How Long Does Wilder Last, As An 80 's Belt Holder?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Fergy, Oct 21, 2021.

  1. Glass City Cobra

    Glass City Cobra Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,277
    7,974
    Jan 6, 2017
    Didn't say it means he had an elite jab. But he obviously had a good one if he won a title fight with a jab.

    Certainly better than Ratliff based on the fight choklab posted. He was a dollar store Ernie Terrel, stiff and skinny with no power and very predictable. Not sure how that fight would help Thomas' chances.
     
  2. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,630
    6,904
    May 30, 2019
    You said that Ratliff "doesn't appear to have a very good jab". So your opinion is that Wilder possesses a "very good jab", right? Then I'd strongly disagree - beating Stiverne with a jab doesn't indicate you have a very good one.
     
    choklab likes this.
  3. Glass City Cobra

    Glass City Cobra Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,277
    7,974
    Jan 6, 2017
    Can you keep a guy at the end of your jab all night if you have a BAD jab? Yes or no?
     
  4. Pepsi Dioxide

    Pepsi Dioxide Active Member Full Member

    854
    1,090
    Oct 22, 2020
    Interesting arguments here. I think Wilder picks up a title granted he stays away from Holmes and Tyson. I do think he suffers lossss though, a lot of the contenders then were hot and cold, but if Wilder catches certain guys on their "hot" night hes in trouble.

    The 80s were a wild time for athletes partying and using drugs, would Wilder be able to stay away from them during the 80s unlike a lot of the other 80s heavys?
     
    Fergy and Loudon like this.
  5. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,630
    6,904
    May 30, 2019
    Probably not, though it depends on your opponent as well. I'd call Wilder's jab a pretty basic, though decent because of his reach. His jab isn't anything special (he uses it mostly as a range finder), but you have to consider it because of his length.
     
    Bokaj and RulesMakeItInteresting like this.
  6. RulesMakeItInteresting

    RulesMakeItInteresting Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,591
    6,330
    Mar 23, 2019
    Really good post. He has a good jab, and it's a nice long shot. He also does use it regularly to set up the devastating punches.

    Overall though I'd say he would have been a far more impressive boxer had he learned to incorporate that punch more into his style, especially when finishing.

    It took George Foreman until his last years to really utilize his truly exemplary jab to full, positive effect (in fact, I daresay it was most impressive against Briggs). Had he done what I hypothesized, used it much more liberally (without mostly just using it as a prelude to the powah), I think he would have cut his defeats in half.

    I feel Deontay could still do that...if he really wanted to.

    But hell, he's super rich and he acquitted himself excellently in his last fight...maybe it's time he took the smart way out. Get the money and run, live life to the fullest. He was a champ, and no matter how much criticism he receives, he held the title for an pretty impressive amount of time. He certainly went out on his shield. Good for him.
     
    Bokaj, Fergy and Glass City Cobra like this.
  7. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    25,940
    5,532
    Dec 31, 2009
    Thank you. I applaud you for watching the fight. I hope you learned something here. Well done. Takes a big man to say this.

    I won’t shy away from these kinds of accusations. And I applaud you for watching these fights. But my stance on heights stands up. If we concentrate on the height differential we can avoid arguing about listed heights. For instance, Tyson was so many inches shorter than Biggs. About four or five inches. That is apparent. We don’t need to quibble about what they claim to be for the tale of the tape. Is Tyson 5’10” or 5’11”. It won’t matter. Let’s just say Biggs was a lot taller and Tyson was significantly shorter. Thomas was significantly shorter than Ratliff.

    a jab that lands is an effective jab. Can you keep a guy at the end of the jab all night if you have a bad jab? It depends on the opponent. And it depends on the level of the guy landing the jab too. A truly great jab is one that dominates at any level. Dominating at a lower level is obviously less impressive.
     
  8. Dubblechin

    Dubblechin Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,015
    10,087
    Jun 25, 2014
    Losing at a lower level even less impressive.
     
  9. Dubblechin

    Dubblechin Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,015
    10,087
    Jun 25, 2014
    Alfonso Ratliff wasn't Deontay Wilder.

    And days after celebrating his 33rd birthday, Pinklon Thomas couldn't last a single round against Tommy Morrison. Thomas was good for a couple years. He was considered shot by the time he was 30.

    Comparing Rafliff to Wilder is like posting a video of Alex Garcia beating Mike "The Giant" White, saying White was taller than Fury, therefore, Alex Garcia beats Fury.

    Wilder held the WBC heavyweight title for FIVE YEARS. He made 10 successful defenses, including a two knockdown successful defense against Fury. Wilder is one of the most succesful champions this century.

    Pinklon Thomas made one whole defense against 27-10-1 Mike Weaver (who himself had been stopped in one round in his previous fight - but the punch came just after the bell/ Weaver shouldn't even have been there.). Then Thomas got huffed and puffed his way to loss against Berbick.

    Wilder and Fury are levels above those alphabet champs of the 80s. LEVELS. None of them could string a couple wins together when a belt was on the line.

    IF Wilder fought John Tate in 1980 for the WBA belt, Wilder would remain champ until he came across Tyson or Holyfield at the end of the decade, when they were at their best and Wilder was older. But Wilder could conceivably beat both of them, too. Tyson didn't have the best heart. Holyfield was nearly stopped by Cooper.
     
