Boxrec #233 heavyweight in WBA's top 15

Your knowledge is non-existent, so that's not surprising. https://www.boxingscene.com/rankings/ Look at the heavyweight rankings. The WBC heavyweight rankings are clearly the strongest. I didn't force you to key into my knowledge. Your opinion doesn't matter so you can keep it to yourself.

How has Wilder accomplished more? Whyte has beaten more top 20 fighters. According to boxrec. Wilder has beaten 1, Whyte has beaten 3. You're picking a random arbitrary criteria. Congrats to Whyte for beating more fighters currently ranked in the top 20. Thankfully, Boxrec doesn't pick one random criteria to benefit a specific fighter like you're doing. If we're picking random arbitrary criteria, I could bring up that Wilder has beaten two consensus top 4 fighters in his criteria, while Whyte has beaten zero. I could bring up that Wilder has beaten someone in Boxrec's current top 7, while Whyte hasn't. But rather than cherry pick biased arbitrary arguments, Boxrec takes into account everybody you've fought, everybody they've fought, etc. Boxrec can get fooled by bogus decisions, but Wilder beats everyone by knockout, so there's no question his Boxrec rating is legit. Boxrec is only good for records. It's ratings suck. Thank you for your opinion. Even if you believe that, it still would be impossible to reach #2 only fighting bums. Is Mayweather the best boxer ever? Boxrec says so. I won't comment on fighters from before my time, but in the 30 years I've been closely following the sport, Mayweather was clearly the best pound for pound.

Higher rating = better does it not? No, it doesn't. It means you've proven more. Just because someone is unproven doesn't mean they wouldn't beat you. You must have no life though because you keep trying to start arguments nobody is interested in. My position is that Wilder couldn't be #2 if he'd only fought bums. You refuse to discuss that, because you know I'm right, so you keep changing to subject to random topics. Klitschko was better than Wilder according to boxrec. That's a lie. Klitschko was more deserving of a higher rating. Doesn't mean he was better. If higher rating always equaled better, there'd be no reason for anybody to fight each other. You don't agree. So is boxrec only evidence/proof when you agree? Boxrec is great proof of whether you've only fought bums or not. The claim that Wilder has only fought bums is clearly a lie because he wouldn't be #2 otherwise. According to boxrec Whyte has beaten more current top 20 HW's than Wilder, so how is he by far ahead? Wilder is #2. Whyte is #5. Wilder has twice as many points as Whyte. If Wilder has only fought bums, what does that say about Whyte? Doesn't mean Wilder would definitely win if they fought. Just means Wilder has accomplished more and deserves the higher rating.

You didn't answer the question. You do that a lot. Do you agree the Klitschko Joshua beat is better than Wilder? Your question didn't make any sense, so I answered the best I could, despite your flawed question. Boxrec doesn't "say" Klitschko was better than Wilder, only that he was more deserving of a higher ranking based on in ring accomplishment. Just as Boxrec says Wilder, based on in ring accomplishment, is head and shoulders above everyone other than AJ. Which would be impossible if Wilder only fought bums. So clearly he doesn't only fight bums. No, I don't think the Klitschko that AJ beat was better than Wilder is right now. But the AJ that Klitschko faced isn't as good as AJ is now. So AJ vs Wilder would be a really interesting fight. AJ deserves to be rated #1, but that doesn't mean he would win. They need to fight so we can find out who the best is.

My argument is Boxrec says the Klitschko Joshua beat is better than Wilder. Do you agree or is boxrec wrong? Klitschko, even after the Fury loss, deserved to be held in higher regard than Wilder is now. Wilder still has to prove himself as the best. But you're still trying to pick a nonexistent fight. Because my only argument is that Wilder couldn't have become #2 if he'd only fought bums. Nothing you're saying is countering my position. You just keep trying to argue how great AJ is. Which is a waste of time because I agree with you.

Their rankings are bought. They have no credibility. Again, if you had started watching boxing before yesterday, you'd know the WBC is actually the only organization that hasn't had a bribery scandal. The only organization that wouldn't accept bribes. The IBF president went to prison for bribery. The WBA was exposed by Arum for an over arching widespread bribery ring. Worse, after the head of the WBA's bribery ring was banned by the WBA for life, he went and started the WBO. The WBO was literally founded by the outed bribery leader of the WBA.

Not my opinion. Boxrecs. You hold boxrec in such high regard and treat it as fact, so i'm sure you agree. The Klitschko Joshua beat id by far better than Wilder he had over 500 points. Boxrec says so. Thank you for your opinion. You think Joshua is the best heavyweight. So do I. So why do you keep trying to pick a nonexistent fight? My argument is that Wilder is the clear #2, and wouldn't be #2 in boxrec by a wide margin if he'd only fought bums. We both know that'd be impossible.

You talk **** about fans while being a Wilder nuthugger and far worse than that a WBC nuthugger. Nuthugging an org is just plain weird. Lennox Lewis said today there should only be one belt in boxing, the WBC belt. Is he a "nut hugger." Is he "weird" for "nut hugging" an organization? I know you started watching boxing yesterday, but if you knew anything about the history of the sport, you'd know the WBC has always been the real belt.

