Wilder's WBC belt or AJ's host of belts?

Is this some sort of wind up? how can you not give a **** about the Ring Title. WBC is arguably the worst of the 4 now after they seem hell bent on ruining any sort of reputation they have. A few years ago I would of said the WBC was the best of the 4, now I'm not to sure. IBF out of the 4 seem to have their **** together the most at the moment, WBA have too many titles.

 

IBF, IBO, WBA and WBO beats the WBC.

Also, AJs resume is far better than Wilder or any other active HW out there.

So he has the better set of belts, the better resume and is seen universally as the Number 1 HW on the planet.

That is all that really matters. If Wilder goes back to facing bums after Fury, assuming he wins and keeps the WBC no one is going to lose any sleep over it. Although I am sure AJ really wants all the belts, and would be prepared to pay Wilder over the odds for the WBC belt.

 

WBC has lost credibility for me...the fact Whyte wasn’t made mandatory is a farce.

 

I think your casual types don't really care and your boxing hardcore lot know enough about the fighters to know who is number one. Back in the mid-late 00's did anyone really think Wlad wasn't the number one in the division despite holding the 'never been taken seriously' IBF title, whilst a combination of John Ruiz, Oleg Maskaev and Nikolai Valuev defended the coveted WBC and WBA belts against Monte Barrett, Owen Beck and Peter Okhello?

 

the trinket itself only gets meaning from who its been won from and defended against for me.

So Joshua has a better level of opponent than Wilder. Therefore the belts are 'harder won' than Wilder. Depending on what type of Fury we see it'll be a hell of a lot closer if he can get past him. If its the Fury of his last two fights it adds nothing.

 

Fighter makes the belt.
I bet people on here wasn't giving Bellew extra kudos when he won the Green strap over the other champions

 

Joshua is the man at the minute. There’s no two ways about it. But his career will be defined by whether or not he gets his hands on that WBC strap or not.

I understand where they’re coming from with the A side and bringing in the money bolllocks but sometimes you’ve got to swallow a bit of that money and unify. You’d go down as an all time great, not many have done it.

 

The belts don't matter. It's how you got them and what you do with them.

The fact of the matter is that Wilder and Joshua both collected their belts with wins over very dubious "champions".

Deontay Wilder
beat BERMANE STIVERNE for his WBC belt
No one rated Stiverne as a legit champion. Wladimir Klitscko was the champion.

Anthony Joshua
beat CHARLES MARTIN for his IBF belt
Martin was even less credible than Stiverne, which is remarkably bad by any standard. Tyson Fury was the champion.

beat WLADIMIR KLITSCHKO for the vacant WBA super belt
.... but Klitschko was no champion. He'd been dethroned by Tyson Fury 17 months previous, had done nothing since, and had not won a fight in 2 years !

beat JOSEPH PARKER for the IBF title.
Parker was a promising young fighter. He's an honest and humble man and everywhere he went he admittted that he owed his position to the fact that Tyson Fury had open up the division by getting rid of Wladimir and vacating the belts.


Wilder's held his belt longer but he's made himself look bad by defending against nobodies, apart from Ortiz.

Joshua fought a few nobodies too, but Wlad, Parker and Povetkin were credible.

 

Joshua and Hearn and their lap dogs and all you Matchroom FC internet weirdos are dreading the possibility of a Tyson Fury win tonight, because you all know deep down that Fury coming along and beating Wilder will cast a shadow over Joshua's achievements, at least in the minds of people who know boxing.
Rightly or wrongly, Wilder is rated and perceived to be Joshua's outstanding rival, a legitimate threat.

If Fury eliminates this "threat" Wilder, picks up the WBC belt, the only belt he never had to throw in the bin in the first place, combined with being the man who actually ended the dominant Klitschko era, that casts a serious doubt on Joshua's credibility.

Like it or not, the facts are the facts.

 

Joshua, without question...

But unforgiven makes a couple of good points a couple of posts above

 

It only means something to those who care, just letters to me. I have never judged a fighter on what belt he holds. I judge him on how good he is.

 

All paper belts.

 

All the belts are the Same.

Its how good the guy is who is holding them that counts.