On a thread matching a fantasy match up between a modern fighter and an old fighter don’t you have to regard the overall standing... in an all time sense? To make a comparison? That’s kinda WTF I’m talking about. Wilder is not an ATG and neither is Williams. I believe Wilder made more of an impression on his own era.
No. You don't have to do that at all. Can if you want. But if you do, if you write of the two best fighter's in one of the fighter's histories you're a) doing him a disservice and b) doing an absolutely pathetic job of what you're claiming you're trying to do. I mean you're really doing a joke job of it tbh. Well they both have one draw. So pretty close.
No I am not writing off the two best fighters in one of the fighters histories. I am agreeing with Boxing News. Their editorial said the two of them were still looking for their first win over a prime world class opponent after their draw. Now of course Fury has this win and he is the top man now. Far from writing him off I would say Fury is a real champion. So of course beating Wilder to achieve this must make Wilder important at this time even if I disregard his holding a belt. Williams, as we agreed a while back was breifly an elite fighter around the time he beat Billy Daniels drew with Machen and took Terrell to a split verdict. This period went on just beneath the championship mixl at that time contested between I think Floyd and Sonny Liston. Wilder by comparison, made a greater impression because he was in the “championship” mix. But to look back upon this time from the future a look at the Ring Annual ratings will show that Wilder was never higher than #2 contender to a vacant title.
You irrefutably did do that when you said "that's it" (or something like it) after saying "he's got the Fury draw" (or something like it). That is precisely and irrefutably what you did. Denying it is impossible to do sensibly, i'm afraid. Of course, the easiest thing to do is go "yeah, he's got two meaningful wins over contenders who mattered when he beat them, that's perfectly true." But instead there's some waffle trying to justify your position below, which, obviously, i'm not going to read.
With all due respect, Cleveland Williams did stop Big Ernie Terrell on April 3 1962, in round 7. And you are correct that Williams did lose a split decision to Terrell about a year later, that fight was refereed by then World Heavyweight Champion Sonny Liston, prior to his repeat kayo win over Floyd Patterson in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Rich, I'm afraid your effort is all for naught. Choklab has a clear anti-Williams agenda and refuses to give him even the slighest credit for his accomplishments, choosing to downplay them, and instead focusing on losses he had when he was 20 and after he'd been shot and nearly died.
Honestly this question is laughable. Wilder destroys "little" cat and it is very funny because after he lost to Fury several people here think then everybody would be capable to beat him too. Tyson Fury is much better boxer ,tougher physically and mentally also is much bigger than Clevwland Williams
I acknowledge the first fight against Terrell as A good win over a fighter who would later climb the ranks. Williams, was briefly an elite fighter around the time he beat Billy Daniels drew with Machen and took Terrell to a split verdict. This period went on just beneath the championship mix which at that time contested between I think Floyd and Sonny Liston. For his era, Wilder by comparison, made a greater impression because he was in the “championship” mix. But to look back upon this time from the future a look at the Ring Annual ratings will show that Wilder was never higher than #2 contender to a vacant title himself. So unless we see more from Wilder, just now, he’s not so different to Williams.