Comments Thread For: Fury and Joshua Still To Agree Whose Name Comes First

[Nusky]

They both have the same name: B---h.

So it doesn't matter.....

[KillaMane26]

If we’re going based on who’s better, been around longer, is ranked higher and has the better wins, its fury. If we’re going based on who has more meaningless titles and a weirdo groupie fan base , it’s Joshua.

Cough (****em)

[Tecnoworld]

Anthony Fury vs Tyson Joshua.

[Kezzer]

From a commercial perspective Joshua makes more sense, particularly for coming out last on the night. I hope this isn’t a proper blocker though, I could imagine fury refusing to fight if they don’t agree to his requirements - and I’m not sure whether AJ would give in either! Can see these “small” things actually being the “big” issues

[mawoodhouse]

It doesn't really matter to fans, but to the fighters it matters as it is a sign of who is the most dominant of the 2, who is the A side. To me, Fury's name should come first for several reasons:

1. He became WBA/IBF/WBO/IBO champ by beating Klitschko and never lost those belts in the ring.
2. He has never been beaten
3. He beat the WBC champ in Wilder, thus when you think about it, he really is the Undisputed champ right now because he never lost those belts in the ring.

Joshua however has a loss and hasn't looked that great in recent fights. He is only champ because he fought for vacant belts and paper champs who won belts because Fury was stripped of them.

Fury also seems more popular to fans now than Joshua, who seems to have lost some of his popularity since that terrible loss against Ruiz and then looking not so great in the rematch.

So Fury vs Joshua is what it should be, based on all of the above.

[landotter]

Only in this day and age could the term "zoom coin flip" actually work it's way into the dialogue of such a huge fight.

I actually do not think either man has got such a large ego that this will be a sticking point. They only care about whose is the first name announced AFTER the fight is over.

[Monty Fisto]

It doesn't really matter to fans, but to the fighters it matters as it is a sign of who is the most dominant of the 2, who is the A side. To me, Fury's name should come first for several reasons:

1. He became WBA/IBF/WBO/IBO champ by beating Klitschko and never lost those belts in the ring.
2. He has never been beaten
3. He beat the WBC champ in Wilder, thus when you think about it, he really is the Undisputed champ right now because he never lost those belts in the ring.

Joshua however has a loss and hasn't looked that great in recent fights. He is only champ because he fought for vacant belts and paper champs who won belts because Fury was stripped of them.

Fury also seems more popular to fans now than Joshua, who seems to have lost some of his popularity since that terrible loss against Ruiz and then looking not so great in the rematch.

So Fury vs Joshua is what it should be, based on all of the above.

What you've written isn't objective though, is it?

You may as well have saved yourself some typing time by writing: Fury, because I like him more.

Fury 'seems' more popular now? Popular with whom and based on what exactly?

When was the last time Fury fought in front of 80,000 fans?
Oh, that's right -- it's never happened.

As for 'when you think about it, he really is the undsiputed champ right now' -- I am thinking about it and what you're saying is a pile of horseshlt.

Let's for one moment consider that what you're saying is true. Then this fight is irrelevant. Totally unnneeded to have an unprecedented fight for all four belts, because apparently Tyson Fury already holds them all. He is undisputed. Except, sorry, reality check... he's not. What you have written is not in any way true.

Joshua vs Fury or Fury vs Joshua.

Fury has never defended a single belt. Champion of champions!

Joshua has a loss. Granted, this is a solid fact you raise. But as far as being a terrible loss and not looking so good in subsequent fights, I think it doesn't compare that unfavourably with Fury getting knocked flat on his back twice against Wilder, once to the point of being as close to the cusp as being knocked out without a stoppage as is possible, and getting his face screwed up by Wallin (this time being as close to the cusp of a TKO without a stoppage as is possible). Joshua's revenge shutout of Ruiz in late 2019 compares just fine with Fury's desperate fight against Wallin in late 2019. And Joshua's multiple fierce knockdowns of Pulev looked just fine to me. I don't know what standard you are judging him by that totally dominating the opponent before eventually knocking him senseless is not good enough for you.

So, looking at objective facts, I will give you Fury's zero losses. I will not give you that he really is the undisputed. I will not give you that Fury is more popular. Who has looked better in recent fights is up for debate.

Fury fans think he is the second coming for winning 50% of his fights against Deontay Wilder. I'm not sure that showing Wilder up as a limited boxer means all that much.

[Monty Fisto]

I'll clarify that last comment -- beating Wilder does clearly mean quite a bit. What I really meant was that I don't think it means as much as Fury's fans make out.

[PunchDunk]

Who Goes First

Joshua has to go 1st. Fury has never defended a World title.

[TexasCowBoy]

But dentay Whiner is taking Big Bad Fury to mediation....deontayduckus wilderquackus is gonna get 32 million step aside........oh well , the boxing world finally got rid of a stinker in deontayduckus wilderquackus....On with The Show.....War Fury