Who has a better resume? Povetkin or Wilder?

So you're somehow glorifying Wilder because a different fighter had the bollocks to step up and was cheated out of a competitive fight by one of the worst refereeing performances of the modern era?

I hope you and @Jackomano did your stretches today, because that's some mind bubbling mental gymnastics right there and I'd hate to see you strain something...

Wins over Chagaev, Takam and Perez defecate all over Stiverne and whatever bums happen to be Wilder's second/third best wins.

 

In my opinion there's no question about it. Of course Povetkin: Chambers, Chagaev, Takam, Perez easily beat all the opposition Wilder

 

Easily Povetkin.

Wilder only ever fought one top 10 rated opponent in Stiverne.

Povetkin's resume consists of Byrd, Chambers, Chagaev, Huck, Takam, Perez and many more solid opponents.

In fact, if we combine the record ratios of their respective opponents, Povetkin's opponents' win/lose ratio will be incomparably superior.

 

This is a joke question lol.
Povetkin has fought stiffer comps by a wide margin.
Drugs allegation aside, I think prime Povetkin would have beaten Wilder as well.

 

For me, Wilder.

Povetkin to me is the better boxer and I would've betted on him to beat Wilder last year, but you cant count out Wilders power. Im still gutted we didnt get to see that fight.

 

They're talking about RESUME.

Not who would win H2H, which is up for debate although I still back Povetkin.

Hell, even Charr, who nobody has even mentioned yet, is as good as anything on Wilder's resume and many feel that maybe he should have gotten the nod over Duhaupas who is one of Wilder's top 3 wins. Povetkin stopped both these guys in emphatic fashion.

 

I think he still beats Wilder. He gets in close and savages him with his short hooks and uppercuts. Povetkin is a superb inside fighter.

 

I mean, I think people are a little harsh on Wilder lately but Povetkin's resume is much better.

 

Yeah I know they're talking about resume. You pick which one you like and I chose who I did - Wilder. I also added my opinion on the two had they fought, just like some others have also done.

Povetkin has fought far far better opponents but I like Wilders resume because he's fought more and won more and is undefeated with a massive KO percentage. It's subjective.

 

But those numbers are horrifically bloated by the sheer volume of bums Wilder has fought. It's not as strictly subjective as you're making it out to be, ask yourself this: had he fought the names on Povetkin's resume, would he be undefeated? Would he still have a 97% KO ratio? Probably not.

A resume should be defined by the opposition and their quality, not percentages.

 

Povetkin no doubt

 

No it is subjective. Hence the poll lol. I agree with what youre saying about Wilders past opponents.

I think Povetkin would win as I said before, but we will never know, and whos fault is it that we will never know? whose fault did that fight not happen? I asked myself what you asked me to ask, and I guessed, but I will never know

We look at a resume for details about what you've done, achieved and where you're at. You said resumes should be defined on details like quality of opponents and that works against Wilder in both our opinions. The Wilder fanboys might say "Ok, what about how Povetkin was fighting under PEDs (cheating) in some if not all those fights", so you see, Im not all for those extra details where opinions get throwin around. I just take what Im given on the resume and come to my own personal conclusion.

I already stated Povetkins fought far far better opposition. So when you want to tell me why Povetkins resume is better, consider what I said underneath.

I hope you understand that Im comparing this to Wilders opponents. Not everyone will agree with each other, some will have their own taste, subjective

 

in the pro ranks, each has a weak resume apart from one fair win, at equal ages that is.
for fair consideration you need to judge fighters at same point in their careers, that is.


in the ams, pov stomps.

 

"Povetkin has fought far, far better opposition, and he has better wins ..... but Wilder has the better resume"

I'm sorry but that sentence just doesn't make any sense to me in the slightest.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the matter, I personally prefer quality wins when I assess a resume, you clearly prefer quantity (despite the fact it is bloated by C and D tier opponents). I objectively think you are assessing a fighter's resume incorrectly but i guess you're entitled to your opinion.

But allow me to part with a quick question in an attempt to make you reconsider. In the first five years of their careers JCC fought nearly twice as many fights as Floyd; so who's resume would you consider stronger? JCC after his first 50 fights or Floyd after his first 25?

 

No you're twisting words. I will never do that to you, trust me. I choose to fully hear and understand what one says that way I can understand how one comes to conclusions.

Heres what I said...

I told you before, its subjective but you said it's not. Do you now understand? I said 'I like'.