Joshua's average opponent record - 25W 6L. Wilder's average opponent record - 17W 8L

Sometimes records tell a story. A bit of both worlds on AJ's resume.
Started off somewhat typical? 1st win was over Emanuelo Leo @ 8-0. His record was shady as he fought 1 dude 3 times. Some Sandor Balogh when he was 1-11. 3-22 & then again at 3-31-4 & some dude who was 6-67. Point: After he loss to AJ, he retired at 8-1.

Of his 1st 13 opponents 12 of them got their azzes toe' up in at least 4 out their last 5 fights. He defeated 3 guys who are ranked top 10 in Whyte, Povetkin & Parker which IMO means a lot.

AJ's last 8 fights have been reputable, he handled his business. I'd say overall AJ has a better resume. Not so much because of their combined wins, but where these guy ranked when AJ defeated them!

 

I ain't buying it.
Wilder's two best wins have really sh1t, completely un-noteworthy careers.
He lost to Fury.
He has no decent win on his record imo and is yet to best a prime fighter who has any relevance in his own era.
If you want to claim he's a "top" HW then fine but the stats and facts simply don't back up that opinion.

 

That’s just standard stuff anyway.only the likes of Lomochenko have stepped up immediately,standard way of turning pro and rising through the ranks is to go the long way which means gaining experience by fighting gate keepers and the like.
In Joshua’s case he’d not gone past five rounds until he fought Whyte if my memory serves me right?In Wilders case they took this to extremes with many opponents who were un ranked and those that were was outside the top 100.

 

I just did this breakdown in another thread to boot Wladamir opponents had a 79% win percentage. I should do fury but i'm not too motivated to lol I was actually surprised at Joshua's to be honest that's impressive.

 

I am however motivated to do ATG lewis 1088 wins 230 losses 82.5 percent

 

I did Klitschko ( wlad) And Lewis,

Lewis 1088 wins 230 losses 82.5 percent
Wlad's 1680 wins to 353 losses 79% percent
I would do Holyfield, but i have no respect for due to his alias Evan Fields just like Toney when you are a steroid cheat you can eff of IMO.

 

Ortiz and Stiverne I were good wins. Of course it's nothing to really brag about, but at the time they were solid W's.
Overall Wilder has an OK resume which would make him a top contender in any era.

But the problem is that he has held a belt for a long ass time now and faced only 3 top 10 contenders. 3 in 4 years...
His title reign is filled with guys he should have fought before he fought for a title.

 

Nope. Time will tell how these wins are rated but imo the only thing giving Wilder any sort of champion credibility right now is narrative and bluster.
Any objective person digging through Wilder's career to date would really struggle to see what all the fuss was about.
If he had done exactly the same things without a belt attached and/or been from a small country, he'd rightfully be maybe top 20/15.
His entire career, and by extension Luis Ortiz's career, is a complete ruse.

 

I am no Wilder fanboy but wtf?
Ortiz and Stiverne were seen as top 10 contenders by the overwhelming majority.
They were OK wins. (again, nothing to brag about, but good wins)

And name me those 19 guys who right now have a better resume.

 

Look, Wilder is a top 5 HW right now, that's a fact and something he's achieved with blistering KO victories so kudos to him.
But let's not get it twisted: the UK is the home of HW boxing now and has been since Fury beat Klitschko.
The US is still coming to terms with losing it's status and Wilder is the personification of this failure to recognise.
Stiverne and to a lesser degree Ortiz only have real relevance in the division if you're in the US-centric bubble.
Objectively, there is nothing to separate Ortiz or Stiverne from the plethora of 2nd tier HWs. Only the US media spin puts either above the likes of Pulev, Chisora, H Fury etc etc.
For a 4+ year champ to be glorifying their wins over Chisora and Pulev would be utterly underwhelming if not totally laughable but that is exactly what Wilder backers are doing.....they just can't see it from their insular point of view.

 

This I agree with. Ortiz and Stiverne were relevant but nothing to brag home about. (I do think Ortiz is a fantastic boxer, but he never beat that elite opponent. So it's skills over resume)
I do think that anyone reasonable would say Chisora is better/greater than Stiverne. Just that Stiverne was relevant at the time and he was a top contender.
But like you said, 3 top 10 contenders in 4 years? Wtf?

Besides that, Wilder's resume is fine. It's just that hes a supposed "world champion" yet hardly fights top competition.

 

And in half the fights lol