Was it low or was it fair?
In all honesty, the answer to this question is not the story of the fight. Oleksander Usyk demonstrated his superiority within the first round, quickly finding his range and landing his sharp jab to the dome of Dubois and giving the audience a hint of things to come.
Whilst Dubois had a clear gameplan and registered moments of success in the fight, it never translated into spells of sustained success that swayed the momentum in his favour. The difference in punch accuracy, technique and fluidity was stark, resulting in the outcome being unsurprising.
But the question keeps returning. Irrespective of who was clearly the better fighter and conclusively close the show; was the punch low?
At first glance I thought perhaps Dubois could count himself a little unlucky. I had seen shots like that landed countless times before without prompting distressed response that Usyk had towards it. I shrugged ambivalently as I watched the champion shake off the pain and gradually return to his feet. It was borderline after all and the referee doesn't have the benefit of slow motion replays, multiple angle replays. The decision wasn't egregious to me.
But before action could resume I made the fatal error of opening up the X app (formerly known as Twitter) and the words "robbery" and "low blow" had began trending.
Freeze framed shots and video replays from different angles supposedly proving arguments from both sides flooded onto X and provoked bad-tempered replies that to and fro'd to exhaustion. Reasonable debate and discussion was a rarity: the mobs had been angered.
In the age of social media, content is king regardless of the quality. Reactions and answers are given instantly. Expression of an opinion is valued greater than the thought put into it. Be first, be fast and set the agenda, receive the engagement and revel in the likes and reposts.
The evidence of Usyk's reaction and lack of protest from Dubois made me consider why did such an innocuous incident trigger such visceral reaction?
Could it simply be a symptom of our societies penchant for partisanship? It is akin to people staunchly aligning themselves as clearly being left wing or right wing, with little grey area, and taking the expected stance on topics depending on their political ideology.
Although Daniel Dubois certainly had his supporters, he isn't among the high profile or beloved boxers or even heavyweights in this country. This was just another battle in the ongoing war between the online foot soldiers of Oleksander Usyk and Tyson Fury.
The rivalry polarised fans to the extent that it has prompted them to pick a side to defend to the hilt whilst attacking the other, with the low blow incident providing the perfect a battleground for the two sides to hurl verbal grenades at one another.
You can be pro-Fury and anti-Usyk or vice versa, with little appreciation for the other.
I can understand why the pro-Fury faction refused to believe the shot was low. To do so would be contradictory to the narrative of their story whereby Usyk is the villain. Usyk the antagonist doesn't deserve the credit of rising after being fouled, continuing to fight and resoundingly defeating a strong, young challenger.
Equally, there are those who immediately cried foul and refused to believe that Usyk could possibly take advantage of the situation with some additional theatrics. He is a heroic beacon of hope and goodness, representing a war-torn country and standing up to the continued buffoonery of Fury.
I decided to ignore the loud and boisterous voices giving their ardent views on X. I read the rules and listened to credible, objective voices in the sport to understand the nuanced truth that simply can't be articulated on a platform that by nature reduces the ability to express any critical thought or balanced opinion.
But the battle lines have been drawn and the people have chosen their side, however, the influence of foot soldiers on this war is minimal. Ultimately, a clash between Tyson Fury and Oleksander Usyk is surely what it will take to settle the score by finally crowning an undisputed heavyweight world champion.
Or will it? After all, if we have learned anything from this past weekend, the truth is often quickly and adamantly diluted by naysayers and deemed irrelevant, when social media fame, agendas, ideologies and preferences take precedence.
Article sponsored by HÖRFA