Is Oleksandr Usyk in your top 10 ATG rankings?

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Maybe numerically he was, but essentially he was a cruiserweight fighting heavyweights.

Back then there was little chance Mike could've made cruiser. The upper limit was only 190 lbs and Mike weighed that much when he was 13. He would've had to lose not just water but actual muscle mass tissue to squeeze down to that division.

 

[BoxingMMA]

A) You literally could not guarantee that

B) You certainly couldn't guarantee that after Usyk already had 37 HW fights in the space of 4 years

Usyk fluffers have become quite silly

Edit - 5 years - I won't just change it to weasle out of my mistake. Point stands.

Nothing sillier in the boxing space than Tyson fans who somehow, after all the losses both to great and garbage opposition, still try to proclaim his greatness.

Yes he was amazing to see and he was the ultimate can crusher. When it came to the fights that would define his era, he came after Lewis and Holyfield. He lost and that’s all you can say about that.

Yes we can speculate about what would have happened if Usyk went right after HW instead of CW. But thanks to that he is now undisputed in two divisions.

the irony of your post. Making Usyks achievements less due to him not fighting at HW the whole time as opposed to Mike. Is that when Mike lost twice to the same guy, it happened against a cruiser weight who moved up as well. he couldn’t crush or intimidate like the majority of cans.

We all have our opinions and definitely I wouldn’t consider myself someone who puts a lot of stock on what a crazy man like teddy atlas. But when it comes to Mike, I’m surprised how much my opinion aligns with his. I’ll quote him and leave it at that. Since who cares, really?

“
“I don’t know if there’s ever been such a combination of speed and power to that pure level that he had, and it was a pure level. I don’t know if there was ever as good a fighter as Tyson was for maybe one night he was great. He wasn’t tested, but he might have been ready to be tested that one night against Michael Spinks when he took him apart in 90 seconds. I think I saw a great fighter that night. I don’t think you can be great unless you have all the requirements of being great.”

Atlas went further to explain what it takes to be regarded as an overall 'great' fighter.


“To not rely on someone else’s weakness to be strong, to be strong on your own,” Atlas said. “Too often, [Tyson] relied on other people’s weakness, whether it’s by being intimidated or whether it was because his talent was so much greater than theirs that it was like putting a monster truck in there with a Volkswagen.

“The Volkswagen was going to get crushed. No matter how much horsepower the Volkswagen might’ve had under the hood, it was going to get crushed. The monster truck was not going to allow it to be a contest. To be able to find a way when your talent wasn’t enough – he didn’t find a way when his talent wasn’t enough.”

To further his viewpoint on the matter, Atlas cited Tyson's upset loss to Buster Douglas in 1990, and a pair of upset defeats to Evander Holyfield in 1996 and 1997.

“A fight is not a fight until there’s something to overcome,” Atlas said. “Until then, it’s just an athletic exhibition contest. Yeah, who’s a better athlete? Who’s got more quick twitch fibers? Who’s more developed in those physical areas?

“But a fight is not a fight until there’s something to overcome. So, if you go by my definition, not Webster’s, pretend it means something, Mike Tyson was only in five, six fights in his life. The fights where there was something to overcome, he didn’t overcome it.”

I rarely agree with Atlas but in this case, he happens to mirror my sentiments exactly. In summary, Mike was not great, just great to look at.

 

[defjaam]

Nothing sillier in the boxing space than Tyson fans who somehow, after all the losses both to great and garbage opposition, still try to proclaim his greatness.

Yes he was amazing to see and he was the ultimate can crusher. When it came to the fights that would define his era, he came after Lewis and Holyfield. He lost and that’s all you can say about that.

Yes we can speculate about what would have happened if Usyk went right after HW instead of CW. But thanks to that he is now undisputed in two divisions.

the irony of your post. Making Usyks achievements less due to him not fighting at HW the whole time as opposed to Mike. Is that when Mike lost twice to the same guy, it happened against a cruiser weight who moved up as well. he couldn’t crush or intimidate like the majority of cans.

We all have our opinions and definitely I wouldn’t consider myself someone who puts a lot of stock on what a crazy man like teddy atlas. But when it comes to Mike, I’m surprised how much my opinion aligns with his. I’ll quote him and leave it at that. Since who cares, really?

“
“I don’t know if there’s ever been such a combination of speed and power to that pure level that he had, and it was a pure level. I don’t know if there was ever as good a fighter as Tyson was for maybe one night he was great. He wasn’t tested, but he might have been ready to be tested that one night against Michael Spinks when he took him apart in 90 seconds. I think I saw a great fighter that night. I don’t think you can be great unless you have all the requirements of being great.”

