No you haven’t “got me” at all! These were the Boxrec rankings of the opponents at the time the fight took place! I was accused once of ignoring the fact that some of Wilders opponents were ranked higher at the time by different organisations, so in the interests of fairness to Deontay I used the fighters highest ranking as was at the time of the fight. As for Stiverne in Fight 1 He was a paper champion whose best rank before being gifted the title was No5 and he was never given a higher ranking than that by anyone, therefore I have him at 5 when he defended for the first time Vs Wilder
when I said I got you, I meant I understand you, but Yeah you are right I don't understand how you have constructed them at all. Breazeale has never been #4 in boxrec... So I don't understand why you would use the higher WBC ranking for Breazeale, but then chosen a lower ranking for Stiverne But anyway, I agree with your general message
See Stiverne answer! Apart from these two they’re Boxrec rankings, not hard to follow unless you’re suffer from being hard of understanding!
To be fair it probably helps if you use a consistent source for ALL rankings, otherwise Dubblechin is just going to come here and accuse you of bias and present his own made up list based on several different organizations.
Well, from my perspective, you are being unnecessarily cryptic and strangely defensive with your responses to quite simple questions. You still haven't actually said where the Stiverne ranking came from, btw. I'm going to guess it was Ring Magazine. I agree with Kiwi above.
I’ve stated quite clearly that the rankings are those from Boxrec with the exception of 2, those being Stiverne 1 and Breazeale. The reason they’re different is because someone stated that I was being unfair to Wilder over those 2 fighters as Stiverne was ranked 5th by the WBC and Breazeale was ranked 4th by the WBC. Boxrec had them much lower than that, outside the top 10 if I remember correctly. So no sculduggery or deceit involved at all, it’s quite clear. Irrespective of that, Wilders record is abysmal
These criticisms are moronic but it's no surprise from someone who thinks that top 10 opponents and top 10 wins are identical. Parker wasn't a titleholder when Ruiz fought him: they were fighting for a vacant belt, just like Martin and Glazkov. Liakhovich (who Ruiz couldn't even wobble over 10 in a competitive fight, despite facing him after Wilder) was a former titleholder: do you give Wilder credit for wiping him out in less than 2 minutes? Stiverne was a titleholder when Wilder dropped and schooled him, he got the title from KO'ing prime Arreola. Notice I said prime Arreola, not the 40 year old, 18 months inactive, injury prone Arreola who AJ-conqueror Ruiz went life and death with in his last fight. "Wilder didn't even try to unify against Charles ****ing Martin" As usual your logic is faulty: it's Martin who didn't want to unify with Wilder. Why would he when he could make more money selling his belt to AJ? Same goes for paint dry Parker. Why fight Wilder for at least as much risk and less money when you could fight cash cow AJ instead?
I enjoy watching fights and I enjoy thinking systemically about the sport. My views on boxing are in line with what we've seen in literally every sport in the last 60 years.
I doubt it. It was a much closer fight than expected but 21 year old 7-0 novice Fury wasn't knocked down, much less unconscious and the commentary was ridiculous. [url]https://eyeonthering.com/boxing/john-mcdermott-vs-tyson-fury[/url]
Fury, Usyk, Whyte, Parker, Ruiz and Hunter all failed to KO 100% of their first 15 opponents, Wilder KO'd his first 40. That's all im suggesting is impressive.
Vitali was 4-2 up on all 3 cards despite being the B-side and outlanded Lewis 156 to 102 according to Compubox. How the fight would have gone after that is speculation, Lewis was gassed and could have potentially been stopped. You missed the point though: 5-1 underdog Vitali's stock greatly increased from that fight, despite the defeat.
You're oblivious to context. AJ turned pro at 24 after 6 years of boxing experience Wilder turned pro at 23 after 3 years of boxing experience A younger fighter with far less boxing experience should be brought along more slowly. Furthermore, Wilder gaining experience against lower level opposition may have paid dividends later. He wasn't battered and made to quit by a 25-1 underdog after all.
I meant Parker was a titleholder when Joshua fought him. Stiverne beat a prime Arreola? That's blatantly false. Arreola was 33 had already gotten the **** beaten out of him by Vitali. And let's be real, Arreola wasn't that good even in his prime.
160 lbs vs 170 lbs men fighting 100 years ago is not heavyweight boxing as we understand it today, it's pointless to compare modern heavies to what we now consider to be middleweights or LHW's from an extremely scientifically primitive era. Wilder fought Tyson Fury three times, twice when Fury was considered the best in the sport. He also fought Ortiz twice, who was a dangerous southpaw power puncher and top rated contender. Since 2018, Wilder has fought top opposition; stronger than AJ and much stronger than Whyte. He has also shown vastly more courage in the ring than AJ has.
