Usyk is the true lineal, Fury is fraud

[Toffee]

The consensus 1 & 2 via what source exactly?

Ring still had Fury ranked #1 so they didn’t have them 1 and 2.

TBRB recognised Klitschko as an inactive fighter so they didn’t have them 1 & 2.

I’m pretty sure Boxrec also remove fighters from their rankings after 12 months of inactivity so they also likely didn’t have them 1 & 2.

It’s utter madness to consider Usyk lineal, unless you’re simply just doing it to be anti-Fury.

Then who was above either of them at that point in time?

TBRB had them 1 and 2 a few months before, removed Klitschko due to inactivity (which was actually due to Fury's situation) then immediately ranked them 1 and 2 afterwards.

Unless you argue Fury was top 2 by April 2017, I'm not sure how you could possibly argue that Joshua v Klitschko was less of a consensus 1/2 than Fury Wilder 2.

Remember Fury's best result in his comeback to that point was a draw.

Not madness, a reasoned case. I think even TBRB would look back and think they were wrong in removing Klitschko just before a title fight. That decision changed their title moving forward (note 'their title'; not lineal).

As for Ring magazine, I don't base much on them. Ranking Fury in 2017 just highlights why they should be disregarded. He was retired, obese, banned and had either dropped or been stripped of all his org belts.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Then who was above either of them at that point in time?

TBRB had them 1 and 2 a few months before, removed Klitschko due to inactivity (which was actually due to Fury's situation) then immediately ranked them 1 and 2 afterwards.

Unless you argue Fury was top 2 by April 2017, I'm not sure how you could possibly argue that Joshua v Klitschko was less of a consensus 1/2 than Fury Wilder 2.

Remember Fury's best result in his comeback to that point was a draw.

Not madness, a reasoned case. I think even TBRB would look back and think they were wrong in removing Klitschko just before a title fight. That decision changed their title moving forward (note 'their title'; not lineal).

As for Ring magazine, I don't base much on them. Ranking Fury in 2017 just highlights why they should be disregarded. He was retired, obese, banned and had either dropped or been stripped of all his org belts.

So no legitimate sources then. Just your opinion.

Fury and Klitschko had both been inactive for the same amount of time so it’s difficult to rank one and not the other.

Even if you consider Fury retired, I’d have rated a prime Wilder and prime AJ as the consensus 1 & 2 rather than a 41 year old who hadn’t recorded a win in over 2 years. No disrespect to Wlad, he was, and I emphasise was, a great champion but by 2017 he was a semi retired, middle aged HW who’d been visibly declining for years.

I know you love AJ and can’t stand Fury but to suggest Fury isn’t the current lineal champion is laughable. You won’t find one reputable source that supports your argument.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Then who was above either of them at that point in time?

TBRB had them 1 and 2 a few months before, removed Klitschko due to inactivity (which was actually due to Fury's situation) then immediately ranked them 1 and 2 afterwards.

Unless you argue Fury was top 2 by April 2017, I'm not sure how you could possibly argue that Joshua v Klitschko was less of a consensus 1/2 than Fury Wilder 2.

Remember Fury's best result in his comeback to that point was a draw.

Not madness, a reasoned case. I think even TBRB would look back and think they were wrong in removing Klitschko just before a title fight. That decision changed their title moving forward (note 'their title'; not lineal).

As for Ring magazine, I don't base much on them. Ranking Fury in 2017 just highlights why they should be disregarded. He was retired, obese, banned and had either dropped or been stripped of all his org belts.

For some reason it’s posted multiple times mate. Apologies.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Nope, Vitali was the WBC champion and let's face it, the better brother.

No marketing changes that.

I agree Vitali was better prime for prime but not in the 2010’s. Wlad was the dominant HW of the 2010’s and the legitimate lineal king. It’s not marketing, it’s recognised by essentially every legitimate source.

[billeau2]

Usyk is truly "the man" at heavyweight and proved it the hard way.

Who has fury beaten? Usyk's resume is far better and he's the far better boxer. Fury will never face Usyk.

You know who the lineal really is? Who the fans say he is. Not some alphabet soup... Not some group of pundits... the guys who go to the pubs, watch the fights, and decide who beat the best as they see it.

the lineal is not some title to be carefully matriculated based on some technicality. And you know what makes the lineal the best? You can have a debate about it and when you do two things happen: Either it can be resolved the old fashioned way... no alphabet soup needed, IN THE RING, or, through a few years or so, it resolves itself.

The lineal is not based on who one has beaten, its based on beating the best. Its also not based on who looks the best, taste the best, has the best stats... Its really quite simple: Look it up and see for yourself...

It seems to me that Fury is the very definition of a Lineal holder.

[Hustle]

I still believe Usyk is lineal.

Fury retired, the consensus 1-2 fought. Joshua became lineal by beating Klitschko.

Just because TBRB made the decision to unrank Klitschko (from being ranked 1) for being inactive doesn't change any of that. He was only inactive because of Fury's issues. They immediately ranked Joshua and Klitschko as the top two again after the fight.

It's a much better argument than claiming that Klitschko v Joshua doesn't count because Wlad was inactive... then somehow ranking Fury top two before the second Wilder fight when his best win in years was Wallin.

Joshua vs klitschko doesn't count because klitschko loss lineal to fury in the fight before he fought joshua.


What's difficult about that bro?

[hhh1200]

Got to beat the man to be the man. More Eastern European nonsense. Surprised people aren't saying Fury is scared of the GREAT Janibek (have to add the Central Asian names in there too)

[M312]

I agree Vitali was better prime for prime but not in the 2010’s. Wlad was the dominant HW of the 2010’s and the legitimate lineal king. It’s not marketing, it’s recognised by essentially every legitimate source.

It's 100% marketing.

Wladimir did not clean up and wouldn't ever have beaten his brother. Prime or not. It's a mismatch.

That's like saying Spence will never fight Crawford so Spence v Ennis is for lineal instead (slightly different concepts as they are not brothers). Nope, doesn't work like that. If you can't fight the arguably best guy in the division, and there is no lineal champion... You can't become one.

It's pure marketing nonsense.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

It's 100% marketing.

Wladimir did not clean up and wouldn't ever have beaten his brother. Prime or not. It's a mismatch.

That's like saying Spence will never fight Crawford so Spence v Ennis is for lineal instead (slightly different concepts as they are not brothers). Nope, doesn't work like that. If you can't fight the arguably best guy in the division, and there is no lineal champion... You can't become one.

It's pure marketing nonsense.

Are Spence and Crawford blood related? Don’t be ridiculous.

It’s not marketing, whether you like it or not, Wladimir was recognised as lineal champion. He was the clear #1 in the division in the 2010’s.

[billeau2]

There is no lineal champion.

Wladimir was not the lineal champion when Fury beat him.

Fury has done an excellent job marketing himself as the lineal champion though.

The only way we get a 'new' one now is an Undisputed champion.

If we're talking number 1, I think it's fair to say it's Fury in most people's books, but not unfair to disagree and think it's Usyk.

This is an interesting comment. Undisputed champions are, in general, great for boxing, and as far as heavyweights go, great to straighten out the lineal.