Is Tyson Fury the goat

amsdfuf wrote:

Bare knuckles., wrote:

Fury beat Vitali Klitschko at 6'7" 250 who was an extremely skilled and accurate champion. He was one of the best all time fighters.

No

+1

Bare knuckles., wrote:

trollism wrote:

John McDermott, Otto Wallin, Derek Chisora, Rich Power, Kevin Johnson.

What have all these got in common?

They've all reached the final bell with the 'huge power' of Tyson Fury. (they're not the only ones either).

Fury isn't a big punching heavyweight. He can sometimes overwhelm an opponent with the jab and then finish things when they get tired, but he's never had one punch KO power.

Young Ali was not a one punch guy either.

The BIG knock on Ali is that in his career he lost to a number of just average fighters and he fought a number of hacks.

Fury never lost.

I believe his reputation is greater than he was.

Who are these supposed average fighters that Ali lost to? He lost to Frazier, Norton, and Spinks - all great fighters and heavyweight champs, two of whom were Olympic champs. Ali avenged all three, including twice to Frazier and Norton.

He only lost to two other guys - one being Holmes, who is the most underrated heavyweight champ probably ever and dominated boxing in the late 70s to mid 80s and went like 48-0. Oh and Ali had fought almost 60 fights by then.

Ali fought for another five or so years between Foreman and Holmes fights and he fought like 10-12 times. He was fighting 2-4 times a year and this is after he's already had 45 fights and is champ. That sort of workrate is unseen today.

The lack of respect for boxers past and present on here is ridiculous. Fury is a great fighter and anyone saying he's not is ridiculous. He's got impressive movement, skills, unorthodoxy, and cardio for a guy his size.

Actually watched some old Mike Tyson fights last night, circa 85-87. I've changed my stance a little. Around that period damn he could bob and weave. He ducks really well and unloads his shots, a big 6f9 guy like Fury would struggle to hit him I think, plus he would need to stoop down and so get hit.

Something changed with Mike late 80s onwards and he stopped bobbing as much, guessing he was missing the influence of Cus. Post 1990 Mike I'd have Fury to stop him or win on points, before this Mike would knock him out I think. I also think pre 1990 Mike would knock Ali out too.

Over40 wrote:

Actually watched some old Mike Tyson fights last night, circa 85-87. I've changed my stance a little. Around that period damn he could bob and weave. He ducks really well and unloads his shots, a big 6f9 guy like Fury would struggle to hit him I think, plus he would need to stoop down and so get hit.

Something changed with Mike late 80s onwards and he stopped bobbing as much, guessing he was missing the influence of Cus. Post 1990 Mike I'd have Fury to stop him or win on points, before this Mike would knock him out I think. I also think pre 1990 Mike would knock Ali out too.

Actually I watched numerous clips of Klitschko which changed my mind. He is the goat. Fury beat Klitschko when Klitschko was 39. Klitschko was a great and a tougher fighter who fought into his 40s. Young Klitschko had amazing power and accuracy. Picture a Mike Tyson at 6'6".

Mike Tyson is quoted as saying he wishes he was 1/2 as good as Klitschko.

Maybe if Fury reached his potential he might be that goat. Klitschko would never, never never have lost to Leon Spinks at age 36. In his prime he would have beat Ali.

We know hes fast wrote:

amsdfuf wrote:

No

Pretty sure Fury beat Wladimir. Not Vitali. I would agree that Vitali is one of the best. His only loss was a stoppage due to illegal headbutt by Lewis when he was young. Never went on the canvas.

He was 39 when Fury beat him.

After hearing everyone talk about how great this fight was and how great Fury is, I decided to watch the replay. I know nothing of these guys and haven't followed boxing since the mid 90s when Tyson became a joke ("the bite").

That said, I don't know what the hype was about. Fury was knocked down twice in a round! Granted, I think the first one was more of a stumble, so I won't hold it against him.

But otherwise, he seemed to not have a ton of power as he snapped off some good punches and Wilder managed to take many of them. When Mike Tyson snapped off a good one, the opponent usually went to sleep.

Fury's personality was pretty refreshing to see, at least in the post match ring interview he seemed pretty level headed and not bragging too terribly much.

Seems silly to be comparing to a guy whose peak was probably 50 years ago. No one would suggest that a marathoner from 50 years ago would be competitive in the London marathon of today for instance.

Bad Wigins wrote:

great fight wrote:

But we are not talking about terrorists killing civilians, we are speaking about heavy weight boxing champs.

Champs like Tyson Fury and John L Sullivan, not terrorists like the British army.

I detect a bit of salt about the "British" champ being an Irishman yet again.

The British Army was an invading force. Terrorists don’t invade and don’t have an army.

Fury is the least athletic athlete I’ve ever seen.

Doesn’t matter though. Results speak for themselves.

Watch this video of Klitschko and then tell me who would win a fight, Klitschko or Ali

Try to see beyond the myth. Its like the Trump effect with Ali. If you hear someone say they are the greatest enough times, some people start to believe them. Ali was clearly great, but Klitschko was better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5YLM3ElIWg

Ali would win. Also an '87 Tyson was built to destroy tall opponents like Klitschko. Not sure what you think you see in this Klitschko highlight reel. Good boxer but not great. Boxing industry has to always pump up the current product as being great, so that they can sell it, but it's often just hype.

