It' s hard to rate Wilder when it comes to ATG rankings but I think he is at least A-level.

I agree with a 15 year old who cares about likes on a forum ... and who also happens to be right, the same as you happen to be wrong.

I am a 300lb Navy Seal trained in gorilla warfare

Yesterday?

You evidently DKSAB if you think Ruiz, Usyk, Wilder, Joshua and Fury would "run through almost any era"

LOL again.

Out of that lot Usyk has the best hopes since he's very proven at cruiser, but he has no pro HW record to speak of yet. Let's talk again in 4 years.

 

See you’re looking at resume, that’s how I know that YDKSAB. You can’t look at the fighters, their skills, their physicality, and determine how they would go in head to head match ups.
Lewis wasn’t that big, wasn’t that fast, wasn’t that skilled. Yet he still stayed on top. He’s no better than Joshua. The thing is because it’s the modern era we write Joshua off after a knockout loss. Lewis was knocked out multiple times. Everyone complained about him at the time. Wlad stayed dominant, despite being a boring stiff. Yet everybody knows he would be at the top of any heavyweight division due to his size and discipline. He was basically Lewis 2.0. Manny Steward told Lewis that for a reason.

Now we not only have Joshua, we also have the most powerful heavyweight ever (also happens to be 6’7), and the most skilled heavyweight ever (who happens to be 6’9). Fury is every bit as fluid and skilled as little Ali was. That’s before I even mention the rest. Watch Tyson and Holyfield, then watch Ruiz counter and throw combinations. I have no doubt at all that this is the greatest heavyweight era ever. I’ve been a boxing fan longer than that 15 year old kid has been alive and I’ve never had an interest in the heavyweight division (apart from when Jones and Toney were making moves there).
I’m not speaking from bias, simply from the fact that I understand boxing and I understand what I’m seeing. If you can’t see it and enjoy it then I just feel sorry for you.

 

Sure I can. I can see that the "top" fighters routinely go life and death with the old fossils from Wlad's era. I see Povetkin outboxing Joshua at ~40 years old. I see Ortiz hammering Wilder at ~40 years old. I see guys that cant box and guys with no chins. I see an eating-contest laureate become HW champion of the world.

 

Lewis didn’t even fight a southpaw, he ducked Byrd who was on a run and excused it with “Well it wouldn’t be competitive anyway”. I could see Ortiz doing what Rahman and McCall did to Lewis. Maybe Wilder just has a better chin than Lewis. So you’re talking about guys who got knocked out by the fighters you’re trying to denigrate? Where was Lewis’ chin? Wlad’?

You talk about guys who can’t box and have no chins, yet you then denigrate a guy who clearly can box and has a great chin, is heavyweight champ... because his body isn’t as pretty as you would like? Ruiz has been built like that since he was a child. Fat middleweight James Toney was slapping around John Ruiz, knocking out Holyfield, and clowning Sam Peters (in the first fight).

So how does a 6’2, super fast lifelong heavyweight who has been boxing far longer than Joshua has, knock him out and then that gets used as evidence against this heavyweight division? Joshua has done more and in less time, and in more impressive fashion than Lewis and Wlad did before they got knocked out. Joshua is that trash is he?

People like you DKSAB. I’ve forgotten more than you’ll ever know, and I have the brain to put things in context. Keep sharing your uninformed opinion with 15 year olds who masturbate over black and white posters of superheroes. I’ll live in reality and enjoy the sport.

 

everything.

 

Every heavyweight era has been weak. This era is no exception to this rule! Heavyweight division in boxing has never really been great as a whole, despite many fanboys claiming so.

The thing is, there's always been exceptional talents in every heavyweight era. There have always been a few standout names in every era, even if the division as a whole has always been weak. Andy Ruiz Jr is one of those exceptional talents, so is Wladimir Klitschko, so is Alexander Povetkin and so forth so on.

Let's not pretend and act like heavyweight boxing has ever been that special as a whole. There have been special boxers with special talents here and there, but the division as a whole, has always been pss poor!

