i pick lennox lewis as well. was watching some footage of wilde saturday and while he was a great fighter in his day, IMO that style is suited to exactly that his day. also boxing in that era was virtually domestic level only with only a few countries in the world having fighters getting title shots. its not diminishing there accomplishments they fought more often than they do today and did not have friendly refs etc etc to use an anology , lasse viren was the greatest runner of his day by far, but there were most probably a 1,000 kenyans in the rift valley at the time who would have needed maths lessons to count how far ahead they would be of him. same as i see it with pre 1940 boxing among the little men wilde had great power/teed of nice powerfull correctly delivered shots. but to do so he left his chin way up in the air and his defense was to try and see the punches coming and slip them as was the norm in thises days. fighters rarely had there hands much above there thighs.
Actually, Wilde's style was considered unusual back in the day. That certainly wasn't a textbook style that was commonplace. The funny thing about the hands down approach is that whilst people are critical of it in the 1900's when you look at the best fighters of modern times they often fight in the same way. RJJ and Floyd Mayweather - hands down! I've never bought into the theory these guys can't compete simply because you can now buy whey in a can Besides, when you are talking about the best fighter of all-time it is all relative. Wilde's achievements are relative to his era, just as Lewis's are to his