Jack Sharkey vs. Wilder

No, he was Sharkey.

 

Wilder doesn't bring anything to the table the Sharkey hadn't seen during his career.

 

Again, agreed.

It certainly seems that Wilder had a ceiling - represented by half-decent, past-prime fighters (Stiverne and Ortiz) who'd managed to acquire and retain a rating. Beyond this level and save for his right-hand, Wilder looked much less.

When fantasy-matched with past masters, there's always going to be that "Well, if he connects..." element to the speculation with Wilder. However, if this element has been best exemplified against the essentially unproven or over-the-hill types, then it needs to be appropriately tempered in any related rationale for a Wilder win.

 

Why do people keep on saying Wilder hadn't fought for 24 months? He did exactly the same thing he does to all his opponents but even faster against Helenius 13 months ago, or do 1 round fights plus the 8-12 weeks of training camp before fights not count as activity? Seems like an arbitrary cut off to me.

Nobody accused him of being rusty when he fought Helenius, which was 12 months after his previous fight.

No one accused him of being rusty when he fought Fury the 3rd time, which was 18 months after his previous fight.

The dude is just overrated. Nothing would have changed if this was his 3rd fight of the year.

 

I actually favor Sharkey

 

The fighter most comparable to Wilder during Sharkey’s time was Monte Munn, who like Wilder had a basketball/football background and also had a great right hand.

For a short time Munn was a even thought of as a potential champion in the making and if he had a matchmaker as good as Wilder’s (Russ Anber) looking after him Munn likely would’ve gone much further in his career. Instead Munn was consistently put against best too soon.

Munn eventually even became a sparring partner for Sharkey.

 

I read that there was another guy in 1978 that a lot of people thought was good, he lost to a guy who weighed around 195, had only 7 fights, and had recently fought a draw with Scott LeDoux. AND, the guy people thought was good was only 36 years old and had not been inactive. Just think what that fight did to the resume' of all of the fighters he had fought? And then the guy who beat the guy in 78 got knocked out in 1 round by some guy from South Africa who got knocked out by Mike Weaver, Greg Page, and Frank Bruno. Strange how things happen. Even "stranger", Wilder is being criticiized as though he was a young, active fighter, not a 38 year old guy who had fought less than one round in over two years...

 

Ali had early stages of Parkinsons his speech had slowed down significantly after Shavers fight, plus Ali was proven against world class opposition and ATG's he beat over 20 ranked opponents compared to 2 for Wilder. So yes Ali who had close to 60 fights and who had been fighting world class opposition for 16 years and had been in countless tough fights is not comparable to Wilder in that regard.

No it don't work like that......Ali has one of the best resumes of all time. Wilder has beaten a grand total of 2 ranked opponents a very average Stirverne and an old Ortiz who was even older than the Wilder who lost to Parker.

Wilder has a very weak resume.

I know it's hard for you to fathom because you have a thing about modern fighters, you once ridiculously claimed "Wilder would never of had a competitive fight if Fury didn't exist". But i'm sorry to tell you Wilder was always a limited puncher and wouldn't even be in the top 30 of all time in regards to H2H Heavyweights.

Lewis
Ali
Holmes
Louis
Thomas
Foreman
Tucker
Ruddock
Tyson
Usyk
Zhang
Joshua
Witherspoon
Povetkin
Wladimir
Vitali
Haye
Parker
Tua
Fury
Ibeabuchi
Holyfield
Bowe
Mercer
M.Spinks
Frazier
Liston
Lyle

All beat him at their best Wilder was more like a contender that held a strap.

 

this

 

I said he had only fought ONCE in 26 months. And was off for 14. And that single round of activity was against a man who is even more shot than he is. Does old age and inactivity not count for anything anymore ? Was sharkey coming out of retirement at age 38 to challenge ranked men ? If so how did he do ?

 

Again he had more time off before Fury III than for this fight. He went from being perfectly fine as an inactive 36 year old, to being perfectly fine as an inactive 37 year old, to now all of a sudden falling completely of a cliff (something he showed no signs of previously), losing because of his age.

Likewise the damage he took from Fury somehow didn't age him between Fury II and III, or Fury III and Helenius, but affected him AFTER that?

Am I saying that Wilder is exactly the same at 38 as he was at 28? Nay, that'd be silly. But the decline between a 36 year old Wilder and a 37 year old Wilder is negligible, he's just ridiculous limited and fought his 3rd best opponent ever. There's a reason why his handlers made his competition absolute ass cheeks.

 

If you can’t see how being 38 years old and fighting only once in 26 months can diminish a fighter then it’s not worth taking the time to explain. It really isn’t . And the fact that you’ve established that he was inactive prior to that only adds to the idea that he’s past it.

 

I am not disagreeing with your assessment of Wilder's condition against Parker, but there is still one thing that bothers me about his performance.

He showed no adaptability.

Once Parker found a way to steer clear of his right, he just got shut out, and had no plan B.

Now he probable was better a couple of years ago, but he still wouldn't have had a plan B.

 

Wilder is painfully delusional, he was trying to headhunt Parker into a one shot KO. After the fight, he said he 'hurt him a few times', when the 5 or 6 right hands he landed didn't budge Parker. The man thinks he has some sort of poison in the right glove otherwise everything he says or does is unexplicable

 

I fear there was little to nothing in his toolbox to adapt.