 

I counted about seven British stoppages in that round.

 

I agree that the division as a whole has always been pss poor. Until now!
Due to the fact that large guys with talent have historically been in the US, and have the appeal of basketball and football to lure them away. Now that boxing is world wide sport (instead of a US sport) you have heavyweights from all over the world. Add in the fact that people are getting larger in general, and you have a far greater talent pool than any other time in history. That’s reflected by having four elite heavyweights at one time with three of them being over 6’5. In the past you’d be extraordinarily lucky to have two elite heavyweights at any one time, and if there were then only one of them was over 6’4 (if you were lucky). Guys like Holmes, Lewis, and Wlad were only at the top of their eras due to size and consistency. That’s not enough these days.

 

Even now, the heavyweight division really isn't ANY better than the division during the Klitschko era. I maintain that Wladimir Klitschko was better than anybody in previous eras, but even doing so, his era wasn't necessarily that much better than most of the previous eras and I believe his era and Lennox Lewis's era were equally bad / good.

Prime Anthony Joshua proved he is not even conclusively better than a washed up, shot version of Wladimir Klitschko at age 41 by going life and death and then needing a questionable stoppage to win in his back yard. Ever since then, Joshua hasn't shown any real improvements. So he is an 'elite' from today's era and is absolutely has not shown to be better than a prime Wladimir Klitschko who dominated for a decade.

After 40 fights, you can barely count on one hand the number of top 10 heavyweights IN THEIR PRIMES that Wilder has fought and beaten. So until he does so, he is totally unproven and is disqualified from being considered a great.

I'll give you Tyson Fury as he is one of those rare exceptions who is a super heavyweight at 6 foot 9 and moves in a way no past super heavyweight showed to be able to move. Same thing with Andy Ruiz Jr and Oleksandr Usyk. But even Fury fought a shot to pieces Wladimir Klitschko and could barely land a glove on him. The gap wasn't that big to prove that Fury (who is one of the best from this era) should be considered greater, especially compared to a prime version of Wlad.

The truth is, there are only 3 elite standout heavyweights today and they are Fury, Usyk and Andy Ruiz Jr. The rest have all been exposed (Joshua) or are still yet unproven (Deontay Wilder). Yes, Usyk hasn't fought at heavyweight in the pros YET, but has done so in the WSB and amateurs and the eye test tells us Usyk is an elite already from those fights and his cruiser weight fights.

So in essence, this really isn't much different from the Klitschko era where you also had two or three standout names then as well whilst the rest weren't that special.

In fact, you could argue that the heavyweights during the Klitschko below the top 3 were better than the heavweights today below the top 3. What's so special about the rest of the heavyweights today? Dillian Whyte? Gimme a break! Joseph Parker? As heartless as they come! Pulev and Povetkin are Klitschko era and they are still in the top 10. Proving this era is really no better than the Klitschko era. Otherwise, Pulev and Povetkin would not be in the top 10 today. Which other non - Klitschko era top 10 heavyweight today is that special? Exactly! None whatsoever!

I do agree that since the heavyweight division became global, and non-Americans were allowed to compete, it became better. However, this principle applies to the Klitschko era too and not just this era. Klitschko era also had boxers oxers allowed from pretty much everywhere. So you can't apply that criticism against the Klitschko era. You can only do that against the the 1970's era for instance.

I could potentially see the future heavyweight division era being a lot better than let's say, the Klitschko era and subsequently today's era with the likes of young prospects such as Sirenko and Hrgovic coming up the ranks. However, this current era is yet to be separated from the Klitschko era when we still have multiple past-prime Klitschko era contenders still in the top 10. This is a fact!

Outside of just a few standout names, this era is really no better than the last era and is equally poor!

 

Also, because one can potentially out-weigh an opponent by an unlimited number of pounds, the heavyweight division has always MAINLY been about size, power and durability ABOVE everything else. Either all THREE of those things or AT LEAST, one of those attributes. This era is no exception to this rule, just like how the Klitschko era also wasn't.