He also beat a better fighter than Wilder. Povetkin is better than Fury. Fury is only 1/3 the fighter he was. Boxrec says so........ Thank you for your opinion. I don't argue opinions. If you think AJ is the greatest fighter that ever lived, I have no problem with that. The issue is whether Wilder has only fought bums. If that were true, he wouldn't be #2 in Boxrec by a wide margin. If AJ had the greatest resume of any fighter that ever lived, that still wouldn't mean Wilder has only fought bums. He's far and away #2 by a wide margin. Just as AJ is far and away #1 by a wide margin.

You know when you get those people that don't listen at all or point blank refuse to have anything resembling a reasoned debate? Then they red K your comments and cause your profile rep to go down? What does a profile rep do?

Emotional ties to fighters they like or dislike can be just as blinding as financial ties. Not to mention most fans having no idea how the sport really works and thinking they know everything. A lot of fans have ****ty lives and live vicariously through their favorite fighters. So they actually have quite a bit to gain or lose. Have no idea what that means. What does the karma do? You know when you get those people that don't listen at all or point blank refuse to have anything resembling a reasoned debate? Then they red K your comments and cause your profile rep to go down? That... Green good.. red bad. Etc

That’s why I only use the alphabit rankings to see where a fighter is ranked with them. Means nothing as far as the fighters skill. I like the IBO rankings. Just sucks they have a belt The IBO rankings are just the boxrec rankings with the champions removed. Better off using boxrec so you can see where the champions actually rank.

So he couldn't just use...I dunno .. water? You're simply proving my point that it's unlikely he knew it contained a banned substance. Makes no sense to list it on the form of supplements he was taking if he knew it was banned.

According to Boxrec, Whyte and Povetkin are better than Ortiz. And? Nobody is disputing that AJ has the best resume and is the clear #1 heavyweight in the world right now.

To the best of my knowledge, WBC has one of the worst rankings in the sport. Your knowledge is non-existent, so that's not surprising. https://www.boxingscene.com/rankings/ Look at the heavyweight rankings. The WBC heavyweight rankings are clearly the strongest.

the good thing about fans are, they have no financial ties to the industry and have nothing to gain or lose by them. Emotional ties to fighters they like or dislike can be just as blinding as financial ties. Not to mention most fans having no idea how the sport really works and thinking they know everything. A lot of fans have ****ty lives and live vicariously through their favorite fighters. So they actually have quite a bit to gain or lose. It means I have you a positive karma for something... You've been here for donkeys if previous accounts are to be believed yet you don't know about the green / red karma system ? Have no idea what that means. What does the karma do?

If I was the retard, I wouldn't have to explain all of this to you. It's not my fault you just started watching boxing and don't know how the sport works. The WBC rankings are clearly the most credible at heavyweight. The #5 fighters from the other three orgs are all lower in the Boxrec rankings than Fury is. This thread was started because the WBA now has the #233 fighter in the world in their top 15 Look at the top 15 of the four orgs and the WBC's fighters consistently out rank the others. It's the most valuable belt and typically has the higher caliber contenders. To the best of my knowledge, WBC has one of the worst rankings in the sport.

If I'm wrong, counter my argument. You can't, because you know I'm right. So instead you ignore my argument and attack me personally. Lame. There is nothing to counter because they are most false. I attacked tour personality because you are fond of it and it's becoming a habit.

So it's my fault that you don't pay attention? Throughout the investigative process, Stiverne has been extremely cooperative and 100% forthcoming. Stiverne informed the WBC that on the day of the Test, in order to facilitate urination, he took a dietary supplement called SUPERPHARM in front of the sample collector. He reported the ingestion of that supplement in the Declaration of Medication Use section of the doping control form he filled in connection with the Test. So he couldn't just use...I dunno .. water? He just so happened to have superpharm on him at the time? But that was the first time he took it? VADA or its testing rep there didn't say "woah hold on bermane... Don't take that random supplement you've just procured today on our visit to have a piss..it's banned. Use water. " Jesus Christ. He took it .. realising it was banned and that he'd pop for it anyway. Did he declare he'd been taking it previously throughout camp or did he simply magically conjure some superpharm after they'd turned up so he could piss . Since when was water not sufficient?

If I was the retard, I wouldn't have to explain all of this to you. It's not my fault you just started watching boxing and don't know how the sport works. The WBC rankings are clearly the most credible at heavyweight. The #5 fighters from the other three orgs are all lower in the Boxrec rankings than Fury is. This thread was started because the WBA now has the #233 fighter in the world in their top 15 Look at the top 15 of the four orgs and the WBC's fighters consistently out rank the others. It's the most valuable belt and typically has the higher caliber contenders. That’s why I only use the alphabit rankings to see where a fighter is ranked with them. Means nothing as far as the fighters skill. I like the IBO rankings. Just sucks they have a belt