How can people discredit Tyson Fury's win but big up Anthony Joshua's?

[iamboxing]

Not only did Fury toy with Wlad, but AJ had the advantage of fighting at home, got shook and nearly taken out. If Wlad had stepped on the gas there's no way AJ would have survived and that's a FACT.

[D4thincarnation]

Winning is someone's else back yard is infinitely better.

True greats can do this.

Frauds tend to stay at home, stacking the fight in their favor

[Mr Objecitivity]

Firstly, Germany isn't Wladimir Klitschko's backyard. Wladimir Klitschko is from Ukraine. In other words, Germany is no more Wladimir Klitschko's backyard than USA is Golovkin's backyard.

Secondly, Wladimir Klitschko wasn't 'on top of his game' against Tyson Fury. He already showed signs of declining in performance in his bout against Bryant Jennings. His wife also had post pregnancy depression for which he couldn't train as much so that he could spend more time with her, leading to more missed training sessions than usual. Thus, causing him to be not as prepared as he could've been. On the other hand, Wladimir Klitschko, despite being older and coming off a layoff, actually did train and prepare himself as much as he could for his bout against Anthony Joshua but still failed. hence, Wladimir Klitschko didn't bother with a rematch against Anthony Joshua because he likely knew he tried his best in the first bout and still lost whilst against Tyson Fury, he was more than eager for a rematch because he likely knew the loss in the first bout was a one off and that it wouldn't be repeated in the rematch again. Since, deep down, he knew he could beat Tyson Fury if he performed at his best and prepared as best as he could. In the end, it was Tyson Fury who ducked / avoided the rematch against Wladimir Klitschko when Wlad clearly wanted it whilst Wlad didn't even bother taking up a rematch against Joshua in the first place. Ergo, proving that Joshua's win over Wladimir klitschko was more decisive and convincing whilst Fury's win had plenty of asterisk behind it.

Thirdly, Anthony Joshua boxed against Wladimir Klitschko in his 19th bout. Remind me again who Tyson Fury boxed against in his 19th bout? Exactly! If you complain that Tyson Fury beat a younger Wladimir Klitschko and that therefore, it was more impressive. I could likewise argue that Anthony Joshua beat Wladimir Klitschko with less experience and that therefore, it was more impressive. Works both ways!

Fourthly, explain how and when exactly in the bout did Fury actually gave Wladimir Klitschko a 'boxing lesson'. Fury, despite having the longer reach, despite being taller and despite being heavier, was barely able to land any effective / damaging punches on Wladimir Klitschko. They didn't even accumulate altogether to anywhere near the damage which Anthony Joshua inflicted with just a few landed punches. He also struggled to reach Wladimir Klitschko due to Wlad's evasive footwork. Unable to land any more effective punches than Wladimir Klitschko landed on him. Instead, he had to resort to landing 2 or 3 more extra ineffective taps (not even proper punches) to win rounds. That's literally the summary of most rounds and you want to call what Fury did to Wlad 'a boxing lesson'?

Yes, Wladimir Klitschko looked offensively neutralized in his bout against Fury. However, Fury ended up either neutralizing his own offense at the cost of neutralizing Wlad's offense or his offensive skills are generally so poor, that he is unable to land punches of the same quality which Joshua landed on Wlad on a more frequent basis.

You're essentially giving Tyson Fury more credit than he deserved for his victory over Wlad when calling it anything like a 'boxing lesson'. Boxing lesson is what Joshua gave Wlad in the 11th round when he stopped Wlad. Barely got hit + destroyed his opponent. Tyson Fury = barely getting hit + barely landing any punches himself = not considered a 'boxing lesson'.

Winning rounds by simply landing one or two more ineffective taps / punches will never be considered a 'boxing lesson' according to my definition.

[Deus]

Not only did Fury toy with Wlad, but AJ had the advantage of fighting at home, got shook and nearly taken out. If Wlad had stepped on the gas there's no way AJ would have survived and that's a FACT.

No it is not. That is your opinion. A fact is irrefutable and based upon actual evidence... you are surmising what the outcome of a fight would have been if Klitschko had done things differently... that's called theory.

[soul_survivor]

Tyson Fury went to the Lineal champions backyard and dethroned him in front of his own crowd. Fury had to give in to all of Wladimir Klitschko and Bernard Bonte's schizophrenic demands. They made demands on everything. Fury was there to make up the numbers in most people's eyes. He gave an ATG, on the top of his game, a complete boxing lesson.

Anthony Joshua on the other hand had it all his own way. Eddie Hearn shipped Klitschko over like some exotic cuisine and fed him to AJ on a silver platter. After letting Klitshko marinate for a good 16 months. And AJ still almost got himself knocked out! In the end, Klitschko's age and ring rust did him in. He almost had to run onto AJ's punches to help get the job done.

If AJ's win was great, like the fanboys claim, then Tyson Fury's must be an all-time great victory.

Who discredited Furys win?

[juggernaut666]

Firstly, Germany isn't Wladimir Klitschko's backyard. Wladimir Klitschko is from Ukraine. In other words, Germany is no more Wladimir Klitschko's backyard than USA is Golovkin's backyard.