There may be rare exceptions to this rule, but for the most part, in an unlimited weight division, size, durability and power are the most important attributes. Yes, even more important than speed, fancy moves and other stuff.

 

I mostly disagree. You rate Wlad highly, yet you claim he was shot to pieces against Fury and Joshua? Based on what? I didn’t see any signs of him slipping, he’s a real professional who stayed in shape and was always sharp. I do think Wlad and Vitali would reign in most eras.
Wilder has proven elite power. What Joshua has done so far is incredible considering his limited experience, in no way can you say he has been exposed. Especially when you recognise Ruiz for the talent he is, saying he is exposed is a contradiction.
I expect Usyk to beat everyone apart from Fury, but he can’t be included yet. Just with those four, this heavyweight division is unmatched. Joseph Parker is boring and lacks fire, I agree there. But he’s another guy who would be champ in most eras due to his skills and footwork. That’s a guy who is essentially Lennox’ size yet is a far superior mover. That’s a guy who is taller than Ali and Foreman.

 

With this post, George has officially become an old man. Congratulations, George. (claps)

You join your predecessors from the 1970s, who, by 1978, were saying the heavyweight division (led by Holmes and Spinks) was the worst it had been in history.

And those fans in the 1980s who said the division was the worst it had ever been in history, with Holmes refusing to unify and then losing to a light heavyweight.

And those from the early 1990s, who said Holyfield was the worst champion ever because he was just a "blown up" heavyweight who kept defending against 40 year olds from the 1970s (Foreman and Holmes).

And those from the mid 90s, when the champions for a brief time were Frans Botha (IBF), Frank Bruno (WBC), Bruce Seldon (WBA) and a 45-year-old Foreman ... who said, when Tyson was released from prison, the division needed saved because it was so awful.

And you join those fans in the late 1990s, when Boxing forums online finally arrived, who said "this" was "clearly" the worst division ever -- when a nearly 40 year old Holyfield and a "china-chinned" Lewis fought to a draw in a unification. And those fans who, when Lewis won the rematch, started polls wondering if Lewis was the worst unified champ ever because he had such a fragile chin and he was the only world heavyweight champ knocked out TWICE by one punch.

And you join those fans in the 2000s who rolled their eyes at a division led by fellows like Wlad, who couldn't stay off the floor even against second-raters, and Vitali, who had quit against Byrd, and Byrd, who seemed to get a gift decision win every time he defended his belt, and John "the hugger" Ruiz, who lost a title every time he defended against a former middleweight champ.

Now, George is among those who say THOSE were the GLORY DAYS - and today's heavyweight's suck.

What you learn when you follow boxing for decades is every CURRENT heavyweight division is considered the WORST by most fans of that period, and then when the fighters from that era are gone, people grow to appreciate them more.

It was the same in the 1950s. Rocky Marciano was considered a clumsy swinger by most "fans" during his reign and Patterson was considered a "ducker" who had no chin. It was the same in the 1960s, when people insisted "the hated" Ali did everything stylistically wrong and the champs from 20 years earlier - like Louis - said he'd beat Ali easily. And fans even openly wished the "mafia" would take over the sport again because they didn't like a member of the Nation of Islam having the title.

It'll be no different with this era.

This era is fine. Just like those were.

 

Watch the ESPN doubleheader featuring Ray Mercer vs. Marion Wilson and Tommy Morrison vs Ross Puritty in 1994 ... which were supposed to be tuneups for the big Hearn show featuring Mercer vs Bruno and Morrison vs Hide ... and you might change your mind.

Marion Wilson and Ross Puritty both won, and everyone from the announcers to the audience agreed, but it was an Arum card and the Arum guys couldn't lose.

Parker and Whyte never got "gifts" like Morrison and Mercer got that night.

And then the big Hearn show was cancelled the day of the fight because Hearn couldn't pay anyone.

Ah, the glory days of the 1990s heavyweights.

 

"Exposed"...by who?

