With Tyson Fury's career coming to an end, does he make your top 25 heavyweights of all time?

[786]

People are in a rush to discuss current fighters placement on historical lists as soon as they achieve something or get a loss. With Fury, I think his fans were so quick to place him at the top of any list as soon as he got a couple of good wins that this has become a recurring discussion anytime he fights.

As it stands, I don't see how he would factor in a top 25 list but at the same time will have to wait to see what happens in the rematch and when his career is actually over. I don't see him winning the rematch with Usyk but won't count him out as he's shown that he can change his approach in rematches.

So for now, no I don't think he belongs but there's no rush or even point to discuss this at the moment. Let's see what happens in the rematch and when it's all said and done. There was too much hype in the first place and Fury fans were telling everyone that he's an ATG, some would even say no.1 and wouldn't take no for answer. Even pulling up top 10's of "worse" eras to make their point but that was discounting all of the better eras we've had that it essentially didn't prove anything. Now the, "I told you so's" want to prove he doesn't belong, which to me is the more accurate take but I'm tired of this conversation and think it's best to leave it for when he retires.

[TheProudLunatic]

So to your way of thinking there will be no more ATGs at HW ever since fighters are just not as 'good' as they used to be and they only fight half as often as those from 30, 40 or 50 years ago?

Like I say you can only measure a fighter by the context of the era that you're in. Conjuring imaginary victories for old timers (or indeed for modern fighters, for those who see the equation the other way round) just doesn't make sense to my way of thinking. We just don't and can't know how modern fighters would stack up historically H2H.

Fury, Wilder, Usyk and AJ
None of the others will be remembered fondly when they retire.
People will remember Wilder for his weak resume and getting thrashed by Fury
AJ will be remembered as a robotic bodybuilder who lost to Puff n Stuff Andy and 2x vs Usyk

[Citizen Koba]

Fury, Wilder, Usyk and AJ
None of the others will be remembered fondly when they retire.
People will remember Wilder for his weak resume and getting thrashed by Fury
AJ will be remembered as a robotic bodybuilder who lost to Puff n Stuff Andy and 2x vs Usyk

I don't know how they'll be remembered in 20 or 30 years cos I ain't got a crystal ball but if they're to be judged objectively by their records vs the opponents available to them in the context of their own time (which is the only objective measure we have which strips away both recency biases and rose-tinted nostalgia) at least one of them - if you're just talking the last decade - and 2-4 if you're including 2000 onwards (which would also include the Klits) - should be considered as breaking the top 25 ATG in my book.

[TheProudLunatic]

I don't know how they'll be remembered in 20 or 30 years cos I ain't got a crystal ball but if they're to be judged objectively by their records vs the opponents available to them in the context of their own time (which is the only objective measure we have which strips away both recency biases and rose-tinted nostalgia) at least one of them - if you're just talking the last decade - and 2-4 if you're including 2000 onwards (which would also include the Klits) - should be considered as breaking the top 25 ATG in my book.

How could people, who aren't around, have a better grasp at their worth than us who are watching them fight (and who they are fighting) ?
When our present day fight fans return to sum up their careers, not much will have changed for the ''top'' 5 HWs.
Fury maybe has 2 more fights
Usyk maybe a few more
Wilder is done
AJ will be picking off the scraps (Andy, Parker, ZZ Flop, Joyce, DuBoys....)

[Citizen Koba]

How could people, who aren't around, have a better grasp at their worth than us who are watching them fight (and who they are fighting) ?
When our present day fight fans return to sum up their careers, not much will have changed for the ''top'' 5 HWs.
Fury maybe has 2 more fights
Usyk maybe a few more
Wilder is done
AJ will be picking off the scraps (Andy, Parker, ZZ Flop, Joyce, DuBoys....)

If we're talking ATGness then you yourself are necessarily comparing them against fighters who you haven't seen fight. IDK how old you are but how is it possible for you to objectively judge how Fury or Usyk would have fared against Joe Louis or Jack Dempsey.

Simple fact is it's part of the human conditon that we are absolutely full of cognitive biases. Every one of us thinks and behave irrationally in a multitude of different ways. We can't help this but we can make allowances, use techniques to minimise it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias

For instance as we age the world typically becomes less exciting, the experiences we have, the fights we watched when we were younger hold a special intensity to us, the great fights remembered and the dull, average performances forgotten. Such is the nature of the human conciousness. Our emotions, our feelings, our memories, our personal connection to events or fighters inevitably colour our perception of them and skew our judgement.

To judge and view fighters on the proper historical context as objectively as possible - same way we'd try to objectively compare the records and performances between past eras in my book at least a decade or more has to pass, and the longer the better. Least that's the way I look at it.

[hugh grant]

Fury needs ideally best usyk first, and then to fight and best josh. Then I'll tell you.