Atlas went further to explain what it takes to be regarded as an overall 'great' fighter.


“To not rely on someone else’s weakness to be strong, to be strong on your own,” Atlas said. “Too often, [Tyson] relied on other people’s weakness, whether it’s by being intimidated or whether it was because his talent was so much greater than theirs that it was like putting a monster truck in there with a Volkswagen.

“The Volkswagen was going to get crushed. No matter how much horsepower the Volkswagen might’ve had under the hood, it was going to get crushed. The monster truck was not going to allow it to be a contest. To be able to find a way when your talent wasn’t enough – he didn’t find a way when his talent wasn’t enough.”

To further his viewpoint on the matter, Atlas cited Tyson's upset loss to Buster Douglas in 1990, and a pair of upset defeats to Evander Holyfield in 1996 and 1997.

“A fight is not a fight until there’s something to overcome,” Atlas said. “Until then, it’s just an athletic exhibition contest. Yeah, who’s a better athlete? Who’s got more quick twitch fibers? Who’s more developed in those physical areas?

“But a fight is not a fight until there’s something to overcome. So, if you go by my definition, not Webster’s, pretend it means something, Mike Tyson was only in five, six fights in his life. The fights where there was something to overcome, he didn’t overcome it.”

I rarely agree with Atlas but in this case, he happens to mirror my sentiments exactly. In summary, Mike was not great, just great to look at.

Atlas? Lol you fool.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Atlas? Lol you fool.

I mean Teddy knows Mike and what he's made of as well as anyone. He's often overly critical of him but he does have a point. Mike didn't exactly do so hot when facing adversity. Several fights he should've won he ended up losing. I still consider him an ATG due to his accomplishments but he's nowhere near the Top 5. I know some historians that don't even rate him in their Top 10 heavyweights of all-time.

 

[burningspear]

Slagging off one fighter to inflate another is wank, especially total speculation from another era, come on.

 

[ChrisBN]

Slagging off one fighter to inflate another is wank, especially total speculation from another era, come on.

Better to have a slag wank off a fighter.

Conas mar atá tú?

 

[Roids]

Beating up 3 overrated and past prime british stiffs, make you top 10 of all time? lul.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Beating up 3 overrated and past prime british stiffs, make you top 10 of all time? lul.

Cool story, bro. Let's see your hero get in the ring with him. He's fought as high as cruiserweight so why doesn't Benavidez move up and challenge the heavyweight champ?

 

[BoxingMMA]

Atlas? Lol you fool.

I know. I hate it when he is right too

 

[Roids]

Cool story, bro. Let's see your hero get in the ring with him. He's fought as high as cruiserweight so why doesn't Benavidez move up and challenge the heavyweight champ?

Did you think that was a good counter to my point? How does beating 3 overrated UK HW's make you top 10 of all time, with only 24 pro fights? lol. His body of work is too thin. He beat 3 big stiff robots at HW, lets see him fight a HW who can move and isn't a robot.

 

[Roids]

People saying Usyk only fought 5 opponents are just hating. Usyk has 8 wins at HW, not 5. His second wins over Joshua, Fury and Dubois are just as meaningful as his first if not more meaningful given that Joshua and Fury have a history of overperforming in rematches and Dubois was even higher ranked the second time around.

If Ali beat Foreman twice instead of once, would you hold that against him? If Mayweather beat Canelo twice instead of once, would you hold that against him? No, you wouldn’t. So why are Usyk’s rematch wins discredited?

How are they hating when its a fact he only fought 5 opponents at HW? Fury barely beat an MMA fighter in his previous fight, and AJ who was always overrated was destroyed in his very next fight. Dubious was a limited but dangerous opponent, who was on a roll, so that was a good win. Not even in the convo for all time though. Just recency bias out of control. Nothing new.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

Why were his fights vs. Berbick and Tucker less important?
Against Berbick he competed to become the youngest heavyweight champion in history and against Tucker he competed for the undisputed championship.

well because they weren't as high-profile and they weren't the same level of competition.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Did you think that was a good counter to my point? How does beating 3 overrated UK HW's make you top 10 of all time, with only 24 pro fights? lol. His body of work is too thin. He beat 3 big stiff robots at HW, lets see him fight a HW who can move and isn't a robot.

