Who was the better world champion. Wilder or Tommy Morrison?

Listen, I'm not trying to be a jerk here, JMo, but I want you to actually think about the guys who held titles in that time period, then think about the fighters now and if you still feel that way, we'll talk about it. Because I find these statements to be some not only wrong, but highly questionable, if we're just talking about who held titles then and who could get them from now, you might as well throw in who was arguably winning fights they officially lost to show how it actually was at that time, without any rose colouring on our spectacles.

 

Wilder and it’s not even close…

 

One thing to add, Wilder should be glad he never ran into a guy like Ray Mercer early doors. If hard roc Sconiers dropped him heavily what would a prime Mercer do to him? Probably slap him around the ring.

 

Yes this is a rediculous question.
Wilder has significant flaws, as does Morrison.
But even if you think the era is weaker now-& I do not believe there can be a dramatic difference or devolution when there are still so many trying to box seriously, & the HWs are only getting larger...
Wilder's accomplishments Dwarf Morrison.

Who did almost nothing as champion. Barely champ of one body...You all know the story.

In fact some must pick Morrison due to hate of Wilder.
And it is statistically & scien-terrifically inevitable that some of those are influenced by racism.

 

One was a massive steroid cheat who has a win over one of the all time great HW of all time. The other is one of the most one dimensional HW champs of all times whose best wins are "prime" Stverne & who knows how old Ortiz.

Wilder did retain his belt against low opposition longer though, but who gives a **** as the talent that was in the 90's HW division was on a different level.

 

Not a Wilder fan in the slightest, and the answer is Wilder

 

Wilder obviously but Morrison has the best single win of the two with a win over Big George, and Wilder isn't beating a motivated Mercer or Lewis either.

 

Morrison had more ability than Whyte quicker hand speed, more power, better skills, better combination puncher. His weakness though was his glass chin.

But I don't think Whyte would beat Big George in the 90s like Morrison did.

 

Maybe not, but I couldn't see Whyte losing to Bennt either.

 

That's also true.

 

Tommy Gunn and Rocky Balboa better than Wilder

 

Morrison didn't outbox Foreman as convincingly as Schulz did and he wouldn't beat 30-0 highly skilled and experienced southpaw power puncher Ortiz, who was much more highly regarded by people in the boxing industry for good reason.

"Motivated" or not, Lewis couldn't take McCall/Rahman power so he'd obviously be at great danger of being iced by Wilder. He had massive height and reach advantages over Morrison, he'd be at a slight deficit vs Wilder and he's not as fast as Wilder. Lewis never fought a 6'5+, athletic heavyweight with big power. If Wilder can land on a defensive Fury he can land on Lewis.

Mercer had a 50-50 war with Lewis, cool. But 42 year old Holmes schooled him, Holyfield beat him by a clear margin, Wlad dominated and stopped him. Mercer came from behind to stop Damiani and Morrison: those are clearly his best uncontroversial wins. He was a short stocky heavyweight who lacked a big punch and exceptional mobility. His reputation as a monster is based on one fight, which could be an indictment of Lewis as much as a feather in Mercer's cap. Peter gave Wlad a great fight the first time, I don't think he beats Wilder either.

 

Morrison for me, he could actually throw combinations and yes the 90’s were that deep

 

Rofl Wilder's only good win is Ortiz.

Not difficult to hold onto a title when you're smacking Chisora level opponents.