[TheProudLunatic]

If we're talking ATGness then you yourself are necessarily comparing them against fighters who you haven't seen fight. IDK how old you are but how is it possible for you to objectively judge how Fury or Usyk would have fared against Joe Louis or Jack Dempsey.

Simple fact is it's part of the human conditon that we are absolutely full of cognitive biases. Every one of us thinks and behave irrationally in a multitude of different ways. We can't help this but we can make allowances, use techniques to minimise it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias

For instance as we age the world typically becomes less exciting, the experiences we have, the fights we watched when we were younger hold a special intensity to us, the great fights remembered and the dull, average performances forgotten. Such is the nature of the human conciousness. Our emotions, our feelings, our memories, our personal connection to events or fighters inevitably colour our perception of them and skew our judgement.

To judge and view fighters on the proper historical context as objectively as possible - same way we'd try to objectively compare the records and performances between past eras in my book at least a decade or more has to pass, and the longer the better. Least that's the way I look at it.

You act as if I invented ATGness
The term has been around longer than me, that's for sure.

It's often said triangle theories don't work, YET, that's exactly how these lists come to be.
Fans and historians declare ''A could never have beaten B if they fought because....'' (which would never have been possible without a time machine).

IMHO, to include any of these present day HWs onto an ATG list would water down said list to a sad level.

[Citizen Koba]

You act as if I invented ATGness
The term has been around longer than me, that's for sure.

It's often said triangle theories don't work, YET, that's exactly how these lists come to be.
Fans and historians declare ''A could never have beaten B if they fought because....'' (which would never have been possible without a time machine).

IMHO, to include any of these present day HWs onto an ATG list would water down said list to a sad level.

Well yeah fair enough. The impossiblity of getting to anything like true objectivity is why I really don't put much stock in subjective **** like ATGness or indeed the whole concept of P4P

Better and more honest just to call it what it is, simply subjective opinion... which of course we're all entitled to. Closest we really got to objectivity here is consensus - if enough folks think the same / similar things then it gains a certain kinda 'truth' of it's own.

Wasn't taking aim at you personally by the way, you were just expressing a commonly held viewpoint about the degeneration and decline of boxing, it was the objectivity of that idea I was critiquing rather than you yourself.

[Atypicalbrit]

You act as if I invented ATGness
The term has been around longer than me, that's for sure.

It's often said triangle theories don't work, YET, that's exactly how these lists come to be.
Fans and historians declare ''A could never have beaten B if they fought because....'' (which would never have been possible without a time machine).

IMHO, to include any of these present day HWs onto an ATG list would water down said list to a sad level.

You are very passionate in this subject but there is a valid counter argument to your stance.

Every other era had numerous issues, ducks going on, flawed fighters reaching the top, in the 80s and 90s you had multiple "top" heavyweights with crack ******* and heroin addictions.

Most other "eras" were American dominated because Eastern Europeans weren't even competing, they were basically domestic divisions and can't be compared to the truly international division we have now.

The ATG discussion is often oversimplified. People will Take Muhammed Ali on his best night and put him up against Fury or AJ or whoever on their worst night's and say "see, no contest"

They'll never put Muhammed Ali who got chinned by Henry Cooper and was having all he could handle off the 175lb ham and egger until cuts bailed him out, and put him up against Fury from Wilder 2 or AJ from Klitschko.

Likewise Rahman 1 Lewis wouldn't be judged against them.

It's unbalanced in favour of the rose tinted glasses days.

[TheProudLunatic]

Well yeah fair enough. The impossiblity of getting to anything like true objectivity is why I really don't put much stock in subjective **** like ATGness or indeed the whole concept of P4P

Better and more honest just to call it what it is, simply subjective opinion... which of course we're all entitled to. Closest we really got to objectivity here is consensus - if enough folks think the same / similar things then it gains a certain kinda 'truth' of it's own.

Wasn't taking aim at you personally by the way, you were just expressing a commonly held viewpoint about the degeneration and decline of boxing, it was the objectivity of that idea I was critiquing rather than you yourself.

If we are unbiased fans (or as unbiased as possible), I believe we can come to ''logical'' conclusions with these Prime v Prime fantasy fight winners.
The most famous being Clay vs Rocky
(Others would match Ali vs Rocky)
Not a fan of either guy but taking everything into consideration, it wouldn't be a stretch if most unbiased fans picked Clay/Ali to win.
Having a punchers chance, which is what Rocky would have had, shouldn't be enough to tilt the outcome.

Knowing what quality a quality opponent is should give us all enough info concerning these FF winners.
If we must invent ways of a guy being better than he is, well......

I admit, I hate Fury, and basically all of these HWs

ATGs/P4Ps....meh