Mark Breland is out for blood. WAR BRELAND

Look, I'm neither here nor there on either of these two. I'm saying that theoretically that if both fighters were to have the same records regarding Fury that Joshua would have the better record of the two.

 

WIlder also didn't defend his title against Fury. He drew once and lost. That hardly constitutes two defenses. You defend a title when you beat the other guy.

 

That's true Breland didn't beat a pastry chef, a special needs teacher, a sixty year old man, a polish sausage and scuba diver. Those are indeed big holes in his resume.

 

Deontay Wilder defended his WBC title against Tyson Fury twice. This first fight was a draw, and a successful defense, he made two more defenses and then he lost the return and his title to Fury.

And with that, I think we're done.

If you want to argue that Wilder didn't defend his WBC title twice against Fury ... you are wrong. He did.

 

Or Jorge Vaca.

 

Technically he defended it once, the second time he lost it.

Yes he made two defences, but only a successful defence can be considered him defending it.

 

Wilder: "Cheater".............. Yeah that's literally all that was said by Deontay. *rolls eyes*.

Your posts are as cherry picked as Wilders opponents.

 

Oh my god.

You can't win a belt if someone isn't defending it. If Wilder wasn't defending the belt, give him his sanctioning fee and the belt back.

He didn't successfully defend it. He lost it.

When a champ isn't defending a belt, it's a non-title fight.

How long have you guys been following boxing?

 

Clearly, this thread is over.

 

keep on telling yourself that it’s everyone else’s fault but Wilder.

 

defended is past tense as you implied it he defended it twice which is wrong he lost the rematch in embarrassing fashion he had one successful defense against Fury which was a draw not a win. the best fighter Wilder has ever beat was either Stivern or Ortiz and both are worse then Joshua or Klitschko's wins.

 

Defending is different from defended. Defending is the process, defended is the successful outcome of that process.

 

Exactly. Not hard to grasp is it?

Truely mind bubbling some people don't know the difference.

 

Yep, but Wildettes have to twist themselves into a pretzel to justify the crap record and all the antics since he lost.

 

You know, this has been fun arguing back and forth, sorry Miniq got banned for whatever happened, it's fun going back and forth with him.

I don't know who either of you guys are, but I'm not going to argue with you about what a title defense is. Go learn what it is and come back some other day.

Wilder defended the title twice against Fury. Brought the belt to the ring twice. Paid a sanctioning fee against Fury twice. Once he was successful. Once he was unsuccessful. Now Fury is the WBC champ, Wilder isn't.

If you don't defend it, no one can win it from you.

Because Wilder defended it against Fury twice, Fury was able to win it from him the second time around.

The fact you've got nothing left to say about anything on this topic except to argue over when to use "ing" and "ed" shows the thread is dead.

And having to explain this to you isn't fun at all. So. Bye.