Wilder-Ruiz is a comical mismatch

"The same Wlad who got knocked out 3 times in his prime yet AJ struggled to beat a 40 year old Wlad and almost got knocked out by him." - joebojoejoeson

From the horse's mouth: Wlad was KO'd 3 times in his prime and Morrison at his peak was better than Wlad, period.

And now you're claiming that you never said Morrison was better than Wlad. What a dishonest rat.

"there have been tons of 6'5 boxers since the 1970's"

There were also plenty before the 70's too but they lacked speed and co-ordination, Steward talks about this. Ali at about 6'3, 215 lbs was taller than any previous dominant champion and heavier than most of his opponents. In the 90's the best heavyweight champions got bigger at around 6'5, 240 lbs. Fury at around 6'7, 260 is bigger still. The consistent trend over the entirety of heavyweight history, with a few exceptions, has been toward bigger champions. Even Usyk would have been a pretty big heavyweight in the 70's or 80's.

"My point stands kid, there are weight class in boxing not height classes"

There aren't separate categories for southpaw and orthodox either, it doesn't follow that stance is irrelevant and that there isn't a southpaw advantage. Weight is regarded as being the most important factor (up to a point, at which you become far less mobile and evasive) but it doesn't mean that height and reach are not important. Nor does Andy Ruiz beating Joshua mean that he's not at a physical disadvantage vs Wilder. You have feeble powers of logic.

 

"I disagree with the surgical mutilation and chemical castration of children, but that's my belief, it doesn't mean I'm right and they're wrong"

"I disagree with child grooming and paedophilia, but that's my my belief, it doesn't mean I'm right and they're wrong"

This is the kind of cowardly filth that we have in the teaching profession unfortunately: even those who aren't overly enthusiastic about child abuse will go along with it and turn a blind eye.

 

The context is clear; you claim to not agree with child transsexuality personally but you also don't have any strong feelings about it, hence "it doesn't mean I'm right and they're wrong". It's an apologia for an abhorrent practice, in the same way that a nonce apologist might say "I don't agree with paedophilia but it doesn't mean that I'm right and they're wrong". Anyone who says that is defending paedophilia by relativising it, ditto child transsexuality in your case.

 

I don't know who that is but I would find it hilarious and bizarre in equal measure if a 5'11 morbidly obese Mexican KO'd the two longest reigning black HW champions of the last 20 years. You could have got at least 500/1 odds on that a few years ago.

 

I don't like the cliché but "styles make fights" applies here. Joshua has the size and power to trouble Wilder. I think Wilder would spark him but it's not a forgone conclusion to me as Wilder-Ruiz is.

Wilder dominating Ruiz wouldn't do good things for Joshua mentally though. He admitted that seeing Wilder wipe out Breazeale in 1 affected him mentally before the Ruiz fight, made him feel he had more to prove. Hearn is clearly desperate for Ruiz to win and is picking him to beat Wilder, just as he picked Helenius to beat Wilder. Despite Wilder-Joshua being a mega money fight and Joshua-Ruiz 3 being lacklustre by comparison. That says a lot to me.