Yeah. Equalizer + poor opposition kept him on top longer than expected. But as we've seen with fighters on that vein they usually aren't able to pick the pieces back up after they've been found out. Only time will tell if that's the case with him but history is not on his side.
Deontay Wilder is already in the top 10 all time in heavyweight history when it comes to the number of heavyweight title fight wins, the number of successful heavyweight title defenses and the longest single heavyweight title reign (not combined reigns). I believe everyone in or around the top 10 in those categories is in the Hall of Fame. Whether people care to admit it or not, the only person who reigned longer in the 2010s than Wilder at heavyweight was Wlad Klitschko. Wlad was the champ when the decade began January 1, 2010 and he reigned until November 2015. Wilder reigned from January 2015 through the start of the new decade in January 2020. Wlad made 12 successful defenses during that period. Wilder made 10. And Wilder's career isn't over yet. So, yes, I think it will be difficult to keep Wilder out. Everyone isn't as jaded or biased as the people on this board. And, if he beats Fury in their third fight, Wilder and Fury will probably go in together. (LOL)
Easily comparible. GGG won a bunch of paper titles and defended them against nothing but bums until he stepped up and scraped a controversial win off of Danny jacobs. What's the difference other than you just like one guys style more than the other?
The other thread established that the consensus is that Alexander Povetkin is a sure fire Hall of Famer. He has never held a legitimate world title, so it depends on your criteria. Neither would be first ballot but if pressed, I think Deontay Wilder would be more fitting virtue of his title reign, as doleful as that is. I don't think that defeating the likes of Carlos Takam, Dillian Whyte, Ruslan Chagaev and Marco Huck brings about Hall of Fame status, why would it? Those are only slightly better names than Deontay Wilder has beaten, but Deontay Wilder has the seemingly highly regarded KO percentage and perceived fear factor. Alexander Povetkin has multiple failed drug tests looming over his head - despite the fact that this would have no bearing on how I would judge him, considering my beliefs on anti-doping governance, policy and sports 'medicine'.
Well for starters I don't count Golovkin's time as 'interim' champ as legit in terms of world title fight defences. We all know that Golovkin's prime saw the top guys at 154 and 160 reluctant to fight him at 10. Even Jacobs had to be coaxed into finally accepting to take his mandated shot at him. He got the W and then went on to beat p4p rated Canelo for the vast majority of people and chalked up another solid win over Derevyanchenko whilst in the tail end of his career. On his way up he was massively held back in Germany and ducked by Sturm, Sylvester, Martinez, Cotto, Quillin, JCC Jr, BJS, CEJ and a host of others. He signed up to fight the super slick and highly rated Pirog without issue and that fight was stolen from him by injury. Compare that with Wilder who did his level best to avoid anyone with a pulse on the way up and then got his dominated against the first top tier talent he was tricked into fighting. Not comparable situations at all. Wilder didn't terrify his division. He cherrypicked it. And before we go on the Golovkin wasn't actually as good as people made him out to be, yep I think that's a valid point. It's just a shame the middleweights of the time didn't have the stones to try to prove it.
Wilder's handlers had so little faith in him they didn't even put him in against Martin in a unification. It's for the best, though. We didn't need Wilder holding TWO belts hostage.
Middleweights of golovkins era were horrendous. It's literally impossible to cherry pick a division that is that bad across the board. Wilder fought Fury, GGG fought canelo. Beyond that they both have empty calorie title defenses. GGG might have been abetter fighter, but his title reign and resume of accomplishments were not
You think a run of Sturm, Pirog, Martinez, JCC, Canelo and Jacobs would have been bad? You're out of your mind. And Golovkin was the older man being waited out against a younger reluctant guy who got popped for PEDs and he still went out there and handled his business. Wilder chased a guy who dropped the equivalent of Ricky Hatton in weight and fought two no hopers after a several drug binge losing 10/12 rounds before getting beaten from pillar to post in the rematch. Like what are you not getting here? Golovkin made some bad decisions and got frozen out in his prime years but Wilder straight bitched out when asked to prove himself. There's no comparison.
it's only comparable to you because your depth of research capable is paper thin, and not to mention, you are just a freakin board troll/idiot. Or you can try to prove yourself, post each guys wins versus top ten rankled opponents. Unless you are nothing but a troll....
