Chisora Greater than Wilder?

Kind of like bakole now

 

I did, I've followed boxing since about 1997.

Ortiz was made the boogeyman because he beat Jennings, who was competitive against an aging Klitschko. Jennings didn't pan out and neither did Ortiz.

The fact is Wilder's resume isn't good, even if his best wins are nothing to write home about. He has less losses than Chisora, big deal he didn't challenge himself against the best in the division; save for Fury who KO'd him twice.

 

At the time you said you'd give Wilder full credit for the win.

 

Ortiz was ranked 4/5 round then. Bogey man or not, regardless of your personal opinion he was considered the best hw not named AJ, fury or wilder

accept the truth and it will set you free

 

You would rank him above Povetkin, Whyte, Parker, Ruiz? Why?

 

Yes, it was Wilder's best win. However, Ortiz never proved to be anything in the HW division. I will say I mistakenly overrated him at the time.

 

He smashed Jennings that was a decent win at the time

 

Ive answered in the other thread.

 

Only decent win he has though

 

Virtually everyone had him beating Helenius though. Credit for Wilder for winning more decisively but Chisora should have won the decision

 

People defending Wilder I never thought I would never see either.

 

Top 10 HW at the time (By Ring Magazine): AJ, Fury, Wilder, Whyte, Ortiz, Povetkin, J-Parker, Jarrell Miller, Kownacki, Pulev.

This was a pretty weak era for HWs. However, how many of those fighters did either Wilder or Ortiz face before fighting each other? Answer zero. Wilder fought Fury in the next fight and lost all three in the trilogy. Ortiz rematched Wilder and never fought any of those other fighters.

Bottom line, neither guy fought any of the other in the top 10, in a weak era. When Wilder did, he went 0-4 (2 KO losses). Ortiz went 0-2 (2 KO losses to Wilder).

Chisora fought Fury x3, Whyte x2, J-Parker x2, and Pulev.

 

In that case maybe everyone was wrong

No evidence for Stiverne or Ortiz being top 5

 

10 world title defences against mostly puddings. You're easily pleased I guess.

 

He was a WBC beltholder. Whether you want to consider that a 'world champ' is up to you I guess. We know he was massively protected and allowed to fight all manner of low level guys while Chisora was forced to fight top level guys his entire career. Like I said, if you're a casual then Wilder on paper looks really impressive. In reality though it was Chisora who proved himself time and again, and Chisora I consider the greater fighter relative to what he achieved in the sport off his own back.