  10. Glass City Cobra

    Glass City Cobra Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,277
    7,974
    Jan 6, 2017
    Thomas would still be roughly 2 inches shorter even if we ignore other sources and stick with the one measurement in this single instance. Wilder is a full 4 inches taller and has a longer reach than Ratliff. The reach and height difference becomes worse when the taller man is going out of his way to maintain that advantage and fighting on the outside. Ratliff was not doing this. Hence why I'm saying you can only get so much mileage out of this fight because he is not only shorter than wilder, he is not fighting tall.

    As I said, it gives us a decent idea of how he'd cope with the reach, but not a whole lot. In addition to the fact the difference in power between Ratliff and wilder is night and day. Thomas would not be impudently and constantly pressing in throwing spearing jabs to the head and body if he knew what was waiting for him (a sledgehammer right hand). That would change the entire dynamic if the bout even if wilder was the same height as radlif.

    Well as I told 70's fan I never claimed he had a "great" all time jab. But he certainly doesn't have a bad one or an average jab. Stiverne is not some amazing A level fighter but he was a very big strong dude and a belt holder and he was completely subdued by Wilder's jab basically the entire fight.

    A jabs primary function for a tall man is to maintain the distance you prefer and set up right hands. He did this extremely well. If that same Wilder shows up I would bet my entire savings account Thomas would not "easily" outjab him. Who wins the actual fight is an entirely different subject.
     
  11. Man_Machine

    Man_Machine Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,346
    5,138
    Jun 9, 2010
    Fury might be a level or two above some of the 80s titlists, but lumping Wilder and Fury together, as though they're on some kind of par, is ridiculous on its face.

    Wilder fans need to understand that Fury was LEVELS above Wilder, who was an accident waiting to happen and would have been so in any era.
     
  12. Dubblechin

    Dubblechin Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,015
    10,087
    Jun 25, 2014
    Wilder floored Fury twice and successfully defended his title against him. Name one Ring/world/lineal champ any of those 80s alphabet champs floored twice and successfully defended his heavyweight belt against ... like Wilder did?

    Tate didn't. Weaver didn't. Dokes didn't. Coetzee didn't. Page didn't. Tubbs didn't. Witherspoon didn't. Bonecrusher didn't. Thomas didn't. Berbick didn't.

    Name one of them who strung together 10 successful defenses? They didn't make 10 successful defenses COMBINED.

    Wilder is one of the most successful defending heavyweight champions in history. Top five or six all-time in terms of consecutive successful defenses.

    None of those alphabet champs in the 80s were. Wilder is levels above the 80s alphabet champs.
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2021
    the_Hawk likes this.
  13. RulesMakeItInteresting

    RulesMakeItInteresting Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,591
    6,330
    Mar 23, 2019
    These are inherently good points...but I think the competition really was better in the 80s. my friend. You just had a lot of good to very good fighters back then.

    Today, what do we have? Is Ruiz even the level of a Mike Weaver? I really doubt that.

    And AJ...could be even be compared particularly favorably to Tim Witherspoon? I just don't see that.

    And I should mention, I like Wilder by far the best out of ANY heavyweights since Lewis (I admire and respect Wlad, but he's not a favorite),
     
    Loudon likes this.
  14. Golden_Feather99

    Golden_Feather99 Active Member Full Member

    672
    986
    Apr 23, 2019
    You can't argue Wilder is a level above 80s HWs based on title defences when he went 0-3 against a guy with 0 title defences.

    You lose credibility when you write stuff like that. That punch was not "just" after the bell. The jab that Weaver landed was just after the bell. Weaver let his guard down and he clearly wasn't expecting Anthony to throw a haymaker. Not only did Anthony punch him after the bell but when Weaver started walking back to his corner, Anthony chased him down and sucker punched him again. You hurt my feelings by calling that a first round stoppage. There's also no need to bring up Weaver's record. The guy was 21-9 when he won the title. His record was always ****, not just when Pinklon fought him. Weaver was 8-1-1 in his last 10 fights and he hadn't truly lost a fight in 6 years (since Holmes defeat). He was stopped prematurely against Dokes and many people believe he won the rematch. Even if you count the stoppage loss that's still one loss in 6 years. Weaver was still highly ranked so I don't see any reason why he shouldn't have been there. I'm glad someone is defending Wilder but you gotta give the other guys credit too. They were no bums.
     
    Sangria likes this.
  15. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    39,241
    18,841
    Apr 27, 2005

    They are terrible points - tell it like it is. He's biasing in on stats that don't matter a **** and trying to use them to push Wilder ahead of other guys. We just aren't that stupid in here, we really aren't.

    Barely anyone scores the bout for Wilder and many have him winning just a single round alongside the ones he dropped Fury in.

    This was a Fury who'd fought 14 rounds in 3 years and that was against pretty ordinary opponents. He looked like a beached whale during his break and little wonder his timing was off in their first fight. He absolutely flogged the crap out of Wilder in the second fight after having another couple of tune up fights. Wilder won what, two rounds against an overconfident Fury in the final match. Sure that power provided him a couple of minutes success but Fury was up and didn't lose a single round after that hiccup.

    In the initial match Fury actually retained his lineal title with that bogus draw.

    Here's another way to look at it -

    How many 80's champs dropped someone twice and still couldn't win let alone stop them? Not once but twice!!!!

    It's all in the way you twist it and he's been twisting on this one for years.