Titles don't equate to necessarily a better resume. Just because Wilder holds a belt does not mean he has a better resume.
you are looking at this all wrong - if you want to compare like 4 like, then consider Wlad 5 fights on to Wilder 5 fights on. 5 fights on, Wlad wasnt able to hold onto even his unrecognised, bargain basement title. Wilder has managed it, and with a real world title. Both have paucity in title resume during this time, but wlad is the one with the lesser in all categories - titles, losses etc.
Yeah and probably already leads this list, crazy No. you're doing your own thread wrong. Firstly by seemingly not allowing my opinion to be different than yours, even though I've tried to shut the argument down a couple times already now. Secondly Question wasn't about 5 fights on. Nor was it about what it'll be at their respective careers' end, I could point to what will be a landslide victory to Wlad in that department, but I won't because it's not relevant here. Regarding your suggestion of equalities in the resume, see what Papillon has just said before, because I that's how I'm seeing it.
I also think Peter was a significant win- & don't remember him being called a 6 rounder...at least not reel time. 6 round fighters don't get 10th round knockdowns like Peter did going the distance with Wlad. Went the distant with JT, twice, went the distance and survived knockdowns vs McCline. Decent slugfest with Maskaev and stopped him. I thought Peter was just exposed as being limited in skills. Again- IMO. As far as the topic : Rank these most prominent HWs by resume -How I see it: AJ LAST 8 FOES 225-10 DWILD 8 FOES 199-12 their opponents are about as weak as in any previous era. Could today's Stiverne & Parkers have been the 90's B. Cooper, T. Morrison? The 80's James Tillis, T. Berbick? The 70s T. Cobb, O. Bonavena? The 60s Doug Jones, C. Williams? As far as recognized titles? Is subjective- or related to era also. I recognize IBF, WBA & the coveted Green belt dating back to Ali aka WBC. IMO guys like Manny Pacquaio made the WBO a worthy belt. Before him, it was a trinket. So those international titles, intercontinental, interim titles, conjunction-function titles, IBO, NABF, USBA- they're worthless trinkets. Lennox - I would never call his era weak- Ring Magazine, KO, BOXING & ESPN- 1990-91 Ratings 1. Holy 27-0 2. Bowe 30-0 3. Ruddock 26-3-1 4. Holmes 54-3 5. Moorer 29-0 6. Witherspoon 37-3 7. Tucker 44-1 8. Forman 71-3 9. Lewis 20-0 10. Mercer 18-1 Up in coming was undefeated David Tua, Ike Ibeabuchi, Michael Grant-- If Lennox era was weak, than today's is a god-awful-friggin' shame. IMO neither AJ nor Dwild would've survived that list without losing their "0" But if I had to add value to his belts...then he has a far superior resume than Wilder. His resume outshines all HW the past 10 years or so, but I can't rank him with the other eras because I don't see comparison rather contrast.
resume by age 30 Muhammad Ali - Olympic gold, Archie Moore, Doug Jones, Sonny Liston x2, Floyd Patterson x2, George Chuvalo x2, Karl Mildenberger, Ernie Terrell, Zora Foley, Jerry Quarry x2, Oscar Bonavena, Jimmy Ellis Joe Louis - Primo Carnera, King Levinsky, Max Baer, Paulino Uzcudun, Jack Sharkey, James Braddock, Tommy Farr, Max Schmeling, Tony Galento, Arturo Godoy, Buddy Baer, Billy Conn, Lou Nova Mike Tyson - James Tillis, Trevor Berbick, James Smith, Pinklon Thomas, Tony Tucker, Larry Holmes, Michael Spinks, Frank Bruno, Donnovan Ruddock x2,
yeh this kind of kills of this posts debate really. None of the guys I listed hold a candle to this kind of sheer deliverance. If we made a list to include 20th centuiry HWs, guys like vitali would barely register in a top 100.
U tried to shut it down with sam peter. mmm. a weak win. We've shown weak wins for all the fighters listed. But even if I concede its a significant win, (and you have a kind of case, since Pater went onto hold a title briefly like stiverne) then Wlad still trails the others, since he doesnt share their title holding ability of those higher on the list. So nothing changed, except your pretence that something has changed. it wasnt, I didnt want it to be, I was just following a reference you made. It never will be about that, so case closed there.
at the most, peter is equivalent to stiverne, a transient, one off title holder. Beating Peter would beno better than beating Stiverne, and probably less if we arent being Waldocentric, since Stiverne had a title, Peter didnt climb to that height till later ( i believe, though correct me if i am wrong, I cannot be bothered to check that fatso's wiki page).