Norton was poor v big punchers, Frazier was harder to hit and had mre active fists, standing off Wilder is silly.
Patterson would have the same problem with Wilder`s reach and power that he had wit Liston`s, that`s the only time Patterson had to face a reach like that, Floyd coming forward v Wilder would be suicide.
Patterson's problem with Liston was as much technical excellence, accuracy and one of the most controlling jabs in the history of the heavyweight division. Absolutely none of which is owned by Wilder. Comparing Wilder to Liston is the absolute height of lazyness. It's about what you're trying to get inside not how long that reach is. Patterson would breeze by Wilder's awful jab.
He might beat some of the lesser or chinny guys, but even then, I wouldn't count them out. We aren't talking about some highly skilled 6'7" hard hitting HW, we're looking at a guy w/ poor stance and even poorer technique. Wilder relied on his power to win in the absolute worst HW era ever. He barely makes a dent in one of the best.
I agree with everything he said minus the Liston part. Other than that. This is exactly how i see it as well
True about Frazier, and.id never suggest that Wilder beats him 100% of the time, but Frazier definitely showed he can be KOd early by a big puncher... Wilder not as complete of a fighter as Foreman, but his pinching power is within range of Foreman's, I could definitely see Wilder catching Frazier early and putting him away
Plus in that era the ref just let's you pound on the other fighter as soon as they are up. No separating them or asking if they are ok....it's crazy how ruthless the sport used to be. Patterson would be a beast
Of the names listed earlier, I see Larry Holmes, George Foreman, Joe Frazier, Sonny Liston, Floyd Patterson, Ken Norton, Jimmy Young, Jerry Quarry, and Ron Lyle beating him. Earnie Shavers is a tossup and Wilder obviously has better shots at the chinnier fighters like Norton. Jimmy Ellis, Ernie Terrell, Oscar Bonavena, Zora Folley and Joe Bugner are the most likely to lose. Wilder's power is quite good, but as was noted above, he got by with in a terrible era and not always convincingly. He has struggled in nearly every fight after the Malik Scott dive, and very few of these men were even the quality of Bugner. I don't think Wilder's power saves him against higher skilled opposition.
Wilder himself is too chinny, and could be taken out by the likes of Quarry, Bonevena, Norton, Patterson, and Lyle to name a few. He also cant box well at all and could lose lots of decision. Since we are going 15 deep, maybe Wilder would win 6 beating the smaller guys who lack power such as Folley and Ellis. No way he beats the Larry Holmes, Sonny Liston, George Foreman or Joe Frazier's on Ali's resume.
Wilder has literally fought 2 heavyweights that were ranked in the top 10 his WHOLE career and now we're saying how well he'd do against Ali's competition??? Lol
It's an era where Artur Szpilka would be considered a big heavyweight so it's probably silly to completely write Wilder off.
There's literally very little measure to gauge whether Wilder would beat many on Ali's resume. He's rarely beaten any top 10 opponents or even respectable opponents. His best win is against a 40+ yo Ortiz who was spanking him until he got lazy. His other "highlights" include beating Spzilka, StIverene and Breazeale all objectively terrible HWs in a meh HW era. Wilder is absolutely shocking and there's a reason he has fought trash cans all his career.. Either him or his team were not confident in him beating actual decent HWs.. Why else has not fought many in top 10?? I'd bet a lot in the current top 10/15 would beat Wilder even preFury spanking
