Better win? Fury over Klitschko, Kovalev over Hopkins?

[bojangles1987]

Fury over Klitchscko. Wlad was closer to his best and more highly regarded than Hopkins at that point.

[FinitoxDinamita]

Beating Klitsxhko meant so much more and that one isnt debatable either.

[hugh grant]

Fury over wlad of course how long was wlads unbeaten run?. If bh beat kovakev that might be a better win though.
It would be actually

[emceetns]

Klitschko had more left than Hopkins.

Agreed. Plus Klitschko was the overwhelming favorite against Fury while Hopkins was rightfully the underdog against Kovalev.

[Boxing Goat]

Klitschko had more left than Hopkins.

It was probably about the same and Klitschko was a lot more competitive than Hopkins was but clearly, he was shot too. He could no longer pull the trigger.

[Larry the boss]

what an odd question

[UNBANNED]

Both legends lost. both past their best.

But which was the better win?

You are ****** trash

[Dean_Razorback]

people forget how awful of a fight was Klitschko-fury. at least kovalev beat hopkins in a clearer fashion

[bluebeam]

Fury beating klitschko was a better win. Wlad was on a decade long win streak.

Kovalev beat a Hopkins that had just lost to Chad Dawson 3 or 4 fights prior

[Nash out]

Wlad past his best? Based on what? It was 18 months before the best performance of his career against Joshua. Yeah he was 39 vs Fury, but one who had took little damage in over a decade, a heavyweight, and and in physical peak. It was PRIME Wlad Fury beat. Kovalev beat a decent but well past his best Hopkins who was 48/49.