Secondly, Wladimir Klitschko wasn't 'on top of his game' against Tyson Fury. He already showed signs of declining in performance in his bout against Bryant Jennings. His wife also had post pregnancy depression for which he couldn't train as much so that he could spend more time with her, leading to more missed training sessions than usual. Thus, causing him to be not as prepared as he could've been. On the other hand, Wladimir Klitschko, despite being older and coming off a layoff, actually did train and prepare himself as much as he could for his bout against Anthony Joshua but still failed. hence, Wladimir Klitschko didn't bother with a rematch against Anthony Joshua because he likely knew he tried his best in the first bout and still lost whilst against Tyson Fury, he was more than eager for a rematch because he likely knew the loss in the first bout was a one off and that it wouldn't be repeated in the rematch again. Since, deep down, he knew he could beat Tyson Fury if he performed at his best and prepared as best as he could. In the end, it was Tyson Fury who ducked / avoided the rematch against Wladimir Klitschko when Wlad clearly wanted it whilst Wlad didn't even bother taking up a rematch against Joshua in the first place. Ergo, proving that Joshua's win over Wladimir klitschko was more decisive and convincing whilst Fury's win had plenty of asterisk behind it.

Thirdly, Anthony Joshua boxed against Wladimir Klitschko in his 19th bout. Remind me again who Tyson Fury boxed against in his 19th bout? Exactly! If you complain that Tyson Fury beat a younger Wladimir Klitschko and that therefore, it was more impressive. I could likewise argue that Anthony Joshua beat Wladimir Klitschko with less experience and that therefore, it was more impressive. Works both ways!

Fourthly, explain how and when exactly in the bout did Fury actually gave Wladimir Klitschko a 'boxing lesson'. Fury, despite having the longer reach, despite being taller and despite being heavier, was barely able to land any effective / damaging punches on Wladimir Klitschko. They didn't even accumulate altogether to anywhere near the damage which Anthony Joshua inflicted with just a few landed punches. He also struggled to reach Wladimir Klitschko due to Wlad's evasive footwork. Unable to land any more effective punches than Wladimir Klitschko landed on him. Instead, he had to resort to landing 2 or 3 more extra ineffective taps (not even proper punches) to win rounds. That's literally the summary of most rounds and you want to call what Fury did to Wlad 'a boxing lesson'?

Yes, Wladimir Klitschko looked offensively neutralized in his bout against Fury. However, Fury ended up either neutralizing his own offense at the cost of neutralizing Wlad's offense or his offensive skills are generally so poor, that he is unable to land punches of the same quality which Joshua landed on Wlad on a more frequent basis.

You're essentially giving Tyson Fury more credit than he deserved for his victory over Wlad when calling it anything like a 'boxing lesson'. Boxing lesson is what Joshua gave Wlad in the 11th round when he stopped Wlad. Barely got hit + destroyed his opponent. Tyson Fury = barely getting hit + barely landing any punches himself = not considered a 'boxing lesson'.

Winning rounds by simply landing one or two more ineffective taps / punches will never be considered a 'boxing lesson' according to my definition.

"he had to resort to landing 2 or 3 more extra ineffective taps (not even proper punches) to win rounds. That's literally the summary of most rounds and you want to call what Fury did to Wlad 'a boxing lesson'? "

Makes you wonder what they watch and how many times they watched the fight ? Majority were clamouring how Fury had this dominant win and boxed circles around Klitchko ?

If not for the Joshua fight they wouldve been calling Furys win the greatest win in history but now have something to at least put a hault to some of the madness . I know this bc this is the boxing scenel logic on here . There were threads up already labeling him the best ever on that horrible fight .

[Ray*]

You can never discredit that "W", but i would not even watch the highlight of that fight. I refuse to, i would watch him sing doe at the end of the fight.

[juggernaut666]

Not only did Fury toy with Wlad, but AJ had the advantage of fighting at home, got shook and nearly taken out. If Wlad had stepped on the gas there's no way AJ would have survived and that's a FACT.

Klitchko only got to step on the gas bc Joshua let him off the hook in the 5th rnd . Actually if Joshua had stepped on the gas and didnt let Klitchko get comfortable rnd by rnd it is Joshua who gets the earier K.O bc that transpired before the 6th rnd and Joshua is at his best early (now that is an actual fact ) .

[The Gambler1981]

I will answer even if you clearly have an agenda.

That's because most of them don't know **** about boxing. Fury's victory was far too subtle. Nevermind that he nearly shut out the best heavyweight of the last decade, IT WAS BORING

Casuals need to die

Question if casual fans need to die, you want to hang out with just hardcore boxing fans? I can't imagine a worse fate. That has to be one of the seven rings of hell~

[Mr Objecitivity]

"he had to resort to landing 2 or 3 more extra ineffective taps (not even proper punches) to win rounds. That's literally the summary of most rounds and you want to call what Fury did to Wlad 'a boxing lesson'? "

Makes you wonder what they watch and how many times they watched the fight ? Majority were clamouring how Fury had this dominant win and boxed circles around Klitchko ?

If not for the Joshua fight they wouldve been calling Furys win the greatest win in history but now have something to at least put a hault to some of the madness . I know this bc this is the boxing scenel logic on here . There were threads up already labeling him the best ever on that horrible fight .

Exactly! I believe majority of those who are over-hyping Tyson Fury's victory over Wladimir Klitschko probably didn't even watch the bout themselves, never mind enjoying it. They probably just came up with some false narratives based on hearsay or watching small bits of the bout to make Fury's victory seem greater than it actually was.