We have to appreciate prime Deontay Wilder was one of the hardest hitters in boxing history

The problem comes when most of those defences actually are, unequivocally, weak defenses...

And it's made worse by having asterisks against the better ones - eg: only not losing Fury #1 because of a cooked card that late KD's exposed as the joke it was; being rescued by the referee in Ortiz #1.

Breazeale is an okay defence.
Ortiz #2 is an okay defence.
(Belt should've been gone by those, but regardless).

Fury #1 is a good defence if it wasn't a clear loss.
Ortiz #1 is an okay defence even with the protection - but it's not like Ortiz achieved much.


Honestly, it's really not a particularly respectable run...

 

Exactly this.

No denying he is a puncher though.

 

Was not a mistake as he based his argument on Wladamir fighting Arreola which never happened.

 

Your definition of journeymen is ludicrous. Chisora is widely recognised as a gatekeeper and fighter that routinely beats journeymen and prospects but fall short when facing legit contenders. In his prime he was even seen as a fringe contender though in truth he was always just a gatekeeper level fighter.

He was robbed vs Helenius when Helenius was undefeated and regarded as a top 10 fighter.

He had two very close fights with Whyte and Whyte in his prime was seen as a top 5 fighter, who beat former champion Parker a fighter most now rank 4th of the era. Journeymen don't do that.

Chisora also gave Parker a very competitive first fight, so much so it warranted a rematch. Journeymen don't give top contenders like Parker close fights that warrant rematches.

No he didn't do well against Usyk, I think the idea of Usyk struggling against Usyk is ludricrous, Chisora won only 2 cards on my scorecard, yeah he made a fight of it and always gives it his all but that fight wasn't close.

Same with the Vitali fight, yeah he did a lot better than many expected against Vitali but again I only gave Chisora 2 rounds against Vitali. Chisora earned that shot at Vitali because people thought he was robbed vs Helenius and so was seen as worthy enough of a title shot based off that performance. Again journeymen don't do that.

 

This guy is not worth your time just add to the ignore list he is a troll who DKSAB he thinks AJ wouldn't KO Wilders first 30 opponents as easily as Wilder and thinks because Wilder KO'ed Breazeale faster that means somthing even though AJ stopped 2 other common opponents faster I tried to tell him triangle theories don't hold much substance but he then resorted to insults so I would save you time for someone you can actually have a reasonable conversation with

 

Oh ok, I can’t particularly remember or be bothered to look back but clearly I was giving the person debating against me more credit than I should have then. His arguments were weaker than I thought.

 

Alright well, far me it for me to disagree with such clearly educated posts as these. Opine after opine with nothing behind it but principles. It's kind of gross. You know, from an intellectual pursuit.

They call it the sweet science and youse talk about it as if it's art.

How it makes you feel should be irrelevant, but clearly this is difficult for you lot.



The argument "but him opponents easy doe" totally ignores probabilities.

The argument that his resume isn't enough to know ignores physics.

The argument his form is wrong ignores history.



But youse sure do get to circle jerk your opinions though. So that's fun.



Kinematic chains are the secret to Wilder's power. Sword and shield boxing is ancient, what looks wrong might just have been right. Done, over, complete argument finished. I'm claiming he hits harder than anyone prior because of the alignment of his bones when he strikes and the type of strike he produces. It's kinda a duh, but for a gaggle of princesses who wank over ranking and totally forgotten grade 3 physics I can see how it'd be difficult to catch.

 

This.

 

All time what?

Best boxers, greatest champs? He isn't.

Greatest hitter? Somewhere outside top twenty. Knocking out Artur Szpilka and a forty plus year old Ortiz looks great until you remember it's Artur Szpilka and a forty plus year old Ortiz.

 

I put Zhang above Wilder. Zhang has connected with three of the standout noggings in the division (Hrgovic, Joyce, Parker) and dropped them all.

It's possible that Joshua hits harder too. Wilder's signature KO is Breazeale. Joshua's is now Ngannou. Both Breazeale and Ngannou walked onto a flush shot. Ngannou had the vaunted chin and stayed down, but Breazeale actually tried to beat the 10 count. On the other hand, Ngannou was already KD before that.