I don’t say he was the greatest, but Ali was certainly one of the 10 best boxers in the sport lb for lb. Klitchko was good but not anywhere near that good. He was stopped by Corrie Sanders, Ross Purrity and one other so-so fighter while he was either in his prime or close to it. Larry Holmes, for example would not have lost to any of those guys. Not even on a bad night.

He was also doped up. I mean, lets not gloss over the fact that pretty much every present day HW has doped or is doping. And we're talking about a guy who hails from a country known to have a state sponsored doping program.

Its really sad watching people who obviously don't like the idea of a black man being considered the GOAT.

We know hes fast wrote:

Funny how people go back to old time fighters, but somehow forget about Marciano. And these are fans of old school boxing? Interesting.

Marciano certainly has to be in discussion of top ten of all time, along with Vitali, Lewis, and the much hated Fury. Fury is obviously not an Alvarez rocketship puncher but he's got power, and he's got quickness and reach. Can find ways to beat people. He is good. Too early for GOAT status but if he could win 10 more championship matches & stay on the top for another 7-8 years then maybe.

Marciano was for sure one of the greatest. I dont think he is forgotten at all generally in discussions about the great HW fighters. Its just that this discussion is centered around debunking Fury as the GOAT in which case Marciano being not that big for a HW his name doesn't come up as a guy who would have been a good match up against Fury. With modern training and doping for sure, he likely would be as unbeatable as he was during his time.

beardedultrarunner wrote:

He was also doped up. I mean, lets not gloss over the fact that pretty much every present day HW has doped or is doping. And we're talking about a guy who hails from a country known to have a state sponsored doping program.

Its really sad watching people who obviously don't like the idea of a black man being considered the GOAT.

Lol, as if the Klitschkos and the Americans since at least the Holyfield/Tyson era haven't all been roided .

One dodgy jiffy bag in a professional team sport that had Lance Armstrong dominating a decade or two ago, does not make for a state sponsored doping program.

Hundreds of confirmed busts covered up, Lance Armstrong, Al Sal/Nike, and almost as many track busts as Kenya, does.

I don't think race has anything to do with this conversation. I agree that Ali is the GOAT, btw.

Did I say anything about Tyson or Holyfield? Pretty sure I didnt. Perhaps you missed all the talk about Russia's state sponsored doping, seems unlikely but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest you simply google "Russia state sponsored doping" should keep you busy for awhile. Sorry if I am a bit skeptical about Russian athletes.

Yes, for lots of people race doesn't have anything to do with it. But it sort of becomes pretty obvious in these discussions some folks really really really like white fighters and grasp at anything they possibly can to bring down guys like Ali and others. So race unfortunately definitely does factor in.

who d'unbanned wrote:

Ali would win. Also an '87 Tyson was built to destroy tall opponents like Klitschko. Not sure what you think you see in this Klitschko highlight reel. Good boxer but not great. Boxing industry has to always pump up the current product as being great, so that they can sell it, but it's often just hype.

Ali would be destroyed. So would M Tyson of any year. Boxing industry hype was at its peak in the 70s/80s. This is why there are still some hangers on who think that was some special era.

This changed when Lewis showed up and then Europeans took over. Klitschko was king for many years. Now its been between Joshua/Fury/Usyk. American boxing can no longer promote heavyweight fighters like they used to since they have been overrun by better, stronger, tougher European competition. Especially the Eastern Euros. My goodness. They just dont giva a f. They are full of confidence. Even knowing this, Western promoters don't want to give Eastern Europeans a shot at good bouts often. Prime examples are Makh truck Arslanbek Makhmudov & Filip Hrgovic. Two of the top prospects for a while and keep winning and knocking out people but they dont get their shot.

Lucas Tanner wrote:

I don’t say he was the greatest, but Ali was certainly one of the 10 best boxers in the sport lb for lb. Klitchko was good but not anywhere near that good. He was stopped by Corrie Sanders, Ross Purrity and one other so-so fighter while he was either in his prime or close to it. Larry Holmes, for example would not have lost to any of those guys. Not even on a bad night.

Lol. Klitschko was incredible. People are so funny confusing the two brothers. Vitali was the better one. Wladimir lost to Sanders. Too funny.

Larry Holmes? Now I know you're messing around

zero tolerance wrote:

Lucas Tanner wrote:

I don’t say he was the greatest, but Ali was certainly one of the 10 best boxers in the sport lb for lb. Klitchko was good but not anywhere near that good. He was stopped by Corrie Sanders, Ross Purrity and one other so-so fighter while he was either in his prime or close to it. Larry Holmes, for example would not have lost to any of those guys. Not even on a bad night.

Lol. Klitschko was incredible. People are so funny confusing the two brothers. Vitali was the better one. Wladimir lost to Sanders. Too funny.

Larry Holmes? Now I know you're messing around

I was referring to Vladimir. I didn’t confuse him with his brother. But if you don’t consider Holmes an all time great, you simply know too little about this sport to engage in a serious discussion.

It's a joke that someone actually believes there's some state sponsored program, but which athlete are you referring to coming from Dr evil communist state sponsored Russia? Fury?