F--- boxing

Joshua is slow to rouse, for sure, but he's a better boxer than Wilder and a better puncher than Fury. He's a pretty well-rounded fighter, in fact - granting, as you say, that he drops his hands too often - and is smart enough tactically to outmaneuver either challenger.

 

Very true...But is he a good enough puncher to counter the boxing skills and difficulties that Fury possesses and is he a good enough boxer and tough enough to survive the right hands he's going to take from Wilder.

Or will it matter. Doesn't seem like Hearn is in a rush for Joshua to fight either guy.

 

Agreed. We'll likely get Wilder - Fury II before we get a fight between Joshua and either of them.

That said, they sure do represent two distinct challenges.

I think Fury can be beaten inside, to the body, but you have to walk through his jab to get there. Wilder on the other hand is a long range bomber with lousy footwork who needs to be kept off balance and in constant motion. Then step in to counter him when he's throwing those haymakers from his shoe-tops.

 

Would prime Tyson have his way with Wilder? @Azrael

 

I quite disagree. But I much hope you're right, if only because Fury and Wilder are far more interesting figures. Joshua kinda bores me with his typical-ness. But Fury is like a cartoon character, the personality, the bizarre personal history, his dramatic ups and downs, even his unusual height and flabby center, how much fun is this guy? And Wilder is ..well, American ...goddamn, how long has it been since we've seen an American undisputed heavyweight champ?

I definitely believe Joshua is the best of the three, but boy would I love it if one of the other two beat him.

 

You don't think they can? At all? It's heavyweight boxing. All three fighters have strengths and significant flaws. The fact that Joshua has already tasted the canvas tells me he can lost to either guy on any given night.

 

Great question.

Tyson in his prime had his way with everybody, even much taller fighters with much longer reach. It's easy to forget how small Tyson is - just 5' 10" - and the size of guys like Mitch Green or Tyrell Biggs or Carl Williams. All at least 6' 4". Tyson was always the shortest guy at the top of the division.

That said, Wilder has genuine power and a 9" height advantage and a 12" reach advantage over Tyson. But he's a terrible boxer. He generates a lot of that power by swinging from long distance. He's got less pop on his inside stuff.

I'd guess Tyson walks through Wilder's not very good jab, neutralizing the leverage of those long haymakers, fights him inside, then chops him down like a tree.

So hypothetical Peak Tyson has a good chance against Deontay Wilder.

But past-his-peak Tyson took a real beating from 6' 5" Lennox Lewis.

And Lewis is smaller than either Fury or Joshua or Wilder.

 

You're right. Honestly, I think I may've done a late night misreading of your post there. My bad.

Yes, they can beat him. But unlikely. And I'd say Wilder has the best shot because of his knockout power. He sure ain't gonna outbox Joshua, but he might be able to put him out if he connects with the right shot.

 

When Tyson was at his best he used his jab to set up his other punches and he could out jab bigger guys because he was so fast. When he stopped doing that and looked for one punch knockouts he'd let the bigger guys hold him and he was far less effective.

 

Few modern heavyweights with faster hands, that's for sure.

We've mythologized the "baddest man on the planet" cliché and overlook Peak Tyson's tremendous technical command. Cus produced a beautifully balanced fighter.

 

I would argue at the top of his game Tyson strung hard, fast punches together better than any heavyweight since Joe Louis. Yeah, I know Ali was incredibly fast but he didn't have the kind of power Tyson did. And Foreman could certainly punch but he wasn't that fast.