Deontay Wilder's second best victory and title win was just humiliated by a fat cajun midget

Catchweightboxing's threads for this week:

*Jersey Joe Walcott sucks because the guy he beat for the belt (Ezzard Charles) couldn't beat Alvin Jones eight years later. (discuss)
*George Foreman sucks because the guy he beat for the belt (Joe Frazier) couldn't beat Jumbo Cummings eight years later. (discuss)
*Muhammad Ali sucks because the guy he beat for the belt (Leon Spinks) couldn't beat Rocky Sekorski eight years later. (discuss)
*Evander Holyfield sucks because the guy he beat for the belt (Buster Douglas) couldn't last one round with Lou Saverese eight years later (discuss)
*Wlad Klitschko sucks because the guy he beat for his first belt (Chris Byrd) couldn't beat Shaun George eight years later. (discuss)

For those who haven't picked up on this yet, a lot of titleholders aren't very good EIGHT YEARS after losing their title, especially those in their mid-40s, like Stiverne.

Who did Jack Dempsey beat in 1934, eight years after he lost the title? Who did Max Baer beat in 1943, eight years after he lost the title? Who did John L. Sullivan beat in 1900? Who did Jim Corbett beat in 1905? Who did Bob Fitzsimmons beat in 1910? Who did Jim Jeffries beat in 1912? Who did Jim Braddock beat in 1945? Who did Joe Louis beat in 1958? Who did Jersey Joe Walcott beat in 1960? Who did Johansson beat in 1968? Who did Sonny Liston beat in 1972? Who did Ernie Terrell beat in 1975? Who did Jimmy Ellis beat in 1978? Who did Muhammad Ali beat in 1986 or 1988? Who did Chris Byrd beat in 2014, eight years after losing his last title to Wlad? Who did Ruslan Chagaev beat in 2017, eight years after losing to Wlad?

Answer: NOBODY. Most were long since retired because they couldn't fight anymore. (Hell, eight years after he lost his title, Liston had already been dead for a while.)

Who will Chagaev beat in 2024, eight years after he lost his last title to Lucas Browne? I'm guessing ... nobody.

What a nonsensical thread.

Did you really start a thread because a guy Wilder beat EIGHT YEARS AGO for a title lost on Saturday?

Boy, you 'really' let Wilder have it with this one.

 

Even useless fighters can decline. They just become even more useless than they were in their prime!

 

lol apparently fighters don't age in an 8 year period.

 

Stiverne is 44, Martin 36. Of course Stiverne fell off and is irrelevant today, Martin was pre-prime as a belt holder.

 

You criticise Wilder for not fighting enough quality opposition but also regard it as being "spin" to give Wilder credit for fighting the No.1 HW x2, even after he'd been beaten badly in the 2nd fight. And unlike the likes of Parker and Whyte who have hardly ever looked impressive in relative terms, Wilder has produced a litany of impressive performances relative to many other prominent heavyweights. If Wilder loses to a Ruiz level opponent or Fury loses to Usyk then you might have a leg to stand on.

 

Produce your top 15 of that time.

 

People have every right to criticize Wilders resume. It should take a champion as long as long to step up as it took Wilder.

 

In order? No, I don't think I need to do that in order to defend my opinion that Stiverne and Arreola were both wildly overrated hype jobs that didn't belong anywhere near a vacant world title match. Certainly not because some newb said so; I don't "produce" lists on demand. If you want me to name 15 better h2h heavyweights active then, then sure. In no particular order: Wlad, Sasha, Fury, Pulev, Jennings, Wilder, Perez, Chagaev, Glazkov, Martin, Ruiz, Parker, Price, Hammer, Boytsov, Leapai, and that's 16 already but I can probably keep going and squeeze in a few more.

Stiverne was a one-dimensional hack, a poor man's Shannon Briggs, and had beaten nobody of note to earn being in a vacant world title match unless you count Arreola himself. (which is a circular argument, because I'm lumping Arreola in with him as useless media-inflated goons)

Before the first Arreola match? A journeyman, Willie Herring, with double-digit losses...ancient Ray Austin, who actually schooled Stiverne in the first half, and Trinidadian glass cannon Kertson Manswell who came in with a 20-0 record against cans and went 5-12 since. Prior to Manswell not even any other padded record prospects, literally all gatekeepers and tomato cans - and he drew against one and lost to another!

Arreola for his part was just one fight removed from losing to Stiverne's bum ass when he somehow magically qualified to be in a vacant world title match opportunity, and on the basis of what? Simply exposing Seth Mitchell, whom nobody today looks back on as some great win - and it wasn't even like he popped Mitchell's cherry, either, as the football player turned wannabe pugilist had already been stopped by ...*checks notes* ah yes, Wladimir Klitschko's replacement trainer after Steward died.

 

"2015 Chagaev, Glazkov, Martin, Price, Hammer, Boytsov, Leapai"

These are extremely dubious. Price (never beat anyone better than Dave Allen) for example, he'd have almost certainly got KO'd by Stiverne or Arreola. Leapai got stopped by Kevin Johnson but beat Boytsov. Chagaev was 12 months removed from getting KO'd by Browne. Hammer never got in the title mix. And although a Parker would have very likely beaten Stiverne or Arreola H2H, he was more useless when he stepped up a level due to his lack of power and grit, in addition to not possessing great skill or athleticism. Stiverne and Arreola both showed against Wilder and Vitali that they had good chins and determination, and more power than many against other opponents. Martin by contrast quit in 2 rounds when he stepped up. Price would have wilted rapidly under any kind of assault from one of the champions.

 

Of course they have that right but no one with any impartiality can criticise his quality of opposition since 2018.

America hadn't had a heavyweight champion for 7.5 years when Wilder beat Stiverne, so his management was very cautious. He came to the sport at 19 and had a short amateur career, which made them hesitant to match him tough. And these days as soon as you take one loss you are considered to be a hype job. Wilder didn't get the AJ treatment and was expected to lose when he stepped up, much like Joyce was. Fan reaction has an impact and further encourages cautious matchmaking.

 

Chin and determination aren't everything (there are journeyman with 50 losses that have never been down), and in both of their cases it's pretty much all they had, along with decent but not showstopping power. Neither had a fraction the skill of any of their era's top 5, and neither had accomplished diddly squat to warrant their rematch being for a vacant world title.

All one man had recently accomplished of note was beating Arreola himself, which becomes a circular argument unless Arreola had done something amazing. He hadn't. He beat an already exposed Seth Mitchell. After doing so Arreola was still one fight removed from a loss.

It shouldn't have been a world title match, period. Arreola and Stiverne sucked and were completely unworthy of the opportunity to fight each other for a championship (regardless of trumped up rankings) and were positioned as they were not on merit but because of the sport's usual political maneuvering, TV network and promoter tomfoolery. I rest my case.

 

I’ve just skimmed through a thread and read one post discuss the merits of a “prime Stiverne” vs a “prime Gerald Washington”

Im such a loser, I really need to spend my spare time more productively

 

That really is a "would you rather have a junkie with hemorrhoids or a wino with Crohn's take a dump in your mouth?" type of thought experiment.