This is just another hot take from you. You've called Benavidez a generational great when his best win is Demetrius Andrade ffs. That was his most accomplished opponent. A guy that used to fight at 154 lbs.

I don't rate Usyk in the Top 10 all-time at heavyweight but to shit on his opposition is hilarious when you're all about Benavidez who has done little in his career.

By the way there are plenty of credible people that do rate Usyk Top 10 all-time at heavy. Like former heavyweight champs. Here's one of them that maybe you'll recognize.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

@Roids You know what's funny? According to your favorite fighter Usyk is the GOAT. He worships him.

“Usyk? I don’t think I have enough experience to go up against Usyk. I’m just being 100% honest. Like you say never say never, maybe in the future, maybe in 5 or 6 years but by then Usyk will be 40 something or even older. I have tremendous respect for Usyk and he’s the greatest of all time.”

 

[SandisLL]

It's interesting to see Tyson denigrated in a thread about Usyk, because one of the biggest reasons Usyk gets such an enthusiastic reacharound from everybody is his size.

We put someone who wasted too much of his pro career either fighting at cruiserweight or sitting on the bench on a pedestal, while shitting on a significantly smaller man who stepped in against HWs from day one. And sometimes fought double the amount of them in a single year.

Do you know how difficult and long time does takes to negotiate high level fights?
He might had wasted even x more years if CW didn't had WBSS tournament format for pros... this allowed him to be an undisputed in division plus to get The Ring belt too...
Later he defended this all and then moved to HW.
plus in europe CW isn't lowest paid division at all, ofc it isn't HW but it isn't CW in U.S where really lesser $ might be get ....
Yup, ofc clauses and rematches took a lot of time between fights in HW division and still he is an undisputed again, now in HW division.

WBSS was good luck for him, otherwise maybe til today he didn't had get all belts in CW division...maybe.
Maybe never had such career in HW too....

 

[Athenry04]

Better to have a slag wank off a fighter.

Conas mar atá tú?

Upvote for Gaelic

 

[brundlefly]

Where do you rank him now?

Is he in your all-time top 10?

No, I don't rank usyk anywhere near the top 10 ATG. Not even top 10 all-time HW. But I would rank him top 5 all-time among cruiserweights ahead of juan carlos gomez.

I seen where paulie malignaggi had a YT post implying that usyk and ali are in the same league. And some other YT content creators are kinda hinting or just plain coming out and making the assertion that usyk is better than ali and that usyk is the greatest HW of all time and shit like that....reminds me of when ggg was campaigning and people would say he was better than hagler, joe louis and ali. HBO even once said ggg was the greatest MW of the past 25 years.

IMO if they compare usyk to ali, they smokin' the crack of butt.

Don't get me wrong. Usyk is probably a great fighter. but i don't think you can say exactly HOW great he is based on his accomplishments at CW and HW. The CW division has been weak since its inception. Standouts like holyfield, haye, toney, etc, didn't stick around long to bring any real visibility to that division. they all moved up to HW and they all won at least a version of the HW title. and it's not like usyk was a dominant CW champion. he struggled with breidis and bellew neither of whom is a HoFer. At HW, the comp was fury, AJ and dubois. All second-raters as far as i'm concerned. And i still think dubois deserved the KO win in the first fight.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

The CW division has been weak since its inception.

If it was as weak as you say then the World Boxing Super Series wouldn't have featured it in back-to-back seasons. The cruiserweight division Usyk cleaned out was when it was at its peak. Roy agrees.

 

[treelo]

This is the part a lot of people overlook. Compare Wladimir Klitschkos schedule as a champion and Usyk's schedule to Tyson's schedule from 86 and 87. Both Klitschko and Usyk would get knocked out if they attempted to compete that much.

James Tillis on May 3, 1986. Mitch Green on May 20, 1986.
You're out of your goddamn mind if you think a 38 y. old Usyk could do that.

i dont get your point here, neither could a 38 year old Mike Tyson

comparing apples with oranges

 

[defjaam]

i dont get your point here, neither could a 38 year old Mike Tyson

comparing apples with oranges

Usyk is cementing his greatness in his mid-late 30s. Tyson was essentially done at his point.

I don't think there should be any comparison. Someone else was trying to talk up Usyk by talking down Tyson, citing the loss vs. Lennox Lewis as an example. Which is not only a terrible example when specifically discussing Tyson, but also when comparing him to Usyk. It's not like anyone here in this thread would be confident betting on Usyk vs. 2002 Lennox Lewis.