Would you describe Usyk as an entertaining heavyweight?

[Atypicalbrit]

In the broad sense here

We can appreciate his technical ability and skill as hardcore fans

But "entertaining"?

He does fight aggressively at times and put nice combinations together but he doesn't seem to catch the eye of the casuals, casual friends of mine didn't care about him vs Dubois at all for example and he only seems to get talked about as an opponent rather than his own man.

[fifth_root]

Entertaining outside the ring - no. In the ring, he is a master boxer. For some, this might be entertaining, for others it is a pleasure to watch him deliver high-quality boxing. I'd prefer the latter, even though I value it when two guys beat the hell out of each other in a slugfest. Deliver entertainment in the ring is different, not always related to top-quality boxing and is rare. But again - what is entertaining for some isn't for others.

[_Rexy_]

Depends what you like to watch I suppose. I've always found it a treat to watch guys like him perform. Some fans would rather watch guys just stand and trade until one falls down though, especially in the Heavyweight Division.

[Lance98]

He would be entertaining if he had not been lying about "low blows" that are actually not low...
His antics ruin the mood of the fight.

[Marchegiano]

Yeah, I like Usyk

Tyson is the consistent most boring of this era. He beat Wlad with a pivot, plays pattycake with Chisora every other fight, and just generally speaking he's too merciful to be exciting and only does enough to win.

Wilder put out the boring-est single fight of his era when he just stood around letting Parker punch at him.

Glazkov was clearly the most overrated, boringest, useless **** to be given a title shot in this era.

Martin is the funniest HW of his era.

Joshua is the most emotional HW of his era.









Zhang is very boring. Hrgovic is very boring. Joyce is very boring. Dubios is very boring. All of them are slow as ****, can KO bums in less dramatic fashion than Wilder, telegraph their punches that are so ****ing mud slow you could see them coming from yesterday, and have all the footwork of Frankenstein's Monster. Usyk beats those fools easy and if that was the division he's have him a nice long reign.


Crazy to me people will promote Fury like he's special but also Zhang. One of those bigguns can move and uses that movement as a core piece of his arsenal, the other's an old man who moves all rickety and **** like old men do.

[BoxOfficer]

Very entertaining.

The way he circles around; his subtle head movement; his footwork; and most expecially, his guard when under flurry of attacks, which hardly allows anything through. It's all a beauty to behold. He is special.

[takenotes]

Usyk is a good fighter, but he is not entertaining. Lewis, Tyson, Briggs, AJ , even Wilder are entertaining because they can KO a guy at anytime from the 1st till the last round. Usyk is not doing that.

[PRINCEKOOL]

Usyk will be in entertaining fights, if he is pushed into 'That sort of fight'.

Otherwise? It all depends on what type of fighters people find to be entertaining. Uysk's offense is not super destructive, the last two cruiserweights to move up into the Heavyweight division and became World Champions 'Both had superior offensive ability than Uysk, and those fighters were Evander Holyfield and David Haye'.

I also believe that at their peak, both Holyfield and Haye were superior fighters to Uysk.

Oleksandr Uysk is beating these other heavyweights currently so far, mainly due to his elite level endurance, speed 'Combined with his ability to reduce the number of unforced errors he produces in a fight, compared to many of these other Heavyweights'.

Anthony Joshua really skill for skill, is for me? The only other Heavyweight, who shares that same trait with Usyk to a high level 'Joshua is fundamentally correct, and as a fighter does not really make a high number of unforced errors'.

Note: So overall, Oleksandr Uysk is a entertaining fighter 'When he is forced into those sort of fights'. If his opponent's struggle to negate certain aspects of his game, then he will most likely out box them and score more points'.

Uysk in the professional ranks, does have a hybrid amateur professional style 'But I don't think that is a drawback. Uysk predominately prefers to do most of his work from mid to long range, none of the opponents he has ever faced have? Forced him out of this area of his game, for long enough duration to beat him'.

If a fighter can compete with him at mid to long range, and even at times force him out of this area 'Then Usyk will have no choice but, to show more of his game'.

Oleksandr Uysk appears to have zero inside game 'It just so happens, that a hallmark trait of this super Heavyweight era? Is that very few Heavyweights at top-level have a developed inside game'.

Derek Chisora, Andy Ruiz Junior, Tyson Fury 'In all honesty, those have been the only heavyweights in recent times who have displayed a inside game'. I have stated this before? Tyson Fury is not super great in every area of his game, but? Fury will have a real go in all area's of boxing, in that regard he is a complete fighter'.

I do believe Joshua has a inside game, but this is a area of his game 'Which has not been his best attribute throughout his career'. I believe this is a bi-product of his training culture from the amateur game 'Joshua has hammered, and mastered the basic fundamentals of boxing. Similar to Uysk Joshua also has a hybrid amateur professional style'.

But there is a difference between Uysk and Joshua 'I believe Joshua has improved his inside game'.

Anthony Joshua's has developed aspects of his inside game i.e he has shown the ability to tie up his opponents and wrestle on the inside in his recent fights. Joshua applied those tactics vs Franklin and Ngannou 'It was one of the aspects of Joshua's performance vs Ngannou, which I was most impressed with'.

Anthony Joshua completely negated Ngannou's strength on the inside 'Immediately the first time, he initiated a clinch. That was something Tyson Fury struggled to do, and why many boxing analyst believe Fury had issues in that fight'.

I believe Oleksandr Usyk is a entertaining fighter, he is active 'And his intentions are to land a assault of punches, from mid to long range'. If his opponents can push him beyond his limits 'Then he will have no choice but show more of his game'.

This is why, if people check my recent posts 'I have not really liked the way, Tyson Fury has been preparing for Oleksandr Uysk. It appears to me right now 'That Tyson Fury believe's he can beat Oleksandr Uysk at his own game, much in the same way Anthony Joshua believed he could beat Uysk'.

That is the type of fight, I am sensing Fury is preparing for tactically 'Fury and his team, have reacted in a panic to his performance vs Ngannou'.

And from my observation, there are definitive signs 'That they are not preparing for this fight, with Kronk Fury concept'.

I have always stated that the Tyson Fury vs Oleksandr Uysk fight may be a very similar match up to Joshua vs Uysk I & II 'In terms of the action'.

But because Tyson Fury is not as fundamentally correct, or technically a sound fighter to the level of Joshua 'There is a potential that Fury could lose the fight vs Uysk, in even more worst fashion than Joshua' etc.

[deathofaclown]

Depends what you consider entertaining.

He's not exciting, but he's entertaining if you enjoy the fine art of boxing.

Much in the same way people said Floyd is boring but I enjoyed watching him suss out his opponents and use his technical ability to win from there.

I'd say he's entertaining enough if you understand the nuances of boxing but the execution of it is not exciting.

I doubt he's very entertaining to the casual fan who doesnt know boxing and wants a tough man contest.

[fifth_root]

PRINCEKOOL not that "Joshua has good fundamentals" again - many heavyweight boxers do have them. The point is that while you can say what Usyk or Fury exceed at or even Wilder with his punch if not else, you can't say that for AJ. But hey - Joshua has to be remarkable at something because he is a product. So they came up with the "good fundamentals". He is good the way he is and that should have been enough.

Tyson is not by the schoolbooks and it is not necessary to be. Calzaghe wasn't, Marciano wasn't - many were not. He is great at adapting and shifting style while being awkward, which we can debate is next level to the schoolbook content.