How Long Does Wilder Last, As An 80 's Belt Holder?

The big head-scratcher here is that GCC seems to be using Pinklon Thomas as the absolute linchpin to my argument, like it's this mountain that one side or the other must scale in order to prove a point. It's ridiculous. I choose Thomas to walk Wilder down and stop him (he was just one of a few on the list, none more important than the other. No idea why they haven't been singled out). To then attempt to refute that opinion because there isn't a laundry list of people 6'5" or above on Pinklon's list of scalps is absolutely nutty. It assumes rather strongly no talent differential, as no argument other than size and reach are noted. It's my assertion that in this case, talent level is ALL that matters.

There. This has become tiresome. Going on now.....

 

A prime Thomas was something, unfortunately for him he ran into a prime Mike Tyson.

 

Thomas was easy to hit though. I wouldn’t be surprised if Wilder bombed him out while losing wide on the cards.

 

This content is protected

Thomas vs significantly taller opponent.

 

I could ask you the same thing. I mean nobody with an ounce of boxing knowledge would claim that it's "easy" to outbox and outjab a guy 4 inches taller with a reach advantage.

To answer your question I've been watching boxing for 15 years. I trained on and off 4 years and I have competed. Your suggestion that Thomas, great as his jab was, could effortlessly keep a much taller man on the outside and jab his head of is fantasy and there is literally nothing in his record against taller fighters that would remotely suggest that this is a likely scenario for his the fight would play out.

 

Yes it goes both ways. Which means that in terms of "levels" Thomas is not in some tier or lofty bracket far above wilder. I would argue they're fairly close in overall ability and h2h pedigree. Thomas was a good belt holder and Wilder was a good belt holder. Some people in this thread were arguing Thomas easily wins with minimal effort and i find that hilarious when he never "easily" beat a guy as good as wilder.

Neither truly stood out as the absolute best of their era but they each brought great things to the table to hang with the best. in Thomas case he had a great pulverizing jab, fundamentals, and a solid chin. Wilder lacked ring IQ but has devastating power, height, and raw athleticism with some good man finishing instincts.

 

Are you doing your shtick where you ignore the tale of the tape that millions of people agree in? Is he secretly 5 inches taller, not just 1 and everyone else needs to get with the program?

So let's ignore coetzee's measurements too?

Sure I can. Name even 3 fighters that were 6'7 with explosive muscle, athleticism, and power like Wilder back then? Who weren't simply journeyman sluggers that barely managed to stay in the rankings?

No, don't weasel out of my question. You claimed any top fighter could KNOCK OUT Areola with a Broken hand. Name some.

 

Wasn't asking for a laundry list. I literally asked for just one example of him outjabbing a taller opponent. You're a drama queen and you can't answer an incredibly simple question. If you had an ounce of boxing knowledge or experience you'd know why it was relevant.

I have even clarified to you on 4 or more separate occasions that I do NOT believe size differences are all the end all be all but you insist on putting words in my mouth. I do not believe there is such a huge gap in skill that Thomas can just pop his jab out and outbox a much taller man. There is nothing in his record that indicates this would be a piece of cake for him. Zero. Zilch. You clearly don't even believe this or you would have responded with something substantial by now instead of constantly replying with straw mans and red herrings.

 

Exactly. I'm trying to figure out when Thomas became this cagey defensive wizard who could effortlessly outbox much taller men and would avoid getting blasted for 5+ rounds.

 

No drama here at all. You're the one obsessing over just one example I used. Why not apply this same level of concern for my other suggestions of those who would beat Wilder, like Holmes, Witherspoon or even Page? You're the one with the hard-on here.

 

I think wilder vs some of the eighties crew would make for some exciting fights. I can see him beating a fair number of them too but yes he’d lose to some as well.

 

Holmes definitely wins 9/10

Prime Witherspoon would be a little rougher but I'd favor him 6/10

Page could go either way.

And yes you were being dramatic. I had asked an incredibly simple question and you drug the thread out for like 3 pages, asked me how long I'd been watching boxing, went on a tirade about linchpins, used straw man arguments, etc instead of just answering the question. You'd make a good politician.

 

Not at all. I was merely trying different avenues to have you understand how meaningless it is whether or not Thomas ever fought anyone taller. I didn't think about that because it simply doesn't matter. You seemed fixated on this one guy for some reason when to me he was just one example of many I gave. There are lots of examples of smaller fighters outjabbing bigger ones (Qawi, Holyfield at heavy, just to name two) and I happen to believe he'd do the same to Wilder. If you disagree, whatever. We'll have to leave it at that I suppose.

 

Ok but it wasn't about Thomas per se. Had you mentioned Tubbs, or Douglas, or literally any 80's fighter I would have asked you the same thing: does their record show them easily outjabbing and outboxing a much taller opponent?

The reason I kept harping on that point is because I do in fact watch plenty of boxing. I have wrote extensive break downs and analysis on fights and I myself have boxed before. It is not a walk in the park to outjab a taller guy unless he's way worse than you and far inferior in skills and experience.

Hence why I kept asking the question. It's irrelevant what Whitaker or qawi did because Thomas is not them. What other boxers accomplished against tall fighters had no bearing on the discussion.

No, I do not believe height and reach are the end all be all. I have picked plenty of shorter boxers to beat taller boxers in h2h matchups. But I do not see Thomas as being the type who could easily outjab a tall athletic guy without any sort of evidence because I KNOW it's not easy.

 

It’s only a “reach advantage” if it is used to the advantage.

Reach is significant if the fighter wins because he’s decided to use the reach and his opponent has allowed him to use it. Then it becomes the advantage. Otherwise he just has reach on the guy.

Reach in itself isn’t doing anything on its own. It’s how it is used. More importantly it’s how the opponent allows you to use it.

Wilder was a special puncher. His power was often at the end of his punch..so he often needed a lot of room. He needed to use space to his advantage for his long arms. And depending on who he was fighting he got that space or he didn’t.

The types of guys that were served up were usually selected with this in mind.

Ratliff had significantly longer reach and height over Thomas. That’s what you asked. If you want to watch the fight you can discover this for yourself.

you seem so certain how Wilder would do against Thomas but you don’t appear to have seen any of Thomas’s prime!

Explosive muscle?