Povetkin Pumpers: You've got some 'splainin' to do

With all this criticism of Deontay Wilder and who he is defending his title against, let's look at Sasha's earth-shattering reign with the WBA belt from 2011-13:

Won the vacant strap (Wlad was named "super champion" or some such so Sasha Baron Po-in could buy a belt) with a win over Ruslan Chagaev -- who earned this spot with two wins over nobodies after being stopped by Wlad: Travis Walker (lost 3 of his previous 6, including two in a row, all by KO) and Kali Meehan, who isn't even a household name in his own household and had no notable wins, lost to every name fighter he ever fought (even though they were past their sell-by dates) and who would go on to be KTFO by ... Travis Walker.

So, a good start for Sasha.

* First defense was against 14th-ranked (generously) Cedric Boswell ... who was 42 years old but fought like he was 102.

Nice.

But, OK, everybody gets an easy touch in the first defense. Surely he sought out a true heavyweight contender for the next one, right?

* Second defense, he edged a cruiserweight, Marko Huck, by a disputed decision. Was Huck even ranked at heavyweight?

What a warrior.

But this would surely change next time out, right?

* Along comes a 39-year-old "mandatory" challenger, Hasim Rahman, who had beaten five cans since getting blasted out by Klitschko four-plus years earlier. (Some Russian money obviously vaulted him to top of the WBA rankings to give Povetkin an oh-so-easy "No. 1" contender.)

Freaking monster this Povetkin is to be willing to step into a ring with this killer. Somehow Sasha manages to take him out in two rounds to shake up the entire world.

He's on a roll now, ready to take on all comers. Enter ...

* Andrzej Wawrek, who was somehow ranked No. 7. No cherry-pick here for sure against the Polish Sausage.

Povetkin rightfully took off 8 months to recover from the incredible challenge presented by Rahman and won this war of the ages in two rounds. Or was it three? Did anyone count?

Now don't get me wrong, I think Sasha's resume since losing to Wlad clearly earns him the No. 1 ranking to challenge Wilder, but why is it that Wilder gets grief for who he defends against when I'd take Molina or Duhaupas over any of these "challengers" save perhaps, maybe, Huck ... the best of the lot and not even a heavyweight?

So, Povetkin Pumpers and Sasha Supporters, tell me how you really feel about your man's turn with the title.

And tell me why it's such a big deal that a Wilder hasn't defended against his mandatory (who become so in May of this year, all of four months ago) while Povetkin took more than a year to face his easy-touch mandatory, Rahman?

 

By which answer I guess you are saying you cannot defend Sasha's ledger as champion without admitting it is, at the very least, no better than on par with Wilder's.

Got it.

 

I'm not quite sure I understand what you're saying.

The rules are supposed to be the same whether someone is "regular" champion like Sasha was (with Wlad) as super champion or WBC champ like Wilder -- remember, the WBC recognizes still Vitali as "champion emeritus" which includes the right to get an automatic, immediate title challenge should he decide he wants to fight again.

The WBA doesn't say "you're our regular champ so there are no rules which you have to follow in defending this" -- and it was only by his status as WBA "regular" champ that he got a shot at Wlad.

As for Ruslan Chagaev, he won the WBA title in the summer of 2014 and made his first defense more than a year later. And at last report he plans to defend it against Fres Oquendo ... the guy he won it over in July 2014, who hasn't fought since.

It will be summer of 2016 -- TWO YEARS -- at the soonest before he fights his first mandatory against Lucas Browne (and the Oquendo report came before Lucas broke his hand in a stay-busy fight that was made because he can't get his mandatory).

Again, Chagaev sits out an entire year then fights Pianeta, who is nowhere near as good as either of Wilder's two challengers so far, no matter what else one might think of them.

 

That's a valid point, but a different subject.

I'm addressing the criticism of Wilder's first two title defenses by comparing them to the title reign of the guy people say he should be fighting instead.