James Jeffries vs Deontay Wilder

Everyone Wilder beat in title fights was rated. You just choose to ignore those ratings.

Put away your hate.

 

I am sorry but I must insist that a top ten ranking with the WBC, is not in any way equivalent to a top ten Ring Ranking.

What point would there be in acknowledging those rankings, if they did not even exist in the other eras that we are comparing against?

 

Well we can at least assume that Bob Fitzsimmons would have been the champion if ratings had existed back then!

 

JEFFRIES DIDN'T FIGHT ANYONE IN THE RING TOP 10 RATINGS ...

I know it's taking you AN EXTREMELY long time to figure out if Wilder is another Cleveland Williams ...

But how long is it going to take you to understand Jeffries didn't face anyone in the Ring Top 10 when he was active?

 

YOU CAN'T MAKE UP YOUR OWN TOP 10 and then insist Wilder adhere to another.

I'm calling bull**** on that.

 

Jeffries beat most of the top contenders who were available to him.

He also stopped almost every top fighter that he met.

Whatever his failings, I don't think that he was a 1900s Wilder style belt milker!

 

Don't backtrack now.

We're using the RING RATINGS, like you said.

You've spent two days bashing Wilder for the number of CURRENT Ring heavyweights he faced.

Tell us all the guys rated by Ring when Jeffries faced them?

See? Stop hating. It's embarrassing.

 

You can make your own top one.

the champion is the champion!

 

My point is that Wilder did not fight the best or brightest contenders available to him, and on the rare occasions that he did he got mixed results.

Jeffries fought most of the top contenders of his era, and stopped pretty much all of them.

 

Yes, the best and the brightest 170 and 180 pounders.

Jeffries was heavier than Wilder for most fights. And Jeffries was significantly heavier than most of his opponents, often by 20, 30 or even 40 pounds. Jeffries was never outweighed in any fight.

Wilder hasn't outweighed an opponent in eight years. And, when he did, that guy lasted 26 seconds.

Wilder against 170 and 180 pounders would be frightening. And if Wilder's big wins came against Canelo and Danny Jacobs, I think you'd have a problem with that.

You want one standard of measure for one fighter (Jeffries) and another standard for the other (Wilder).

You want to tout wins by Jeffries over guys who weighed in the 160s, and you want to dismiss Wilder because the 250-pound top WBC contender he destroyed in a round wasn't currently rated by Ring.

You dismiss Wilder's opponents with a wave of the hand, and don't even bother mentioning guys like John Finnegan and Jack Monroe who Jeffries defended against, who would not even be heavyweights today and were barely even fighters then.

This thread is a testament to the bias on this board when it comes to certain fighters.

 

Fat Dunkhorst ? Why ? Fury is far away from a Mr. Olympia also.Check out his pathetic deadlifting performance because
Fury is very weak for his weight !

 

I am not sure how important any of the above is.

I rate a champion based on him beating the best available contenders, not the biggest ones.

I am sure that Jeffries could have beaten Ed Dunkhorst if it would have made you happy!

Not if they had beaten the best heavyweights of their era.

Not really, I just rate a champion based upon how they did against the best of their era.

In Wilder's case that is Fury, Stiverne, and Ortiz.

 

Ok, so he went 4-1-1 (3 KO's) against his best opponents. The guy he lost to outweighed him by like 40 lbs and was an undefeated skilled big man who can move as well as pressure fight, with either orthodox or south paw. The only other blemish is a draw where he brutally knocked down the same guy twice, who has somehow became a h2h monster by beating such a "terrible" opponent.

It becomes 5-1-1 (4 KO's) if you include Dominick brezeale who was the WBC's #1 contender. By YOUR logic that guy qualifies as one of the best opponents available, or are we ignoring #1 contenders as qualified opponents?

Can you explain to me why that's such a bad record?

As for the issue of weight, what is the the point of praising fighters like Tommy hearns and manny pacquiao moving up in weight and beating larger men if you're going to turn around and give wilder zero credit for knocking out heavier men while praising Jefferies for knocking out smaller older men? Do you not see the hypocrisy here?

 

And in Wilder's case, the best of his era was a 6'7" 270 pound undefeated boxer-puncher with 30 wins.

And in Jeffries' case, it was a 6 foot 180 pounder with a thong up his crack and 10 wins (in 15 fights) to his name.

Long live Jeffries.

This thread is garbage.