 

Wlad was shot, based on his performance against Bryant Jennings. Wlad has either shut-out, and / or KO'ed guys of similar dimension and style as Bryant Jennings during his prime, that were much faster, much more powerful, much more athletic and much more skilled than Jennings. The fact that Wlad even lost as many rounds and missed as many punches was evidence of Wlad being shot.

You can even see in the Joshua fight that Wlad's left-hook was totally shot, as he was missing uncharacteristically. Keep in mind that Wlad has KO'ed much quicker and slicker guys than Joshua in his prime and had no problems landing his left-hook on them. So there's no other explanation for Wlad missing as much, other than being shot.

And to top it all off, no past heavyweight at the age Wlad was, when he lost to Fury and Joshua, were beating top level heavyweights at the level of Fury and Joshua. In fact, they were already losing to far inferior level of opposition. So to think somehow Wlad is exempt to aging, is utterly ridiculous. Even more so, when you consider that this is a 6 foot 6, 240+ pound super heavyweight who has been boxing for over 2 decades with 2 decades worth of training camp. You seriously trying to tell me all those training camps and fights aren't going to have an effect on a guy that big, after 2 decades of doing so? The accumulation of wear and tear is very very real!

The human body, especially one that is as humongous as Wladimir Klitschko's, is not designed to have such longevity and is more prone to wear and tear than smaller bodies. When Fury, Joshua or any other super-heavyweight today can put on better performances than Wlad at the same old age, then I might re-change my position on Wlad being shot. Until then, common sense and the eye-test dictates Wlad was shot to pieces by the time he fought Bryant Jennings.

Joshua has been exposed because he has gassed in not just one fight, but multiple fights. That's the very definition of being 'exposed'. Two of them occurred in his back-yard (against Wlad and Takam) where he got questionable gift stoppages in fights that he could've lost from gassing, if the referee didn't hand-out those stoppages. The third came against Andy Ruiz Jr but this time, he had no referee helping him because he wasn't fighting at the comfort of his own home. Which is why he lost.

I recognized Ruiz's talent long before he even fought Joseph Parker. Had nothing to do with the Joshua fight. I knew Joshua would lose to someone like Ruiz Jr, as early as when he got destroyed by Mihai Nistor in the amateurs (someone with a similar style and dimensions as Ruiz Jr).

Joshua so far, has fought 4 guys top heavyweights in his amateur and pro career who fight small. Mihai Nistor, Takam, Povetkin and Ruiz Jr. 2 of those against guys who were old and shot to pieces (Takam and Povetkin) and he arguably would have still lost to Takam without the gift stoppage. The other two were against prime guys (Ruiz Jr and Nistor) that he got destroyed by.

So in total, he has a 2 wins and 2 losses against such a style. HOWEVER, to be more specific, he has 0 wins out of 2 against EVERY prime top heavyweight who boxes using a short / small style (Ruiz and Nistor)

So yes, we have overwhelming evidence that Joshua has been exposed in terms of his poor stamina and his difficulties against prime top heavyweights who box using a short style.

Joseph Parker may dominate and be the number guy in the 70's, 60's and POSSIBLY even the 80's. But, he'd be another bum if he fought in the Klitschko era according to many people when Klitschko beats him in lopsided fashion. He is ABSOLUTELY not better than many top 10 guys in the Klitschko era. heck, a washed up Pulev at age 40 is probably still better than PRIME Parker right now. Let that sink in for a moment!

As stated already, apart from a few stand-out names, this era's heavyweight division is really no better than the Klitschko era and considering Povetkin and Pulev around age 40 are still top 10 heavyweights TODAY, then an argument can be made that the Klitschko era was even better.

This era is still up for grabs!

Deontay Wilder is still yet to prove his power against top 10 heavyweights in their primes. Wlad had done that for a decade by cleaning up the division by regularly beating top 10 heavyweights. When Wilder does something similar and totally cleans up the division (even if not for a decade), only then am I going to even think about rating his power that highly.