Wilder vs Joshua

Pulled over for 'illegal tinted windows'. Before the usual suspects claim the embarrassing BLM arse gravy mantra this is a normal reason to be pulled over. Had it happen to me due to the tint semi covering up the R plate. Could have been a fine and 2 points but was let off with a warning. Wilder made the mistake of being on gear at the time.

 

AJ would’ve had a chance before his psychological problems. I couldn’t see anything other than an early Wilder win now.

 

He swerved the best yet fought Fury 3X. Explain that one to me please

 

That one's quite easy:

• First time: He cherrypicked Fury. Next to no one gave Fury a chance of winning before the fight, most thought it was way too soon in Fury's come back. Really, it was all just a way for Wilder to legitimize his reign through "lineal": low risk, very high reward - strengthening his negotiating position with Joshua.
• Second time: WBC ordered the rematch. After he was embarrassed in terms of boxing skills by the shell of Fury, Wilder was forced to pursue the rematch. His fans believed he actually KO'd Fury in the 12th, so no big deal, right? And again, Wilder was favourite going into the second fight. Especially after Fury's performance against Wallin.
• Third time: His ego(, fans, and career) couldn't accept the loss. Even though Wilder got absolutely obliterated in the second fight, he and his fans blamed everyone and everything for the loss. He had ****ed up his payday for undisputed, his career was in tatters, and the only option left was to exercise the rematch clause.

 

"Next to no one gave Fury a chance of winning before the fight"

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/who-wins-fury-or-wilder.612276/

Not true on this forum, 17-13 Fury on that post from August 2018.

If your statement were correct then it would be reflected in the odds. Surely Fury was a 20/1 underdog like Ruiz? Or a 10/1 underdog? Or at least a 5/1 underdog? No, Fury was given at least a 40% chance of winning. Public and experts reasoned that if Fury is willing to fight Wilder then he believes he's got a great chance of winning, so he's probably in good enough condition to be an extremely live dog at minimum. Which turned out to be correct seeing as Fury didn't lose and most thought he won.

"WBC ordered the rematch"

The WBC (who many have described as the Wilder Bodyguard Council) wouldn't have ordered the rematch if team Wilder had been against it. It was a mega fight and they believed they would win 2nd time. Wilder was a very marginal favourite in the rematch, it was close to 50-50.

"His ego(, fans, and career) couldn't accept the loss."

Many fighters would have avoided the rematch after sustaining far less punishment than Wilder did in that 2nd fight. He went into the trilogy fight as a 30-70 underdog, having been obliterated in the fight prior and there being no easy stylistic adjustment that would get him the win.

So it's utterly nonsensical to claim that Wilder has "spent his career avoiding the best" when he's fought the best (Fury was No.1 ranked heavyweight in fights 2 and 3 and regarded as the best other than Joshua at the time of fight 1) more than anyone else in the division.

 

Can’t say I agree to be honest. He fought Fury because he thought he was long past his prime after the huge damage he did to his body. That fight let to the 2nd and 3rd for various reasons. There is no other reason that he took that first fight.
The only fight I can give him credit for taking really is Ortiz for their first fight, but even that was somewhat calculated, due to his advanced age.
It’s not that Wilder is terrified to fight anyone, but he’s hasn’t exactly gone out of his way to seek out the biggest challenges and biggest fights has he?

 

These people keep trying to big up Wilder into something he's not. He's had nearly 50 fights and his best win is some mid 40's Cuban who actually outboxed him too. That's quite telling.

 

Ortiz was 38 and he got KO'd. Many heavyweight "greats" arguably had inferior best wins than a 30-0 highly skilled experienced and determined southpaw puncher. And unlike many of the "greats", Wilder never lost to a wide underdog fringe contender. If he splatters Joshua there will no doubt be more excuses.

 

Why do you think Joshua took the Wlad or Povetkin fights? Would Hearn have put him in with Wlad in Germany two or three years prior? Or Povetkin in Russia two or three years prior? Of course not. Ortiz was younger than Povetkin and much younger than Wlad, with less wear and tear and he went 50-50 over 12 rounds with Ruiz at 43 with 2 KO defeats.

Regardless of excuses, the bottom line is that Wilder fought Fury three times and Fury was ranked as the No.1 heavyweight in fights 2 and 3.

No champion fighter typically goes into fights thinking "I'm going to lose" and risk-reward always plays a part. But it's nonsense to suggest that either the "experts" or the public thought that Whyte or even Ortiz were more dangerous than Fury. Both were far wider underdogs against Wilder than Fury was even in fight 1. Even though Wilder's team thought he would beat Fury in fights 1 and 2, these were obvious high risk fights, and so they proved to be.

Wilder had a 6 fight streak over 3.5 years where he fought: Ortiz, Fury, Breazeale, Ortiz, Fury, Fury. There are few six fight streaks in heavyweight history that compare in terms of danger and level of opposition. If you want to critique Wilder's level of opposition pre-2018 then fine but we're 5+ years on now. Wilder also wants to fight Joshua next, who is very likely the highest ranked opponent he can fight. That will likely be a two fight series. If Wilder beats Joshua he'll likely want to fight either Fury or Usyk. At that point his "level of opposition" would be impossible to critique.

 

Incorrect.

 

I can still vote on that poll now, so it is meaningless. Also the thread itself was not exactly active with a total of 4 people picking Fury to beat Wilder.

So, given your first argument was the laziest of rebuttles, you'll excuse me if I dont argue endlessly over the rest.

Stop trying to rewrite history Neetz.

 

Pathetic. You can't rebut anything I've said, all you've done is make reversionistic excuses. No one has voted on that poll for ages. It's ancient and people don't tend to revisit random old posts with few replies. I do because they expose hypocrisy from people who like to rewrite history.

 

Can you explain how you know Ortiz was “determined”?

 

Lol you troll.

Here is the very first video I found on the topic. 312 replies. Good luck finding all those pro Fury hot takes

This content is protected

This argument is the definition of a time sink. Pointless and endless

 

I think if he beats Joshua then that’s a good victory, although things may have gone differently a few years back. I actually voted for Wilder to beat Joshua here because I can’t see Joshua avoiding the right hand. Unless Joshua comes in to beat up Wilder from the beginning, I can’t see Wilder not landing it to be honest.

I’m just saying until that happens he doesn’t have that premier win on his resume, and I think that’s down to either his handlers or his choice of opponents for him.