Wilder`s 10 world title opponents v Ali`s 10 win streak world title opponents

No he didn’t, he had an official draw to fury

 

*yawn*

 

1. Wepner- Molina (Toss up. Molina might be better. Beat Adamek. Who did Wepner beat again?)
2. Lyle-Duhaupas (Lyle)
3. Bugner-Szpilka (Bugner)
4. Frazier-Arreola (Frazier by a mile)
5. Coopman-Washington (Washington)
6. Young-Stiverne (Young)
7. Dunn-Ortiz (Ortiz)
8. Norton-Fury (Fury - Both considered robberies by some. Wilder floored Fury twice. Ali didn't floor Norton ever. Fury is better than Norton.)
9. Evangelista-Breazeale (Breazeale)
10. Shavers-Ortiz (Ortiz)

5-5 if you think Wepner is better than Molina. Otherwise, it's an upset.

 

Boxrec's ratings for each opponent:

1. Wepner (536.4) - Molina (94.67)
2. Lyle (774.3) -Duhaupas (124.0)
3. Bugner (1290) -Szpilka (197.0)
4. Frazier (2201) -Arreola (99.68)
5. Coopman (391.1) -Washington (121.3)
6. Young (933.1) -Stiverne (88.74)
7. Dunn (620.9) -Ortiz (418.6)
8. Norton (1695) -Fury (401.6) - DRAW
9. Evangelista (287.7) -Breazeale (192.9)
10. Shavers (1000) -Ortiz (363.7)

Worth noting that anyone rated around 400 has had Wilder managing to pluck victory from the jaws of defeat with some vulgar displays of power.

 

Wepner beat Ernie Terrell who faced Ali for the title himself in his first 9 fight defense streak and held the WBA heavyweight title. He was a 6'6" beast and Wepner was one of the few men who almost matched him in size at 6'5". Yes heavyweights were quite big then too.

 

Wepner>Molina
Lyle>>Duhaupas
Bugner>>Szpilka
Frazier>>>Arreola
Coopman<Washington
Young>Stiverne
Dunn<<Ortiz
Norton>Fury (Fury isn't better than Norton was, at least that's not been confirmed yet, especially that version of Fury)
Evangelista=Breazeale
Shavers=Ortiz (Shavers at that point is about equal to an ancient Ortiz)
8-4 total score.

 

I have been watching boxing since the mid 1970s and have followed boxing online since the internet was readily available in the 1980s, and I have ZERO freaking idea what the hell a 536.4 and a 391.1 boxing RATING means ...

If you're trying to say WITHOUT SAYING IT that Jean-Pierre Coopman was MORE THAN THREE TIMES the fighter Gerald Washington is and Richard Dunn was a whole level above Luis Ortiz ... that is a joke.

 

I know who Ernie Terrell was. Terrell wasn't a beast in 1973. I think Molina and Wepner were close in calibre. I'd probably lean toward Wepner, too. But Terrell was done when Wepner faced him. Terrell was done with boxing, then had a failed music career, and then returned to boxing. He was done that year and retired for good.

Wepner and Molina were basically the same size. And Wepner lost to everyone. But Molina's on-again, off-again desire and heart lead me to pick Wepner, just because he'd want it more. I'm not too high on Molina. But he did knock out a long-in-the-tooth Adamek in Poland when Adamek had a little something left. That was good, compared to Wepner's wins.

Whatever. Wepner seems like the right pick.

 

I'm not saying he's good but that win is better than anything Molina did.

 

Did you see Wepner-Terrell and Molina-Adamek?

On paper, Trevor Berbick winning a wide unanimous decision over Muhammad Ali is better than anything Sonny Liston ever did, too, until you see it.

 

I understand this post is theoretical and all but does Boxrec point rankings take into account the advantages modern fighters have? As Mike Tyson once said no one wants to admit that boxers and athletes in general get better as time keeps moving forward. Modern fighters have access to

1. Better nutrition
2. Better medical, dental, vision treatment
3. Vastly improved training technologies
4. Better supplements

Today’s fighters reap many benefits from the advancements in both nutritional as well as exercise science. Today’s fighters are not only accompanied by their head trainer, cut-man, and second corner-man; they are also joined by a nutritionist who oversees the fighter’s diet with customized diets as well as a strict eating schedule.
They also bring in a strength and conditioning to coach, to ensure the fighter is recovering from his/her workouts so they can be in optimal fighting shape. The training methods employed by these coaches include plyometrics, which aid in explosiveness.

The most glaring change that today’s fighters have is their immense size advantage. In today’s heavyweight landscape, the average heavyweight stands at approximately 6’6 in height with an average weight of 245lbs. That is huge leap from the days of the 1940s, 50s, 60s and 70s, where the average heavyweight was 6’2 215lbs. Could you imagine Floyd Patterson in against Tyson Fury?

Boxing gloves have also come a long way. More padding, foam versus horse hair, more weight from 4 or 6oz to 10. The point I’m trying to make is when you face off say Ken Norton vs Tyson Fury, these things do matter. Makes it harder to compare them in a hypothetical versus matchup.

 

Nope. I was throwing it out there to see what reactions I'd get I have a pretty strong belief that comparing across multiple generations is ******ed because there are so many variables, the styles, training, sizes, etc etc have changed so much and I actually think if anything - there is a VERY good chance that Ali would not do anywhere near as well in the current "weak" heavyweight division as people make out.

Like I'm not saying he wouldn't be competitive, but people rip on the current division as though it's as weak as ever - and if that were the case, then the "GOAT" Ali won't be able to even find someone to have a competitive fight with. Any fight would be a relatively easy one. I find that VERY hard to believe.