If Wilder Never Fought Again..?

sorry he dont rank
his cv is just to weak way to weak
three fury fights
two he got absolutely battered
does not get in the hall of fame imo

 

Two contenders then. I had Fury winning soundly.

 

Fergy was talking resume tho.

I don't think he'd do near that well personally.

 

Top 30? Based on what?
Stiverne and Kong are both crap and like Wilder untested against anyone of note in the division.
His power is grossly overrated as the only decent person he fought he couldn't KO. I'm not convinced he knocks everyone else out as he's untested. Blasting bums does not make you great. I think he get's starched by quite a few of the 90's top dogs.
Even if I give the benefit of the doubt and go well top 30 H2H. again based on what?
I think Wilder gets beat by more of the current top dogs than many on here think. Power is only good if you have the skill to land it.
Wilder fought a very unfit Fury on two occasions and at this point Fury is massively overrated based on very little that has happened in reality.
Wilder is an over achiever and has done well for himself. but is nowhere near the ATG converstaion.

 

His resume is very thin. Stiverne twice, Ortiz and a total gift in a draw with a 50% Fury.

When you consider how many great heavyweights there have been it's hard see how you could have him top 30.

In his era alone Fury, Joshua and Usyk rank higher and I'd say Povetkin was better to. So maybe Wilder was 5th in his own era, maybe 6th if Whyte does the unthinkable or does something else that clearly takes him ahead of Wilder.

Then prior to this era you had Wlad and Vitali.

Then before them you had Lewis, Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson and maybe even Moorer who's win over Holyfield is better than Wilder's entire resume.

Then you had Holmes, Norton, Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Liston, Marciano, Charles, Walcott, Louis, Dempsey, Tunney, Baer, Johnson, Corbett, Sullivan, Langford, Patterson, Braddock.

That's 31 guys, then you throw in the John Ruiz, Chris Byrd's, who might have as many title defences but you could argue they have better resumes. So no definitely not top 30.

But he probably does better head to head as many of the older heavies would just be too small.

 

Based on what? This is the same spastic thinking that Fury beats everyone because of reasons.
You can't rate someone if they've spent there career fighting bums
The only decent fighter Wilder fought was an unfit Fury who was hardly in elite shape.

 

Based on his power.

As I've said, he's like a modern day Earnie Shavers. And the numbers I listed are about what Shavers would do as well. With that level of power, even against true ATGs, they're going to land some lucky shots and ice a few.

 

Wilder's a 'one trick pony,' with his only fight strategy being to set up a big right hand to the head to KO his opponent, due to his limited technical ability and lack of intelligence. That works again the Spilkaz and Molinas of the world, but when you start fighting legitimate competitors, it becomes increasingly ineffectual. Could you imagine how discouraged Wilder would get after hitting someone like Joyce with his biggest bombs, with no effect whatsoever?

 

Can you imagine Joe Joyce even winning a major title? (Because he hasn't yet.)
Can you imagine Joe Joyce making 10 successful title defenses? (Because he hasn't yet.)
Can you imagine Joe Joyce holding the title for five straight years? (Because he hasn't yet.)
Can you imagine Joe Joyce going undefeated for 12 years? (Because he hasn't yet.)
Can you imagine Joe Joyce knocking out everyone he faced over those 12 years? (Because he already failed at that.)

Can you imagine Joe Joyce having more successful defenses in a single reign than everyone in heavyweight championship history except Louis, Holmes and Wlad?

If Wilder was a "one trick pony" that was a helluva trick.

 

All that means nothing when you've got a resume as thin as Wilder's. His one decent win is old man Ortiz, and Ortiz himself was absurdly overhyped to make Wilder look good (this is the same Ortiz who just went life and death with a journeyman).

 

Wilder is one of the top 3 heavyweights of his era.

Wilder has never been rated lower than the #3 contender in the Ring ratings in the last seven years ... and sits as the #3 contender now.

Nobody else rated above him currently has been rated that high for that long.

If he falls out of the top 3 in year EIGHT of being there, that would be understandable.

Wilder has been in the Ring top 10 for an incredible 400+ straight weeks. By comparison, Usyk has been there for 31 weeks. Fury for 161 straight weeks.

That's a pretty incredible run at the very top.

 

solid post
couldnt of put it any better

 

All that means is Wilder is one of the longest reigning and most successful heavyweight champions in history ... and Joe Joyce hasn't won anything yet as a pro.

Wilder has been in the Ring Top 3 at heavyweight for seven years. Joyce got in the Ring top 10 (at the very bottom) what was it, two months ago?

I like Joe Joyce. I hope he becomes a champion soon. But Joe Joyce is one month older than Wilder and, by comparison, hasn't accomplished **** at heavyweight yet.

So spare me the "can you imagine if Wilder fought Joyce" garbage.

Facts.

 

Current era:

1) Fury - top 20
2) Joshua - top 30
3) Wilder - top 40

 

Wasted talent. Fought bums to prop up his pathetic reign, all the while ducking the best.
When he did fight the best, he was proven for what he was. A one trick pony.
Like a fart in the wind.