Here's a stat - Wilder has won 5 rounds out of 30 per your average scorecard across dozens available. 3 in the first fight and 2 in the last and of course zero in the second.
As usual with the 80s HW champs, it depends on what version of that shows up. I might go as far as to say that every one of those guys was a more skilled fighter than Wilder. But they were all their own worst enemy. So basically: the very best version of any of those guys > Wilder > a lesser version of any of them
Fonzy Ratliff was not Deontay Wilder no. but at least the fonz won golden glove titles and beat Mitch Green. When Thomas fought him the fonz was a live opponent. There are precious few live opponents on Wilders resume. It was not a world title was it. Just because the WBC put their name to a vacancy in the division and selected two unsuitable fringe guys together below elite level to create a championship doesn’t make it a world title does it? It is Micky mouse. I don’t class him as a champion and I don’t believe history will either. Yes but he still had to beat a live contender in Witherspoon before this. Who was the live contender Wilder beat? he did indeed but at least Berbick was a live contender. Berbick had wins over Page, David Bey and had earned his bones in a title fight with an actual champion so he had a lot more form going into a fight with Thomas. In fact, Fury coming off that lay off and mental health problems probably didn’t have as much going for him as Berbick going into the first Wilder fight. yes this is absolutely true. I have used this against Weaver and Thomas in the past. But in this case, Thomas beat Tim Witherspoon to win that so called title. He didn’t beat stiverne to win that so called title did he? Wilder put a nice run of unbeaten fights just below world level that has mistakenly been called a title run because the WBC said it was. But it was based on a vacated title. two fringe guys were selected rather than genuine contenders. And once Wilder beat the winner the challengers were all below even that! if Wilder fought John Tate in 1980 that would be a 50-50 fight. Wilder is not necessarily matched to win like he was in his so called championship. There’s no guarantee wilder wins because unbeaten Tate beat Coetzee and Mercado and believed in himself. based on beating Stiverne? Tyson and Holyfield beat better opposition than Stiverne and Areola. Without ever beating Fury, Wilder still has no signature win!! To even make a comparison with Tyson or Evander, Wilder has to have done something at world level in his own time. At world level he did not beat Fury. That’s the only time he dipped his toe in those kinds of waters.
This says it all really. (No need for me to reply directly now). Bottom-line: Wilder couldn't beat an under par Fury on two occasions (bouts 1 and 3) and got utterly hammered by the version, who came to put the matter of the ridiculous scoring from the first fight to bed (2nd bout). Wilder fans riding on the coattails of Fury's mugging and spanking of their guy is a new internet forum fan phenomenon and perhaps the most hilarious one yet!!
Deontay Wilder won the National Golden Gloves. The US Amateur Championships. The Olympic Trials. And made it to the Olympic Semifinals, winning a bronze medal. Comparing Wilder to Ratfliff, amateur or pro, is a joke. If you're just going to compare guys you think look alike, why not compare Mike Tyson and Cliff Couser. At least they had the same dad.
He floored Fury twice and successfully defended his title against him. You have to put blinders on to "pretend" it was "no kind of success" for Wilder. Wilder defended his title against Fury twice. Wilder made two defenses AFTER successfully defending against Fury. Why, YEARS AFTER THE FACT, can't you guys accept what actually happened? Fury didn't win anything that night. Nothing. Wilder retained the title. Wilder scored all the knockdowns. Wilder walked out of the arena as the WBC champ having scored his EIGHTH successful title defense. Fury didn't win the title from Wilder until 14 months later.
Stiverne was the WBC heavyweight Champion and was rated #2 by Ring when Wilder beat him. How the hell was Stiverne not a "live" contender? https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine's_Annual_Ratings:_2014
You think Trevor Berbick was better than Tyson Fury? Trevor Berbick? That's how far you're willing to go NOT to give Wilder his due? Pinklon lost to Trevor Berbick, and Wilder successfully defended against Tyson Fury ... but you rationalize that by saying you think Berbick was better than Tyson Fury? Frankly, that's pathetic. What is it with all these long-time posters willing to say the dumbest garbage ever to just to try to diminish Wilder's accomplishments. It boggles my mind. What was Berbick ... a year and a half removed from losing to freaking S.T. Gordon? I don't know if I can even have a conversation with you about this. Seriously. Deontay Wilder was better than all those 80s alphabet champs. Wilder knocked out everyone he faced except for the WORLD champion, who he dropped FOUR times in their fights. Wilder put together 10 successful title defenses, fifth ALL-TIME in terms of most consecutive title defenses. Wilder didn't get knocked out twice by Mark Wills. Didn't lose to S.T. Gordon. Didn't get KOed in one by 18-5 Bonecrusher Smith (who was coming off a loss to Marvis Frazier earlier that year). He only lost to the World Champ. And the World Champ had to get off the floor four times to do it.
Yeah, I have no problem accepting that Wilder got a gift draw against a Fury who was still recovering from his long layoff of drinking and snorting, and then got smashed into the ground by a recovered Fury who decided to take it out of the judges' hands.
Because most of us saw an objectionable robbery. As the most pro-Wilder poster on the forum, it's natural enough you should ignore this, that you can't accept what actually happened in the opinion of most...but doing that while criticising others for similar seems off.
Once again, for the THOUSANDTH time, Wilder didn't fight the fat drunk who showed up at the Wlad Klitschko press conference TWO YEARS EARLIER. Tyson Fury was in great shape for their first fight. Tyson Fury was fighting in his THIRD FIGHT IN SIX MONTHS when he fought Wilder. Fury was the most active heavyweight in the division at that point when he stepped in the ring to fight Wilder. (Or name a heavyweight more ACTIVE than Fury in the six months leading up to the first Wilder fight?) So don't get bogged down in all this negative garbage about Fury, most of which was spread by guys who gave Fury ZERO chance to win before the fight ... and never could admit Fury looked great that night. Because admitting Fury looked great meant they were not only wrong about Fury ... they were wrong about Wilder. And they were wrong about both of them. This content is protected
I accept what actually happened. People's "opinions" don't tend to change what actually happened. Like people's "opinions" were there was a child sex ring going on inside a Washington D.C. pizzeria. What ACTUALLY happened was the Pizzeria was selling pizzas. I just tend to go with what actually occurred. Like Wilder floored his challenger Fury two times and successfully defended his title with a draw. Like Lewis, Holyfield, Rahman, Byrd, Jack Johnson, Tommy Burns successfully defended their titles with draws as well, minus scoring the two knockdowns against their challengers doing so. Sue me.
Right, but you know and understand that when the judges find a result that most of the viewing public finds objectionable that this affects feelings surrounding that fight not matter how far into "future" one might travel? Absolutely no need to start ranging about child sex btw.
