Of the two very limited skill wise but knock you out cold from nowhere types who was a better champion overall?
Wilder's bad, but not that bad. Bailey wouldn't have won crap in a 2 belt era. I mean, neither would Wilder, but he may at least have been a contender, not so sure about Bailey.
I dunno. I think Randall has a number of better wins than Wilder does. I rated Mike Jones more than I did geriatric Ortiz.
Meh, I think Ortiz still had something left in him, Jones was barely a top 10 rated fighter for like a year and then popped out of existence. Both of their resumes are basically nonexistent, to be fair, so even comparing them is a hard task on its own.
Given that Bailey was only 4 and 6 in world title fights it is very tough to pick him. I will go with Wilder.
I don't think Wilder would have been in 10 world title fights had he fought better opposition earlier on.