Worse 6 defenses and a title won in a row, is there any worse than Wilder?

i think your being maybe a little harsh on Patterson here. He was paired with Moore, who had just lost a challenge, for the vacant title. Jackson, i believe, was no1 contender. Rademacher is a fair enough call but considering it was 3 weeks after the jackson fight, his no1, and was getting a shitload of money, he gets a pass in my opinion. Harris was his number 3,and whilst the number 1 and 2 were involved in a legal dispute, he had to fight someone so he took the next highest ranked fighter. I'll give you london but then again, they ALL have 'gimmes'. And Ingo wasnt exactly a mug and was coming off a devastating knockout of the no2 ranked Machen.

 

You can’t dismiss Rademacher by how many weeks he fought before or ‘he got paid.’ If Ali had made the Inoki debacle a title defense would you say ‘well he got paid’ and would it matter if he had fought three weeks before? It’s still a complete disgrace for the heavyweight champion of the world to defend against an amateur.

If Patterson disposes of Ingo like any other champ in history likely goes, Ingo is just a guy with one fluke win.

Tommy Jackson was 8 months removed from a loss to a journeyman, Jimmy Slade, and had two wins since (one a majority decision). If he’s No. 1, it’s pretty fishy.

Harris is the only defense in that stretch that I’d hold in any esteem.

Soon as Floyd won it back from Ingo he wasted time fighting Ingo again and then lined up McNeeley before he finally stepped up ... and got knocked right back down by Sonny.

Floyd was a good fighter — a better one in many ways after his title days — but he basically took his title and hid from any threats until he finally manned up against Sonny and then we saw why.

And you can’t hide that **** sandwich that was the Rademacher fight no matter what you try to do.

 

im not trying to defend it per se. Just that i can fully understand why he took it. It is a business after all and if i was his manager ida took it too. Supposedly serious money for then but your right, it shouldnt have been counted as a defense. I may be well off the mark here but wasnt there some kinda rule or something that everytime a heavyweight champ fought, it had to be classed as a defense? I think i may have read that regarding some of joe louis fights but i may well be wrong. As for jackson, you cant really blame floyd for his ranking. Regarding fighting ingo, we cant really talk about 'ifs' and 'buts' . The fact is he nearly murdered machen (ref shoula been shot as im sure you well know) and therefore was a legit challenge. So out of the 6 you mentioned, 4 were bonafide regardless of our thoughts on how their rankings came about. Rademacher, which i agree, shouldnt have been a world tile fight but the rules then (if im correct of course, which i may not be) dictated it was. And London was a gimme, i think we can all agree that. When we look at it like that, or should i say, when i look at it like that, whilst not perfect it certainly wasnt the worse it gets painted. Just my 2 cents for what its worth. Out of curiosity, who would you say he hid from?

 

Marty Jakubowski might be > Wilder's stack, p4p.

 

Sonny Liston. Cus took Floyd and ran like a cockroach when the lights come on to keep him away from Sonny. To Floyd’s credit he finally bit the bullet (or took the bullet as it were) — but losing to Ingo and the subsequent rematch and re-rematch turned it into a full 3-year affair that kept Floyd safe from facing any really meaningful opposition.

You’re right in that you can’t blame Floyd for who was ranked, nor can you blame Wilder for the WBC ranking nor anyone else I guess.

The heavyweight crown is indeed on the line when the champ fights — the weight class is unlimited. If he’s stripped, then if he’s lineal it’s still on the line. And yet you can see Ezzard Charles fought what’s considered a defense but the New York State Athletic Commission refused to recognize it as a title defense because it regarded Gus Lesnevich as so unworthy. Floyd and Cus didn’t have that worry fighting Rademacher in Seattle.

But it’s been equally true in other divisions — as long as no one is over the weight limit the title at least can be on the line — Robinson weighed just under the middleweight limit when he challenged unsuccessfully for the light heavyweight title.

 

But everyone Wilder fought was clearly not amongst the best ten in the world.

Lesnevich was 1 year removed from being LHW champ but he had lost his previous fight

I said other than because he was Olympic champ so it was some weird crossover fight.

You know how sometimes people say Fighter A would have been champ if he had a title fight on his debut, but like that but obviously not the case here.

I actually don't think Wilders resume is as bad as people make out tbh, some of the wins aged quite well. But Charles is a bad example to use.

 

The following were all ranked during Floyd's title reigns.
Liston
Williams
DeJohn
Valdes
McMurtry
Folley
Miteff
McMurray
Pastrano
Machen
Satterfield

 

LISTON

 

I just watched Patterson v Rademacher. Rademacher may have had the worst pedigree of all time for a challenger but his performance was far from the worst ever.

Ironically, the referee according to the commentary i watched had Rademacher ahead after 4 rounds and he actually dropped patterson in the first or second round. That means that if it was an Olympic gold medal fight, Rademacher would have won!

He did seem to visuably tire towards the end of the third round and Patterson caught him with a big shot.. but he was far from disgraced. I dont know if i would necessarilly favour Wilder to win that Defence.

 

Wilder fought

This content is protected

guys .500 or less in his first 15 fights, which shows how careful his management was with him. Above this, the ones he fought with winning records were often fighters who lost a few in their last 6 matches who were cashing out. As such his KO% largely built upon what some boxing fans call " _ _ _ 's "

He didn't start fighting fringe contender level completion until he became champion.

As for the quality of his title opponents, it's the worst in the past 100 years. I've mentioned this before, with Wilder fans saying it's not so or just wait.

Wilder has yet to beat a Ring Magazine ranked opponent under the age of 36 and I don't think he ever will. My hat is off to his manager, but I fear any USA based prospect might try to replicate what Wilder did, if he can somehow find a really weak champion a win a belt. Boxing has a problem with the right fights on the wya up being made. Fans don't need excessive belt milking.

If you don't like this thread, you don't have to participate in it.

 

@ Mcvey, I enjoy posting replies here. The information I provide is accurate.

 

Not much to add to this post. It sums up Wilder's run accurately. That is to say it was abysmal. People have to do false equivalency gymnastics to sugarcoat his reign.

 

What are you even going on about? “If you don’t like this thread?” I’m participating in it and discussing the topic ... are you suggesting this thread and others are only for people who agree?

And why are you going off-topic? What does Wilder’s first 15 fights have to do with anything? What does the age of a ranked opponent have to do with anything? This is about the first six title fights for someone winning a title and next five defenses.

You don’t like Wilder. We get it. Doesn’t mean what you just posted has **** all to do with this topic. If you don’t like this thread, you leave.