A graph showing Wilders Supremacy

Shut the hell up punk

 

Lets examine the "worst WBC champion" accusation closer.

Maskaev, Stiverne, Samuel Peter, Frank Bruno. Probably Berbick?

No Wilder is not the "worst WBC HW champion". Maskaev IMO is.

Also we judge champs not by who they fought before winning the belt we judge them by who they fought in their title fights and their title eliminators and maybe a few other big fights that weren't for belts. Thats the typical way resumes are evaluated not by sorting through the fluff which every great fighter has a lot of. Doing it the way this post is doing it is backwards. Not that Wilders title fight opponents were great thats a different discussion but thats how he should be evaluated. But this is the "O" era where every fighter is trying to keep their undefeated status as long as possible to maximize hype. Wilders resume is simply a product of this time period.

Wilder is HOF worthy. He is an average HOFer. His status as a HOFer should not even be in question.

 

No. Nowhere even close.
Wilder does not belong in the HOF.

 

No, he's really, really not.

A long run is only worth a damn if there's good names along the way... The highlight of Wilder's run is manufactured "boogeyman" (with the resume of a gatekeeper) Luis Ortiz, who was pushing 39, on heart meds and Deontay still needed a bit of good old fashioned A-side privilege in the form of referee rescue to get through it unscathed.

He's not remotely HOF worthy.

But...

Just because he was a fraud of a champion doesn't mean he won't get in - it's just that HOF isn't really objective in any meaningful sense.

 

It's called Karma. Everyone is turning on against him at the same time. Even his wife. It's harsh

This content is protected

 

Am I missing something? I only see 47 opponents and don't see the rankings of the faces in that graphic.

 

By this logic I'd think your HOF standards are near divine.

I think someone like Clarence Henry is probably the borderline.

 

i got lots of questions.
i question why he never proved to be better than 4th best of a very weak era. i question why even casuals can tell he doesnt know how to box like these other guys. i question why winning a manufactured trinket gets you into the hof.

 

If Wilder belongs in the HOF, without even a debate, then so does pretty much everyone who have beaten a few contenders.
Both Charlo´s would be a lock.
Danny Garcia.
Shawn Porter.
Heck, Emanuel Navarrete won 12 title fights in a row, chuck him in the hall as well.
****, Jerwin Ancajas won 10 title fights in a row. HOF! Oh, maybe not as one of those fights was a draw, guess that might disqualify him.

 

Berbick would have beat him, and maybe Bruno.

 

What about Vitali Klitschko? What was his best win? Does he deserve to be in the HOF?

 

Yes all lower end HOFers.

I don't really know the divisions below 140 tbh but based on what you're saying HOF.