Lets play Triangle theory with Deontay Wilder, Dylan Whyte and The Gypsy King:

[billeau2]

Tyson Fury says a lot of things. If you can intuit certain behavoirs Fury is not really deceptive... or, rather, one can see when he is pissing on your leg and telling you it is raining. Some time ago Tyson talked up Wilder as an opponent. He never wavered from his assesment of Wilder, including saying recently after this fight that fighting Wilder is like "holding dynamite in your hands."

Fury has been consistent and the Whyte fight seems to bare out the fact that Wilder is dangerous. Wilder, it turns out, in his ability to hang in there, take punishment, and find a way to deliver shots, may turn out to be Fury's biggest foil for when people debate Fury's place in heavyweight history, years from now.

Thoughts?

[famicommander]

Wilder showed what he was made of in the first Stiverne fight and the two Ortiz fights. All three were top 5 opponents at the time of those respective fights. He got washed in the second Fury fight but the first and third were classics.

[billeau2]

Wilder showed what he was made of in the first Stiverne fight and the two Ortiz fights. All three were top 5 opponents at the time of those respective fights. He got washed in the second Fury fight but the first and third were classics.

I agree. I am a very vocal supporter of Ortiz who I think is skilled heavyweight, and a challenge to anyone not named Usyk or Fury. ortiz was boxing beautifully and competatively against Wilder, especially the second fight. Wilder is so damn strong, Ortiz just made one mistake! That shows how good Wilder is as well as Fury's assesment.

[Toffee]

Wilder was a house built on sand. He might be the second best of the era, but you can't really determine that on losing efforts and you can't really go to his resume. You're pretty much using Ortiz, who isn't really even a house built on sand. All Ortiz had was eye test and "he's Cuban".

Fury is the best of the era currently. But we're lacking the fights needed. A trilogy really didn't help that.

Joshua, Fury, Wilder... you can belatedly add Usyk. They've operated in two conferences. We can't really play triangle theory as no-one has fought more than one of the four. And they've beaten each other's common opponents so it's a very vague triangle theory based on 'who did it better' (like it matters).

Fury and Joshua beat Whyte.
Fury and Joshua beat Wlad.
Wilder and Joshua beat Breazeale.
Fury and Usyk beat Chisora.

Are there any others? I'm not sure what any of that proves.

What we actually need is an extension to:

Fury proved better than Wilder
Usyk proved better than Joshua (to be continued)

It's not enough. Yet.

[famicommander]

I agree. I am a very vocal supporter of Ortiz who I think is skilled heavyweight, and a challenge to anyone not named Usyk or Fury. ortiz was boxing beautifully and competatively against Wilder, especially the second fight. Wilder is so damn strong, Ortiz just made one mistake! That shows how good Wilder is as well as Fury's assesment.

I'm worried Ortiz is done. I didn't like the way his legs looked in the Martin fight even before he started getting hit. Of course he got up and knocked Martin out, but I think even two years ago Ortiz blows Martin out of the ring like nothing. Reminds me of Povetkin in the David Price fight.

[billeau2]

Wilder was a house built on sand. He might be the second best of the era, but you can't really determine that on losing efforts and you can't really go to his resume. You're pretty much using Ortiz, who isn't really even a house built on sand. All Ortiz had was eye test and "he's Cuban".

Fury is the best of the era currently. But we're lacking the fights needed. A trilogy really didn't help that.

Joshua, Fury, Wilder... you can belatedly add Usyk. They've operated in two conferences. We can't really play triangle theory as no-one has fought more than one of the four. And they've beaten each other's common opponents so it's a very vague triangle theory based on 'who did it better' (like it matters).

Fury and Joshua beat Whyte.
Fury and Joshua beat Wlad.
Wilder and Joshua beat Breazeale.
Fury and Usyk beat Chisora.

Are there any others? I'm not sure what any of that proves.

What we actually need is an extension to:

Fury proved better than Wilder
Usyk proved better than Joshua (to be continued)

It's not enough. Yet.

You can watch tape of Ortiz and see his skills. He also was succesful and did not lose fights coming into his fight with Wilder.

Yes the trilogy with Wilder did not prove anything, agreed lol.

The one problem with Usyk is the Chisora fight. I personally do not think it matters and would give Joshua all the credit in the world if he stops Usyk second time round... or, if he is even competative with Usyk... But people would have a right to look at that fight and say "well. who has Usyk really beaten at heavyweight that makes him so good?"

[billeau2]

I'm worried Ortiz is done. I didn't like the way his legs looked in the Martin fight even before he started getting hit. Of course he got up and knocked Martin out, but I think even two years ago Ortiz blows Martin out of the ring like nothing. Reminds me of Povetkin in the David Price fight.

Couldn't agree more. Ortiz is indeed getting older and at an age where it matters more and more in the ring. Very underated fighter is Ortiz imo.

[Toffee]

You can watch tape of Ortiz and see his skills. He also was succesful and did not lose fights coming into his fight with Wilder.

Yes the trilogy with Wilder did not prove anything, agreed lol.

The one problem with Usyk is the Chisora fight. I personally do not think it matters and would give Joshua all the credit in the world if he stops Usyk second time round... or, if he is even competative with Usyk... But people would have a right to look at that fight and say "well. who has Usyk really beaten at heavyweight that makes him so good?"

Re: Ortiz, yes we see it in him (or saw it). But that's so different from doing it at a high level and I try not to give too much credence to losing efforts. Particularly not for the rematch, where Ortiz was winning but Wilder wasn't even trying to compete for winning rounds.

Re: Usyk. 'People' would absolutely say that. They'd say he's just a blown up cruiser. In fact, some are already saying that on here.

Personally I would rank a Joshua win very highly. It would also likely lead to a trilogy. Usyk is obviously at the level where he'd deserve that.

If Joshua emerges from Usyk. And Fury has emerged from Wilder. It's only a couple of defeats that seperate them, and both were avenged. If Usyk emerges, well he's the real deal.

There's still plenty of running left in this race.

[MONGOOSE66]

Tyson Fury says a lot of things. If you can intuit certain behavoirs Fury is not really deceptive... or, rather, one can see when he is pissing on your leg and telling you it is raining. Some time ago Tyson talked up Wilder as an opponent. He never wavered from his assesment of Wilder, including saying recently after this fight that fighting Wilder is like "holding dynamite in your hands."

Fury has been consistent and the Whyte fight seems to bare out the fact that Wilder is dangerous. Wilder, it turns out, in his ability to hang in there, take punishment, and find a way to deliver shots, may turn out to be Fury's biggest foil for when people debate Fury's place in heavyweight history, years from now.

Thoughts?

Ahhhh, you think too much.

[BodyBagz]

Wilder ends him sooner