Why isn't Deontay Wilder famous/huge in America yet?

I'd say because he hasn't fought anybody yet but Joshua is pretty well known over here by now, Hearn does have a good hype machine though and he won a gold medal too which really helps over here.

 

Hasn't stepped up from knocking over garden gnomes.

 

Yes I know. Realistically Foreman, Tyson and Wilder's path to a title shot has been of much the same standard. Perhaps with the actual champion still deemed light years ahead of Wilder and the American public are still weary about putting their emotional faith fully behind Wilder in case he gets utterly destroyed by the hated Klitschko is playing a part.

:think

 

Wilder has to beat wlad to get the recognition.


He would be the undisupted heavyweight champion

 

Good point

 

I feel like he is pretty well known. I'm from Jersey and a lot of people here heard of him...but boxing isn't as popular in the U.S. as it used to be so that could also be why, idk

 

lol

Hmmmm... could it be that Wilders 'resume' looks
alot like Butterbeans resume of KO victims??

Now he's defending his 'title' against Duhaupuss!!

Go figure...

His last title defence was against a guy that
got KTFO in one round by Tits Arreola!!

hehehe...

 

1. His personality isn't special
2. Hasn't proved much

If he would have ko'd Stieverne I know he would be more popular. The fight was kind of lack luster compared to expectations.

 

If you went life and death with Harold Sconiers? Nuff said

 

Good question. I haven't read the full thread at this point, but I doubt you got as much real feedback as it deserves. I've wondered this a few times too. I think there are probably a number of reasons:
1. different environment. I think American's were waiting for a great American HW more back then, Ali was active 4 or 5 years before, Holmes was finishing up a great but unsatisfying career. Boxing was doing well across the board in America but there was a thirst for more. HW boxing not nearly as high profile in America now, less a sense it will happen again, and probably less an appetite for it.
2. Wlad. Along the same lines as #1 in terms of environment, people acknowledge Wlad as the best and there's no real sense Wilder will dethrone Wlad. Holmes was more clearly on his way out/already gone by the time Tyson was getting to be huge. There was a vacuum that nature/boxing public abhors that Tyson seemed primed to fill that Wilder doesn't
3. I think Wilder's resume is somewhat underrated. That said, Tyson's was more impressive. He was so young, no one was questioning who he fought, and he did it somewhat quicker than Wilder has done. Gave it more of a destructive feel and less opportunity for cynicism
4. Size. Tyson was tiny. It was really remarkable someone his size could do what he did to much bigger men. Wilder is a giant (except his legs), so people are much less surpised at his domination. There was a novelty factor with Tyson.
5. Social media. No blogs etc around to tear down boxers back then. Today's culture is much more cynical in general, and probably especially toward boxing and HW's, than yesterday's culture.

So, all told, a lot of good reasons Wilder hasn't had remotely the social impact as Tyson. If somehow he defeats Wlad (overwhelmingly unlikely) I think that would change. But for now, while he's still got some social cache, he's not remotely at Tyson's level.

 

seems like he would be wildly popular. especially after having the courage to actually fight Dustin Nichols. whew.

 

Yes.... This fight cemented his legacy. Worm was the most avoided competetive Ester in sports and Wilder actually took down the quarter ton beast; whilst having been dropped heavily. Leshun showed his heart but honestly if Worm didn't tire, who knows?

 

Because even casual American fans desperate for a great US hope at heavyweight aren't gullible enough to buy that his level of competition has been worth giving a damn about.

 

Americans know Wlad is the champ and anyother belt is fraudulent