Wilder's resume

Minus the dirty tactics the cut was still bad enough o have justifiably been stopped on a referees call

That's the point

Don't tell me you have not seen fights stopped for less

 

If Ruiz can destroy Joshua than Parker, Povetkin, and Klitschko would too because they're better than Ruiz. Oh wait

 

None of that ocurred before the cut

He could have justifiably won...end of

 

My point is the could have stopped the fight with no legitimate complaints and Wallin could have scored an upset

All before he used any such tactics

Thus no opportunity to use dirty tactics

Stop skipping over what my point is

 

Are you genuinely claiming Wilders resume is better than Joshua's?

 

He seems to think that because Ortiz beat Jennings, that Ortiz is better than any other win on everyone else's resume.

 

Actually, if we're being honest, and none of you seem to be honest when it comes to Wilder ... IF WILDER NEVER HELD A BELT ... and had the same record he has now ... he'd be MORE WIDELY REGARDED ... not less regarded.

If he went 12 years without a loss or a title fight ... knocked out everyone he fought for 12 years ... destroyed eight or nine WBC-rated heavyweights ... floored Luis Ortiz five times and stopped him twice ... floored Tyson Fury twice in a 12-round draw in a non-title fight ...

And his lone loss in his entire career was for the vacant WORLD/Ring title against Tyson Fury ... most of you guys would be calling Wilder the greatest heavyweight ever to never win a world title.

I'm firmly convinced most of you dislike him because you are from the UK and the last five or six years has been the greatest era in British heavyweight history ... and Wilder has been the lone "Fly in the Ointment" ... if you will.

HE ruined the party when he held the only belt Joshua has never won ... and he continues to do so by ruining your precious Fury-Joshua unification. If he beats Fury in a couple weeks, you may never see that match.

So you hate him for it.

It's as simple as that. Because the HATE people have for this guy is ludicrous.

He is always in shape. He is arguably the most exciting heavyweight on the planet INSIDE the ring. HE knocks out everyone.

But some of you don't have a single nice thing to say about him ... because he ruined that all-British party.

That's the only reason I can think of. Because the hate directed at him by Brits is totally irrational.

If he was the #1 Heavyweight Contender and he had the same 42-1-1 (41-KOs) pro record and never held a heavyweight title ... most of you would probably be rooting for him to finally WIN a world title.

 

Complete bollocks

 

Pulev should rightly have been stopped in the third round of the AJ fight when he literally turned his back and ran away. After that it just looked like Joshua wanted to get some rounds in, knowing he was in no danger. He did that against Breazeale as well. Both those later stoppages aren't indicative of him struggling, but rather of him not feeling the urgency to put his man away.

Jennings tried to win the Wlad fight, but the fact he fought in such an ultra cautious defensive style limited his options for fluid attacking movements. He was limited to trying to walk down Wlad (when he wasn't pinned to the ropes) throwing one or two cuffing left hooks or weak overhands that minimised opening up his high guard as little as possible. Obviously that wasn't going to cut it as a winning performance, though it prevented Wlad really getting into his usual rhythm, especially once he was warned for his clinching early doors.

Chagaev fought in a similar manner, but that was against a much sharper Wlad in his adopted hometown and Wlad was sharp enough to get shots through that forced the corner stoppage.

Don't know about anyone whitewashing the fact Wilder has two wins against Ortiz, but Ortiz did absolutely nothing between the first fight and the second to warrant things being any different. A win over Hammer? Whoop de do. Povetkin managed the same far more convincingly two years prior, and that wouldn't screpe a top five win on his resume. It does on Ortiz's.

Point about Holyfield or Louis (you could also substitute Frazier here) is that these are all legendary fighters, and to beat one in their prime highly elevates your standing. Beating Bryant Jennings does not.

Why keep bringing up bookmakers' odds like they mean something? Joshua is often the favourite because he's one of the top two fighters in the world and highly popular to boot. Why wouldn't he be the favourite in most cases? You telling me his taking on Usyk isn't a challenge? Or if he gets past that and manages to pin Fury down he won't be a challenge also?

 

Yeah, he could have been. His rubbing of the cut was pretty blatant. But that doesn't change the fact that under most circumstances a cut that bad to begin with would be ample grounds for a doctor stoppage.

I like the fight with Whyte as it's a hard one to predict. Wallin is clearly no scrub, but he also doesn't look like a worldbeater. Whyte should win, but it might be an ugly win with a ton of roughhousing. Whoever gets their jab going will be able to control the rhythm of the fight and that should go a long way to determining the winner.

 

Any win over a still decent Povetkin trumps Ortiz. Not by a huge margin since I respect Ortiz's H2H ability but it's still a superior win from a resume perspective. Old Pulev, old Takam and a green Whyte aren't brilliant wins, but then neither are Molina, Duhupas, Szpilka, old Arreola or Washington. Who does Wilder have that's better than even a forty year old Wlad? Lyakhovic? What the hell?

Look, there is no sane debate to be had for arguing Wilder's resume over Joshua's. None. If Wilder beats Fury fine, we can reopen this conversation.