I can rationalize it in 2 ways: 1. Wilder was completely dominated and made to look buffoonish in his last fight, plus, Whyte has the most impressive resume of anyone who has not captured a belt and has a string of wins (a couple debatable but wins nonetheless) of late and Wilder has arguably lost 23 out of the last 27 rounds that he has fought so Whyte deserves the bump over him. 2. Wilder's only loss is to the current "Ring" champion and someone who was arguably above him anyway. Joshua when dropped from the de facto top spot was only dropped below the current champions (including the man he lost to). Why did Wilder not receive similar treatment? I personally think he shouldn't be dropped below someone who hasn't "yet" won a title but again, I can definitely rationalize the reasoning behind it. I don't think The Ring was being nefarious in doing so (for once).
When did I say the Rivas decision was controversial. I said the fight with the #7 contender (Parker) was controversial. Whyte has a controversial decision win over a #7 contender, in a fight in which he was floored, and a decision win over the #9 contender, in another fight in which he was floored, and a seventh round KO loss to the #1 contender, in a fight that Whyte ended on his back (again). Wilder has a two knockout wins over the #4 contender, and he scored two knockdowns in a draw with the world champ, and he lost by seventh round TKO to the world champ in a fight that ended with Wilder on his feet wanting to continue. Wilder should be rated above Whyte, clearly. If Whyte had knocked out Ortiz twice and floored the World Champ Fury twice and drew with him (while Wilder was getting KOed by Joshua and bounced off the canvas by Parker and Rivas) we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
