Tyson Fury Loss Makes Me Rethink Orwell’s ‘1984’
Fury was considered a generational talent until yesterday. The perception change reveals more about us than him.
Tyson Fury lost his championship belt this past weekend to Ukrainian pugilist Oleksandr Usyk. A couple of short years ago, Fury was considered to be the best heavyweight boxer of his era and one of the greatest of all time. Today, following an unconvincing win over MMA champion Francis Ngannou and the latest loss to Usyk, a common refrain is that Fury is overrated and always has been. The sudden reversal speaks to how fickle human perception is.
Calling Fury overrated is not new. Any athlete in the limelight is subject to this brand of facile indictment, but the proportion of naysayers has increased dramatically in a short period of time. One might argue the criticism is valid because Fury isn’t as good as he was. That may be true. Maybe his faculties are deteriorating, or maybe his motivation has evaporated. To say an athlete has lost a step or was bested by a deserving opponent is valid, but to use a recent failure as evidence of perennial mediocrity is not.
Forget Fury for a moment. Here’s another example: The Minnesota Timberwolves’ triumph over the defending champions, the Denver Nuggets (This will be the last sports…
