Please, just don't be THAT kind of hypocrite...

[koolkc107]

...that tries to belittle what the upcoming fight will mean career-wise.

Now that the Fury-Wilder fight is a done deal set to go off this November or December, some of you have observed how Fury will probably not be the same guy that beat Wlad to become the lineal.

Fair enough.

This makes sense and I agree.

However, I am hoping that the same folks making this observation were also saying the same thing about the AJ-Klitschko fight before that happened.

I hope those who seek to belittle what a win by Wilder over Tyson might mean also talk about how AJ fought a diminished Wlad.

Because the truth is, Fury will likely be more ready for his fight with Wilder than Wlad was vs Joshua.

Klitschko had looked bad going back 2 years and had zero tuneups before AJ.

Tyson will have had 2 fights before Wilder.

Now, there is no denying Wlad did look pretty good vs AJ.

But the truth is, we don't know if that was due to a "good" version of Wlad or due to an inexperienced AJ...and really, we still may not know.

Who has AJ fought since again?

A Takam that just got flattened by DelBoy (God Bless him!)?

A Parker that looked very ordinary vs Whyte, who is pretty ordinary himself?

So, when it comes to rating a potential Wilder win over Fury, please be objective enough to keep all this in mind.

[that g]

well, you make some fair arguments. but no matter what, you still can't deny 2 things if you are being objective:

- joshua's resume is still better than wilder's. how much better can be up for debate.

- if you hold this line of reasoning, isn't it better for wilder to tell fury to get in good shape first and fight some other folks first? its what Joshua did. that also means its better for wilder to take care of breazeale first, then he can have a year to plan the fury fight properly.

[SeGoodland]

...that tries to belittle what the upcoming fight will mean career-wise.

Now that the Fury-Wilder fight is a done deal set to go off this November or December, some of you have observed how Fury will probably not be the same guy that beat Wlad to become the lineal.

Fair enough.

This makes sense and I agree.

However, I am hoping that the same folks making this observation were also saying the same thing about the AJ-Klitschko fight before that happened.

I hope those who seek to belittle what a win by Wilder over Tyson might mean also talk about how AJ fought a diminished Wlad.

Because the truth is, Fury will likely be more ready for his fight with Wilder than Wlad was vs Joshua.

Klitschko had looked bad going back 2 years and had zero tuneups before AJ.

Tyson will have had 2 fights before Wilder.

Now, there is no denying Wlad did look pretty good vs AJ.

But the truth is, we don't know if that was due to a "good" version of Wlad or due to an inexperienced AJ...and really, we still may not know.

Who has AJ fought since again?

A Takam that just got flattened by DelBoy (God Bless him!)?

A Parker that looked very ordinary vs Whyte, who is pretty ordinary himself?

So, when it comes to rating a potential Wilder win over Fury, please be objective enough to keep all this in mind.

Yeah agree but with a few points to make...

1. The two fights that Fury had are on the same level of David Haye's comeback fights against de Mori and Gjergjaj. They were overwhelmingly one sides but served a purpose. So I take it you meant that the camps leading up are better than taking a 2 year break? That makes more sense to me.

2. Who AJ fought after beating Klitschko does not really have any relevance when rating a win over Klitschko considering that Takam was an ordered fight (initially with Pulev) and Parker was a World Champion and therefore a unification...that's a different thing really isn't it?

3. Considering Dr Steelhammer's KO ability through his career, I would say that it was a good show of AJ's ability to get knocked down and comeback and win. Considering who Fury did it against (Steve Cunningham), I would say AJ's win was better.

[Outwest Exp 355]

You make some fair points but everyone has their own agenda and no one is going to care.

[Ray*]

Thats boxing fans for you, the same people that are calling Wlad old and 15 months inactive (Fair point), are the same ones that would criticise you or cry that Fury is at his weakess point right now. They would NOT want you to mention his inactivity, his health issues and his gimme tune ups against jokers. At the end of the day all arguments are made to suit each agendas.

[Rip Chudd]

Dude you're asking people on THIS site to be objective? Good luck with that

[rudy]

...that tries to belittle what the upcoming fight will mean career-wise.

Now that the Fury-Wilder fight is a done deal set to go off this November or December, some of you have observed how Fury will probably not be the same guy that beat Wlad to become the lineal.

Fair enough.

This makes sense and I agree.

However, I am hoping that the same folks making this observation were also saying the same thing about the AJ-Klitschko fight before that happened.

I hope those who seek to belittle what a win by Wilder over Tyson might mean also talk about how AJ fought a diminished Wlad.

Because the truth is, Fury will likely be more ready for his fight with Wilder than Wlad was vs Joshua.

Klitschko had looked bad going back 2 years and had zero tuneups before AJ.

Tyson will have had 2 fights before Wilder.

Now, there is no denying Wlad did look pretty good vs AJ.

But the truth is, we don't know if that was due to a "good" version of Wlad or due to an inexperienced AJ...and really, we still may not know.

Who has AJ fought since again?

A Takam that just got flattened by DelBoy (God Bless him!)?

A Parker that looked very ordinary vs Whyte, who is pretty ordinary himself?

So, when it comes to rating a potential Wilder win over Fury, please be objective enough to keep all this in mind.

Well spoken

[4truth]

I'm undecided on how I'll feel about what I see till I see it. If you are making up your mind beforehand how you should feel, that seems very false to me.

[SAINTSTEVE]

As far as I'm concerned and I'm sure there will be differing opinions, Klitschko vs Joshua wasn't for the lineal championship b/c Wlad had already lost it and Wilder vs Fury shouldn't be for the lineal title either b/c of the absence of Joshua being represented. So ultimately this all doesn't mean anything until we have one champion. One to rule them all like Game of Thrones! (or is that from Lord of the Rings?)

[Chrismart]

Fair points in that post.

Also hopefully people who have discredited Joshua's win over Wlad due to inactivity will acknowledge Fury's inactivity going into this fight.