So that is Zhang (and arguably Joshua ahead of him). If Wilder is not #1 in his own generation, he would probably fall in the 6-10 category. Maybe lower, but it's hard to see enough of the smaller stature heavyweights putting as much behind their shots.

 

Difficult to say really, Breazeale was undefeated at the time, and Joshua was trying to box with him from what I remember. But I watched the finish again just now for you, and it came when Breazeale took a combination on the guard, and went down. Then got back up and Joshua finished him with a combination ending with a left hand getting through Breazeale's guard and Breazeale stayed down.

The punch landed on Ngannou was more comparable to what Wilder landed on Breazeale.

Anyway, whether Joshua is higher or lower won't change much on Wilder's general position due to the existence of Zhang.

 

Wilder fought a lot of cans so it’s hard to gauge him,

 

Then what's a gatekeeper define that for me please because you don't seem to distinguish between the two and if you don't then you're the only one that here that doesn't see a difference. There are clear well defined levels in boxing, journeymen, fringe contenders, gate keepers, top contenders and champions/elite.

Who's hyping Helenius, it's just a fact at the time Helenius was very highly regarded when he fought and should of lost to Chisora as he had beaten two former world champions in Peter and Liakhovich and knocked them both out.

In contrast Washington was a nobody who came in as a late replacement for Wawryzk when he fought Wilder, he wasn't seen as a genuine contender, most people didn't even know who he was. He was mainly known at the time for struggling to a draw against a 43 year old Amir Mansour. So you comparing Helenius who had beaten 2 proven world class operators to a guy scraping a draw with a 43 year old journeymen is as ridiculous as the majority of your opinions.

 

The irony of calling Chisora a journeyman to defend Wilder's reputation isn't lost on me

I mean, considering Chisora fought more fights against more contenders than Wilder did... And came closer to beating several of them...

Well, if Chisora's not even a gatekeeper then Wilder sure as hell isn't.


But Chisora is a gatekeeper - a rough night's work for near enough anyone because he was durable and hit pretty hard... But wasn't quite good enough to get from that decent platform into actual wins.

Wilder... If we're honest... He's definitely not a legit contender, being 3-0-1 against contenders (and the draw being an absolute gift at that) isn't a contenders resume - either in depth or accomplishment.
I've previously said Wilder's power made him a fringe contender with a punchers chance against the best - having seen how limited he is and how incapable he is of actually using enough of it against contenders - certainly his resume struggles to support anything more than that...


It seems uncharitable given the majority opinion still seems to be that he was legit at some point...
But it's also his own fault he didn't prove it.
Besides, since when did I let majority opinion get in the way of fact?

 

I agree Chisora is shot, he looked truly awful against Washington a fighter he would of KO'ed early in his prime.

Not hyping Helenius at all, simply stating the facts at the time in terms of how Helenius was viewed going into the Chisora fight. Sure he turned out to be just another journeymen but he was mired with injuries but if I am honest even at his best before those injuries I suspect he was no better than a gatekeeper himself.

Lets not forget Chisora did more than just beat Helenius. Chisora has given plenty of top fighters tough fights. Whyte, Parker even Haye was struggling before Chisora walked into a huge counter. He was competitive with Pulev in both fights too. Washington's only claim to fame is taking 4 rounds off Wilder who was ring rusty and came into that fight preparing for Wawryzk not Washington. Comparing Chisora to Washington as the same level is simply inacurate.

Never said Wilder was a can crusher. He was a top 10 heavyweight of this era, but he was in reality over hyped and probably never top 5. He spent a career ducking tough fights, refusing to unify and you wonder why people call him can crusher? Fans don't respect fighters who do that, fans appreciate fighters who fight the best, don't duck tough fights which is why Chisora even at the end of his career could make millions because the British fans respected that desire to simply fight the best even if it meant he lost a lot of the time. Wilder in comparison won't be remembered as fondly, he'll be remembered as a fighter who was better than Chisora for sure but he'll also be remembered as a manufactured fraud who milked his title for as long possible until he cherry picked the wrong opponent.