So Usyk then? Sounds good. As I just posted elsewhere, the best punch against a southpaw is a straight right hand. Wilder's straight right is pretty good. Finally get to see the fight that should've happened at the 2008 Olympics, except Usyk lost one fight too soon.
I left out losses, only that's why I didn't put in Ring and unified champion Lennox, or even Byrd... but you know that of course. He lost twice, resume doesn't count for losses, because then Chisora's resume would be frikin' amazing. All ratings at time of the fight have been accounted for. And again, losing to Fury does nothing for your resume. Losing twice doesn't either... losing a 1000 times even less. What the F are you on about?! Wilder didn't defend against Stiverne either, it's when both won the WBC belt. If I wanted to pad anything I left both out, because that would make things worse for Wilder in comparision. Stop acting like a child! Yes, they were all WBC contenders, some were also WBA, IBF, WBO and Ring contenders. Yes, your point being here? Now you're just full of it! Arreola of 2016 is the same as Arreola of 2009... Of course, that makes sense. Then you can give Wilder another top 10 ranked victory in Liakovic, because 2006 Liakovic is the same as the 2013 version Wilder fought. The same 7 years apart, no difference between either of those versions at all. I think it's pretty much over!
Byrd wasn't a Ring contender when he beat Vitali, so you wouldn't include him. Vitali was a low-rated Ring contender when they fought. Byrd wasn't rated by Ring at all. You say Arreola wasn't rated by the WBC, but he was when Wilder fought him. Everyone Wilder defended against was rated by the WBC, just as everyone Vitali defended his WBC belt against was a WBC contender. Wilder had 13 WBC title fights. Vitali had 13 WBC title fights. That's how many they had. Both fought the reigning Ring champ once, and both lost to the reigning champ. Wilder fought six Top 5 Ring fighters in his 13 WBC title fights. Vitali fought four Top 5 Ring rated fighters in his 13 WBC title fights. I'm not being childish. I'm posting facts. You, on the other hand, were saying guys weren't rated by the WBC when they were, adding non-title fights to punch up Vitali's numbers compared to Wilder's title fight numbers. If you're going to try to prove a point by posting stats, compare apples to apples. Otherwise, you're just wasting everyone's time.
I don't think Wilders resume is really any better than someone like Pulevs to be honest. Wilder vs Pulev might be an interesting debate
Is it? Pulev fought in a ring the shape of a circle on Triller on the undercard of a rap battle in his last bout and he's doing so again in his next. ... and Wilder made more in his last fight than Pulev did in his whole career fighting the best fighter in the world. Not much of a debate. I think a five-year, 10 successful WBC title defense reign is better than winning nothing. But that's just me.
Not many I would pick him against with a great deal of certainty but he always has a punchers chance and would imagine he'd lay a few out if he managed to land his money shot before he got taken out himself. I guess that is Wilder in a nutshell.
"Wilder gets outboxed" Aside from Fury, how many opponents were actually up on the cards with at least two judges at the time of the stoppage? The answer is only Ortiz in the 2nd fight, then Ortiz got one-punch KO'd in the 7th after landing nothing of consequence. You have to factor in boxing politics because Wilder's team certainly did. Also, how much damage did Wilder typically take when he was "outboxed"? Only Ortiz 1 and Fury 2 and 3 put miles on the clock. Wilder's strategy was to take many opponents late, then snipe them. His power forces them to move more than usual and adds to the mental fatigue, as well as accumulating more damage and makes them cautious. Emptying the gun early is riskier and wasn't the optimal strategy against anyone save Fury. UFC champ Ngannou has never won a decision, is regarded as one-dimensional, sloppy technically and unlike Wilder suffers from a terrible gas tank. He also seems to be less naturally brave and confident. But he is a H2H nightmare even for superior technicians due to his insane power, speed, size and toughness.
His so-called title defenses were against terrible opposition and don't really help him here. Pulev beat as many top 10 heavyweights as Wilder and has only one prime loss. His next best wins over Fury and Chisora are arguably better than anyone Wilder beat outside his top 2. Fury is largely untested and is a long way from proving he is the best. Povetkin would seem to be ahead based on resume as well. Wilder fans seem to overrate how Wilder ranks among his peers.
Wilder floored the undefeated World Champion TYSON Fury (not Hughie) twice and successfully defended his title FOR THE EIGHTH TIME against him. Then Wilder made two more successful WBC title defenses (defenses NINE and TEN) by brutal KO, and then defended his WBC title against TYSON Fury (not Hughie) for a SECOND time, and lost in his 11th WBC title defense. Wilder successfully defended against Tyson Fury more than THREE years ago. You need to catch up. Pulev never tied or floored anyone as good as TYSON Fury or won or successfully defended anything. If you are bringing up names like HUGHIE Fury to pump up Pulev, there's no discussion at all. That's why Pulev is fighting on Rap Battle undercards in a odd-shaped ring. Because he never won anything. And now he's scraping the bottom of the barrel. And Wilder will probably once again make more in his next fight than Pulev ever made in his whole career. Because Wilder is a celebrated, long-time heavyweight champion. And people can't stop talking about him for a single day on this board. While Pulev rarely gets a mention.
In 2015 and 2016 the consensus in America was that Ortiz was a serious threat to Klitschko, even in Britain Hatman was picking him if he was to fight Wlad in America. Fury was rating him highly and Chisora compared him to a "southpaw Mike Tyson". Joyce was steered away from a post-Wilder 1, officially 40 year old Ortiz in early 2019 and Hearn was saying that "no one wants to fight Ortiz" just a few months ago. So claiming he was a "gatekeeper" or "fringe contender" is revisionism; he was a high risk, low reward top contender and a very atypical 28-0 power punching southpaw with vast amateur experience. Wilder fought him a couple of years past his prime but he was still top 5 and had previously been dead set on a fight with AJ that didn't materialise for one reason or another. Tua was leaden-footed and the slubbiest prominent heavyweight of modern times, making him far less dangerous than a very fast 6'7 Wilder. A number of poor and by no means iron-chinned journeymen pushed Tua to close decisions or at least went the distance. The only fighters who Wilder genuinely struggled with are Fury and arguably Ortiz the first time, though at the time people thought Wilder was closer to defeat against Ortiz than he really was. Wilder has a very atypical style and attributes and thus can't be judged by the same standards as fighters who often try to win on points.
Wilder was never lineal, hence never a champion. Who cares how much he made? And Tyson was dropped by Steve Cunningham, so again Wilder dropping him proves what exactly? That he's as good as Cunningham? These seem like silly arguments. Hughie Fury is likely better than anyone Wilder beat outside Ortiz and Stiverne highlighting how incredibly thin his resume is hence my bringing him up.
Deontay Wilder lost to Tyson Fury. He doesn't have much relevance when discussing Wilder's resume. I don't think its hyping Hughie to suggest he is better than guys Wilder beat which doesn't include Tyson Fury.
A lot of Tyson Fury's and Wilder's reputation is based on fighting each other. Trying to cite their fights as proof of their greatness seems like circular reasoning to me. If either of them cleaned out the division that would be far more compelling evidence of their ability than fighting each other over and over and ducking the other top fighters.
