What about Deontay Wilder vs. Joe Frazier?

It's an enormous advantage for Wilder. We aren't talking about Julius Long. Wilder has GOAT power and quick feet. Frazier would have to go through no man's land in order to have a chance of landing a punch. Evey time he had to reset he might get sparked.

 

I randomly caught a clip of Joe being interviewed after the Ali rematch. All class. More or less said that’s the way it goes but I thought I (Frazier) won.

If there was a time to complain it would’ve been then - given Ali’s punch and incessant hold strategy. Not Joe though, not even then.

I don’t necessarily know the characters of all fighters but Joe has to rank as one of the nicest and most genuine.

At HW, up there with Patterson, Norton and Shavers. Noteworthy skills/abilities aside, terrific spokesmen for the sport.

 

AGREED

 

People do hate on certain fighters.

We have to try and remain objective for the sake of the debate.

Whilst much of what Sauhund wrote was true, a lot of it didn’t allow for context. And there were also some untruths in there. So it was a biased opinion.

He said that Frazier openly ducked Liston.

He didn’t.

Look at the timelines and the results, as well as the elimination bouts etc.


Now look at his thought process:

Yes, of course Foreman easily beat Frazier twice.

Yes, of course Wilder is hugely powerful like Foreman.

However, you can’t just make the assumption that Wilder could have replicated Foreman’s results, just based upon his stature and his firepower.

You have to study those fights, and see specifically how Foreman was able to have beaten him. And when you do that, you’ll realise that Foreman and Wilder are completely different. Wilder being as big and as powerful as Foreman, isn’t really relevant when you look at their styles and their overall attributes, as well as their strengths and weaknesses.

Wilder hasn’t got Foreman’s strength.

Wilder hasn’t got Foreman’s jab.

Wilder hasn’t got Foreman’s inside fighting skills.

Wilder hasn’t got Foreman’s punch repertoire.


I’m always repeating myself sounding like a parrot regarding styles, but it’s because most people have an opinion which isn’t based upon how they’d realistically have matched up on the night stylistically. It gets overlooked. Yet that should always be the first thing that should be focused upon more than anything else.

Sure, you can say that Wilder is a huge puncher, and that Frazier lost easily to the only great puncher that he fought. But again, it’s not that simple.

Who has Wilder beaten like Frazier?

Wilder has literally struggled with low level guys and Euro level opposition, until his power has bailed him out. But we’ve seen how vulnerable he is, if he can’t land it. And with Frazier’s small stature and relentless style, it would have been very difficult for Wilder to have hit him with his power shots.


If you were to give this fight some serious thought, you’d realise that despite the Foreman results, Frazier would have given Wilder a horrible stylistic match up.

Styles make fights.

To this day, Tyson Fury will tell you that his hardest fight stylistically, was against Steve Cunningham.

So I call for an objective debate with anyone based upon the specific stylistic match up of the two fighters.

 

You have zero comprehension of styles.

Zero.

I’ve tried to debate you countless times, but you never seem to acquire any further knowledge.


A horrible stylistic match up for Frazier?

SMH.


What about looking from Wilder’s perspective?

A guy of 6’7, who has a ZERO inside game, trying to land on a 5’10 target, who had a bob and weave style, and who had great in-fighting abilities and a relentless style?

Think about it.


“Oh Wilder has HUGE power, he’d have taken little Joe out”

Yeah, and how would he have landed those power shots with leverage?


Frazier would not have been a 6’6 Helenius walking straight to him in a straight line.

He was a little guy. An awkward, elusive target.

Without an inside game, Frazier would have been a horrible stylistic match up for Wilder.


Frazier would have targeted Wilder’s body.


Wilder would have landed big?

How?

Based upon what exactly?

Knockouts against guys who bare no resemblance whatsoever to Frazier?

 

Ha!

Here we go again.


You probably think that Wilder being so tall at 6’7 would have given him a huge advantage over a 5’10 Mike Tyson.

Again, you have no understanding of the sport.


Being 6’7 looks great on paper. But it wouldn’t have been so great, with Frazier coming at him hard on the inside, fighting out of a crouch at about 5’9, with his head movement and relentless style.


Your opinion is based solely on Wilder’s size and the results of the Foreman fights, without realising that Wilder and Foreman have hardly anything in common.

 

He doesn’t understand that in some cases it’s actually the bigger fighter who is at a disadvantage.

Being 6’7 with a big reach and great power, is great, if you’re facing limited guys of a similar size, where you can use all of your attributes.

But if you’d have put Wilder in with someone like Mike Tyson, it would have been little 5’10 Mike who’d have held the size advantage in the fight.

He’s got a lot to learn.

Hopefully he’ll get there.

The last time we debated, he told me that Floyd Mayweather would have beaten Marvin Hagler.

 

Ha!

It wouldn’t have been an enormous advantage for Wilder at all.

You haven’t got a clue.

 

So you don’t think it would have been a bad stylistic match up for Wilder either?

A guy of 6’7 with zero inside skills, trying to time and connect on a small elusive target?

A guy of 5’10 with a bob and weave style?

Against a guy who has literally struggled against Euro level opposition?

 

Name a single instance in which an ATG puncher was at a disadvantage because he had 6+ inches and 15 pounds on his opponent. Interested in real life examples, not your “expert” opinion.

 

Styles make fights you fool.

The old adage is as true today, as what it was when it was first said.


Wilder being 6’7 tall would not have been an advantage to him, fighting a 5’10 guy with Frazier’s style.

What are you struggling with with that comment?

In some fights, or even most fights, Wilder’s height and reach give him huge advantages. But against certain guys of certain styles, they wouldn’t have.


Do you think Wilder’s size would have been advantageous against a prime version of Mike Tyson?

Yes or no?


Do you think that Valuev vs Mike Tyson, would have been a size mismatch in Valuev’s favour?

 

Haven’t read any of your walls of text. I asked for examples to back your delusions and you’ve dutifully failed to provide any.

 

Delusions??

What??

By saying that SOMETIMES the bigger fighter can be at a disadvantage against a smaller guy, due to styles??

There’s nothing delusional about that.


Why do you even bother being a member, when you don’t learn ANYTHING??


If you want me to answer your questions, you can answer mine first.

Would Deontay Wilder’s size have been a disadvantage to him against Mike Tyson?

Yes or no?


Of course you’re going to claim that you haven’t read my posts.

How convenient.

 

Are you really narcissistic to the point where you think you don’t need to back your words up? Give one example. That’s all I asked for.

 

Read carefully:

Every question that I’ve asked you, has been answered with a question.


Answering a question with another question is not giving an answer.


So why should I be courteous to you, when you have been completely ignorant?


However, I will TRY and answer your question, if you answer my question.


Would Deontay Wilder’s size have been a disadvantage to him in a fight against Mike Tyson?


If you answer the question honestly, then I will answer your question.