the definition of first rate is that they must have at least 4 stars when fighting each other on the boxrec. ... it is not important if he can score points for himself. The thing is that he can't do anything but swing at windmills and the fact that he hasn't been knocked out more than once is due to his height and bad opponents. ... yes i admit he has won a few times due to quality boxing but against bad opponents except super old Ortiz
"the definition of first rate is that they must have at least 4 stars when fighting each other on the boxrec." Boxrec is a very rough guide, the algorithm is highly questionable. But by that standard, Breazeale and Duhaupas are also "1st rate" Wilder opponents are they not? Also, why is 4 stars "1st rate" and not 5 stars? "The thing is that he can't do anything but swing at windmills" Complete rubbish. Watch the full fights or even just the KO replays. "the fact that he hasn't been knocked out more than once is due to his height and bad opponents." Wilder's been KO'd twice. He wasn't KO'd by his non-Fury opponents because he's less vulnerable to that level of opposition than Lewis (one-punched twice by fringe contenders) Vitali (injury retirement against Byrd) Wlad (stopped three times by a journeyman and two fringe contenders) or AJ (quit against a fringe contender). "except super old Ortiz" Unlike the even older Povetkin, Pulev and Wlad that AJ beat...
you are an ultra stupid demagogue. ... We can classify Breazeale in the first rate, but then we would have to count him to Joshua as well Duhaupas never beat anyone from first rate except Charr. ... first rate are 4 stars or 5 stars. This is to make it a wider zone and more opponents can be included in it....try to think a little dickhead. ... "except super old Ortiz" -> Unlike even older Povetkin, Pulev and Wlad, whom AJ beat... -> age at match: Povetkin - 39 Pulev 39 Ortiz 40
"you are an ultra stupid demagogue." Yet you struggle with basic maths and are flagrantly dishonest. Age at time of match: Ortiz 1 38 years old Povetkin 39 years old Pulev 39 years old Wlad 41 years old "Duhaupas never beat anyone from first rate except Charr." Helenius was rated as 4 star until recently but they changed the algorithm, Szpilka was too when Wilder beat him. You've moved the goalposts: Duhaupas is a 4 star rated Wilder opponent, so he's "1st rate" by your own definition, like Scott. "first rate are 4 stars or 5 stars. This is to make it a wider zone and more opponents can be included in it" I see. You made the "1st rate" list longer by including guys who are intuitively 2nd rate by your own boxrec standard. Wlad and Takam/Scott are all "1st rate" wins lol. Meaningless rubbish.
I'm just curious if he's lost a step after the Fury fights. If he has Helenius has a chance. I'd written him off as a contender but he seems to have come out from his decade long slumber of struggling to impress against journeyman. Conditioning better, volume higher. Moving a bit easier. But it can also end with one Wilder right hand as we know.
Wilder is back talking to "Old Media", must have been the ass whoopins. Looking like Ortiz 3 will be in the making...sad. This content is protected
You shouldn't be saying "we don't know til they fight" when talking about a fighter with 10 title defenses. Thats the point everyone is making here.
Why? It's been done to death time and time again. Is Wilder a fraud? No. Is he an elite boxer? No. Does he have enough to beat most heavies? Yes as this division is full of slow plodders woth zero head movement made for Wilders right hand. Should he have a better CV? Yes.
Wilder is a fraud because he and his promoters claim to be the world champion and the most dangerous heavyweight. This is complete nonsense and a lie. Because it's the same story as when two people apply for a job (boxing title), but one of them has a resume where he's obviously proven his skills, and the other overestimates his work experience in his resume and makes up everything he's accomplished. In the end, they both get the job, but the first person with a good resume is simply an honest worker. The other is just looking for shortcuts and lying about who he really is. And defending the title with Parker or Povetkin is a completely different story than defending it with Stiverne and Spilka. Wilder is a fraud.