Inoue or wilder? Bigger puncher?

So Duggum... How many heavyweight champions of any of the belts were able to survive with just a punch? How good was Wilder that he could actually get to the top with just his punch? Ever think about that? That's a great point! Wilder may have lacked fundamental defensive skills and technique, but it does take some kind of skill and technique to be able to time an opponent, then throw and land a haymaker. Otherwise, he'd just be swinging at air and leaving himself open for counters.

Skill for skill, pound for pound Naoya Inoue is clearly the more destructive and affective offensive fighter 'Deontay Wilder as a Heavyweight fighter, hits with more force. But his actual offensive game is quite unsophisticated and limited. Past Heavyweight fighters such as Frank Bruno in my opinion, overall had a more destructive and effective offense than Deontay Wilder'. Deontay Wilder's power has a very limited range of application i.e. meaning his power throughout his entire career, was only really most effective from long range predominately and very rarely at mid range. Wilder's power was least effective on the inside; I will go as far to say? That Wilder's inside game, was no more destructive than Oleksandr Uysk's'. If Deontay Wilder was such a destructive power puncher 'He really should have beaten Tyson Fury in their third fight. At times during that fight, in my opinion? All it would have taken was for Wilder to ether straighten up his punches and deliver them straight down the middle while he had Fury seriously hurt. There was many times in that fight where Tyson Fury was right there for the taking, it was Wilder's lack of technical sophistication which aided in Fury being able to recover each time he was badly hurt'. That version of Tyson Fury who fought Deontay Wilder for the third time 'Hypothetically in my opinion would have been a bad knockout waiting to happen, vs multiple all-time great Heavyweight fighters'. Deontay Wilder vs Tyson Fury III 'May have been a competitive, passionate and action packed fight. But skill for skill it was not a high level Heavyweight title fight, both fighters were fatigued by round 2 to 3. Tyson Fury early in the fight was also making unforced errors and technical mistakes, which are not really associated with elite level boxing'. Note: The events from the action of that fight, which lead to the firsts knockdowns of each fighter 'Encapsulates precisely the level of the action skill for skill. Deontay Wilder was first decked in round 3 by Fury, and it was due to a combination of fatigue and just walking towards Fury with no real fortified defense. Then Tyson Fury in round 4 for no apparent reason, decided to stand square on vs Wilder and just wade forward. It was like he was opening the front door to his house, but instead? To his credit Deontay Wilder whacked him with a power puncher the consequence for this technical mistake'. Regardless I still rate the Deontay Wilder vs Tyson Fury trilogy 'As the greatest Heavyweight rivalry since Riddick Bowe vs Evander Holyfield I, II, & III. But this high rating is not due to the skill level of those fights. The reason why the Wilder vs Fury trilogy is great, was because of the passionate and competitiveness between the two fighters. It was an awesome boxing event'. To conclude: Deontay Wilder's best performance and fights 'Both show that he has power, but also that he does not have a elite level offensive game. Mike Tyson, Ray Mercer, Evander Holyfield, Lennox Lewis, Tommy Morrison, David Tua, Ron Lyle, George Foreman those are some of the past great Heavyweight fighters with not only power but a very high level offensive game' etc.

So Duggum... How many heavyweight champions of any of the belts were able to survive with just a punch? How good was Wilder that he could actually get to the top with just his punch? Ever think about that?

Damn, what is your obsession with Deontay Wilder? You gotta be into the dark meat, huh? :lol1: The answer is of course Wilder because whether you like him or not or think he fought the best competition or not, he regularly knocked out guys who outweighed him by 30-40 lbs. The problem is he gets away with posting these threads. I don't mean he should be censored, or in any way restricted, but people should call him out on this. First of all calling any fighter a bum outside the context of how it is used occasionally is disrespectful. This guy constantly denigrates fighters who to him do not qualify because of immaterial, special interest groups that give rankings to people like WACHE and call them champions.

How many good fighters did wilder ko before Fury though? Ortiz who was 40? Seems strange his power was very diminished agaisnt all the good fighters he fought. Sure knocking down Fury is nice but it's been done many times. No one would say usyk is the biggest puncher ever, maybe if he fought 40 bums they would...maybe people are catching on to the scam now You have no concept of how to compare fighters. Would you call good is laughable.

You mean Fury who was knocked down vs Cunningham, petjkic, usyk and ngannou? Are they all huge punchers too? Wow what an era to live through Cunningham is a decent hitter. You will do anything to discredit Wilder. And fury was not knocked down by USYK. It is the totality of knockouts and how they occurred that make wilder such a lethal puncher.

You are so close to seeing the right answer but all those bum fights truly made an impression on you Nope, you tried to present a poll that judges KO power in relation to the level of competition. If you want to start a poll that calls out which fighter has the greater skill, you should do that. But in this case, that would be too easy, so you had to throw in the level of competition to support your argument that Wilder is a lousy boxer. Everybody already knows that he can't box. You're also trying to say that he can't punch either, which is just untrue.

You were in attendance in their dms? Wow I think that's called hacking. You are under arrest No, Nash was there in person with Deontay Wilder, Anthony Joshua and Earn with Hearn. Wilder counted the money, AJ and Hearn made a run for it, and Wilder and Nash spent the night drinking Gin and Juice whilst listening to Snoop Dogg. Nash out - His Majesty

Wilder barely hurt tiny Charlie zeleonoff with a full force blow. I would eat it up and ko him. Innoue is a real boxer and would floor me Let’s see if you survive.

