrgovic from lol. That type of comment makes me wonder if your wet behind the ears. I have to take my son's home now anyway but I enjoyed the debate nevertheless. Good day to you and stay safe.

[removed]

He has a case for current no1. He's not in my opinion, but he has a case. But he has not proven he is without a doubt the best heavyweight in the division. Largely due to the fact that he has only fought one guy and has yet to fight the rest. That's the part your clearly not getting. If Josh Taylor beats Terence Crawford can he say he is the best WW? No. He has to fight the rest. If Rolly Romero beats Gervonta Davies, is he the best lightweight? No. Has to prove it against the rest. When Mike Tyson beat Trevor Berbick, was he undoubtedly the best at that point? No. He still had to go on and prove it by cleaning out the division and beating the best. I get that you idolize Fury and fair play to you, but you must recognize he still has work to do. I'm a Joshua fan. And prior to his first defeat I felt he was the number 1 heavyweight. But I could at least recognize the fact that he has to go out there and continually prove himself by beating the best guys. Not just say "Oh well he beats Wilder and Fury, so doesn't need to fight them, so that's that then ". Fury still has plenty to do. Maybe he will, maybe he won't. But he has to make the fights and prove so.

I know that you're just another upset Joshua fan who is annoyed at looking like a fool. You've been liking pro-AJ/anti-Fury posts for months, i also recall you predicting Joshua to knock Usyk out, so i guess that shows how much you know about boxing.

Like i say, Fury could retire now with an amazing legacy, however i agree that ideally he needs to beat Usyk and unify the belts to cement it and go down as the greatest HW of this era.

Beating bums like Whyte, Ruiz & whatever other ex-AJ victim you want to list doesn't really add to that legacy.

[MikeyG]

Well, it is natural to seek next opponent, next challenge. And for me it is better than coming to conclusion about yourself as a boxer and your ranking "prematurely" and from this mythical status judge fights that you didn't take.

[The plunger man]

I know that you're just another upset Joshua fan who is annoyed at looking like a fool. You've been liking pro-AJ/anti-Fury posts for months, i also recall you predicting Joshua to knock Usyk out, so i guess that shows how much you know about boxing.

Like i say, Fury could retire now with an amazing legacy, however i agree that ideally he needs to beat Usyk and unify the belts to cement it and go down as the greatest HW of this era.

Beating bums like Whyte, Ruiz & whatever other ex-AJ victim you want to list doesn't really add to that legacy.

But your content with fury beating wallin , seferi and pianeta and disregard other more worthy opponents in the top 10.
im not a fury hater at all and I’ve grown to like him but as I say again why are you ok with fury fighting lesser opponents and then argue and say fury does t need to make a mandatory defence.
ive said from day one that fury has to face the top contenders to be regarded as the very best.......and at the moment he is the number one ranked heavyweight but like all champions he has to beat the best of the division .....4 months ago we was in agreement that we didn’t want fury to face wilder a third time because he beat him so easy the 2nd fight...now all of sudden your saying Tyson doesn’t need to fight his mandatory and should coast it.

I don’t know what’s so hard to agree to this....fight whyte beat him and then beat either usyk or Joshua and he can undoubtedly claim to be the very best of this era.

why is it hate that I am asking Tyson to do this......it’s a normal behaviour of a champion to clear out the division.

just because fury beat a fighter who he was expected to beat does not free pass when his obligations as champion is to beat his organisations mandatory and then unify.

Sugar ray leonard beat Wilfred Benitez , Roberto Duran and Thomas hearns but in between he had to beat a guy a called Larry bonds who was his mandatory.....it goes with the territory as champion.

lennox Lewis had to beat David tua and Michael grant as his mandatories and still beat Tyson , Holyfield etc ....as I said it’s what champions do and stop using that hate card.
I like fury and has grown on me a lot btw

[miniq]

Only a lighter 220 pound Usyk ring circling for 12 rounds can maybe outbox Fury

Whyte gets murdered

[REDEEMER]

Whyte would be Furys second best win stylistically though there’s tougher fights for Fury but not much . He won’t stiffen up like a Wilder with mere jabs and he will make a rough fight on the inside.


Here’s my list of most problematic guys for Fury .

1. A.J ( it’s still the best match up between everyone )

2. Hrgovic

3. Joyce

4. Whyte

5. Usyk


I’m not including Wilder he just doesn’t have the balance to get a win nor punch resistance, yes he could knockdown a less then prepared Fury but that’s not winning the fight .

[sallyField]

I believe whyte beats him, but sparring has no bearing in this.

It has some bearing they were boxing each other in a ring with gloves and Whyte knocked him out, styles make fights.