Its just disgusting that they even tried to compare wilders defenses to muhammad alis. They compared it to the alis second run after the 3 year layoff. Ali had 9 defense before that. Ali defended the UNDISPUTED heavyweight championship all together, 19 times against world class fighters and future hof. While wilder has only 1 belt and doesn't even have a single top 3 rated boxer on his defenses.
Both Fury and he have legitimate claims, far more legitimate than Wilder because they beat the last recognized champion, Wlad Klitchko.
The question should really be amongst long reigning title holders. It's really astonishing he got away with it so long tbh Don't forget also, Fury was supposed to be shot, he looked awful in his comeback fight and it was only by some miracle he got back to his best, but Wilder initially only signed the fight because he thought Fury was done.
Wilder does not have a single legitimate "title defense." Even Fury did not have a legit rank at the time. They started out LITERALLY fighting part-time fighters who use boxing as supplemental income (Molina, Duhaupas) and, when they couldn't find a proper brick-layer to add to their list of tradesmen, they LITERALLY started targeting the medically unfit (Stiverne II obesity, Arreola obesity, Ortiz high blood pressure, Fury weight problems and addiction). It all backfired spectacularly in the end. The man is a disgrace. And now his shitbag fans (you know how you are) are arguing that we shouldn't point this out any longer because it is Fury's second best win and those of us who are Fury fans are going against our own narrative. Well, they aren't as eloquent as all that, but they say something like it.
Pretty sure he more or less won it over e-mail too. I don't consider it a world title mind, I just know some do
Five years as WBC Champ. 10 straight successful WBC title defenses. One loss to the current World Champion in 44 fights over 12 years. Has a chance to avenge that loss when boxing returns this year. They should create and "OFFICIAL TROLL THREAD" stamp for nonsense threads like this. On one thread on this board, you've got people insisting Tony Tucker, who won a vacant IBF belt and held it for three whole months, and never held another alphabet world title again, was the third-best heavyweight of the 80s behind Mike Tyson and Larry Holmes. On another, you've got people asking if a champ who held the title for half a decade and made 10 successful defenses (including a successful defense against the current world champ), is the worst ever champ? Some people on this board need to go outside and take a walk.
Wilder scored nine stoppages and floored the current world champ twice in a draw in his 10-successful defense, five-year reign. All the challengers were either ranked by the WBC (because Wilder was the WBC champ) or by Ring Magazine, or by both. In his last five title defenses, he fought the current #4 Ring rated Luis Ortiz, the current World Champ Fury, the WBC #1 contender Breazeale, the current #4 Ring rated Ortiz again. the current World Champ Fury (again) and he's fighting the current World Champ Fury when he returns to action this year. While you've been complaining, Wilder has been facing the best heavyweights for the last couple years now. On the other hand, you don't have a single legitimate post in this thread.
Ortiz was medically cleared THE DAY OF THE FIGHT. He is a sick old man. Breazeale was already bested by Joshua and had done nothing to earn another shot. The took the Tyson Fury fight because they thought he was finished, and he still lost in the eyes of 90% of the boxing community. If you think Wilder has been facing the "best" heavyweights, you are more of an idiot than I thought.