Damn, what is your obsession with Deontay Wilder? You gotta be into the dark meat, huh? :lol1: The answer is of course Wilder because whether you like him or not or think he fought the best competition or not, he regularly knocked out guys who outweighed him by 30-40 lbs.

Ortiz was a good solid ko win no doubt but you aren't a huge puncher by koing one good fighter. Too small a sample size. Wilder tried to expand his sample size against good fighters and no more kos. And ortiz was nearly kod by Ruiz Jr and Charles Martin so his chin is not great. His lack of fighting stiff competition is why he had never been kod. You see how this all connects? You can pretend wilder beat good fighters but he didn't. Guys like Washington, spilzka, duhapas, etc...if you want to claim they are good you will be laughed at Says who? What great puncher Koed everyone? Your just picking at anything silly. Look at great punchers, and BTW like so many casual fans you confuse great punchers with great finishers, they are not the same. So what fighter caught all his opponents with his punch at the top of the food chain? Liston was a great boxer puncher with an excellent punch, but his KO wins were often finishing the opponent with a strong attack and not with a devistating punch. Tyson had a devistating punch with either hand... But when he fought up his KO's were diminished. Look at the Ruddock fights. Wilder fought no more, less cans than other fighters. Louis had 15 rounds and used them exceptionally and still went the distance may times. Levels to the game... KO percentage is ok but seldom tells us much if we do not see how the KO was accomplished. Fury actually had a KO ratio of like 77% coming up, while people were crying about how weak his punching was...

Question should be, P4P, whose a bigger puncher, but taking this question at face value, well of course Wilder. The dude puts men weighing 250+ lbs to sleep. No way in hell Inoue is accomplishing that. I don't even think if he had loaded gloves he would.

And what does any subjective ranking system have to do with this? Your not judging him by what he did... Ortiz had never been KO'ed, or, even lost a match when he faced Wilder... And those are facts, not opinions of a ranking organization. Fury went tooth and nail with Wilder in order to not be brained and still got caught and almost lost the first fight. The same Fury that gave Alexander U his toughest fight.... According to Usyk! Not any secondary source... See how your card towers come down with the slightest wind? :lol1: Then you will try to make some argument that Joshusa fought better secondary fighters in a weak division... But Joshua lost his bid to be at the top... So it really is academic if one believes Jennings is better than breazeal, oh wait! Didn't Joshua and Wilder both fight Breazeal? with Wilder being a lot more dominant? Do I need to keep going? Your problem is you do not know how to truly compare things. You work backwards: You don't like Wilder so you try to construct an argument that minimizes his talents. You constantly fail to realize that this is a weak era! Every heavyweight is fighting the same quality of opposition. YES, Tito would not have been undefeated in many eras, ut the same conditions apply equally to virtually any present heavyweight perhaps with the exception of Usyk... the jury is still out on that one. Ring rankings, alphabet soup rankings do not consider the objective abilities of fighters when assigning rank: The ranks are issued relative to present conditions, Alphabet soup gives people championship belts who are often not even legit contenders... Grow up!:lol1: Ortiz was a good solid ko win no doubt but you aren't a huge puncher by koing one good fighter. Too small a sample size. Wilder tried to expand his sample size against good fighters and no more kos. And ortiz was nearly kod by Ruiz Jr and Charles Martin so his chin is not great. His lack of fighting stiff competition is why he had never been kod. You see how this all connects? You can pretend wilder beat good fighters but he didn't. Guys like Washington, spilzka, duhapas, etc...if you want to claim they are good you will be laughed at

For those that think Wilder is a "bum?" Exceptional punchers are expected to breeze through their competition and be able to eventually threaten an exceptional opponent whom is either, a fellow slugger, or, an exceptional artful boxer. Wilder presented a challenge to Fury, an exceptional boxer, a fighter that shut down Vlad Klitsko... Wilder accomplished this. He almost beat Fury and was competative. Joshua was not competative against Usyk, Usyk has said as much. Usyk respects Fury for one reason alone, Fury gave him a really hard time.

It is different. Being a top fighter is a self selecting system. The guys who can't take a punch usually don't make it to the top. Those that can do. That's why it's much harder to knock out ranked fighters. They don't go down so easily as wilder found out yet you still have people on here judging him based on what he did vs the crappy fighters he fought. And what does any subjective ranking system have to do with this? Your not judging him by what he did... Ortiz had never been KO'ed, or, even lost a match when he faced Wilder... And those are facts, not opinions of a ranking organization. Fury went tooth and nail with Wilder in order to not be brained and still got caught and almost lost the first fight. The same Fury that gave Alexander U his toughest fight.... According to Usyk! Not any secondary source... See how your card towers come down with the slightest wind? :lol1: Then you will try to make some argument that Joshusa fought better secondary fighters in a weak division... But Joshua lost his bid to be at the top... So it really is academic if one believes Jennings is better than breazeal, oh wait! Didn't Joshua and Wilder both fight Breazeal? with Wilder being a lot more dominant? Do I need to keep going? Your problem is you do not know how to truly compare things. You work backwards: You don't like Wilder so you try to construct an argument that minimizes his talents. You constantly fail to realize that this is a weak era! Every heavyweight is fighting the same quality of opposition. YES, Tito would not have been undefeated in many eras, ut the same conditions apply equally to virtually any present heavyweight perhaps with the exception of Usyk... the jury is still out on that one. Ring rankings, alphabet soup rankings do not consider the objective abilities of fighters when assigning rank: The ranks are issued relative to present conditions, Alphabet soup gives people championship belts who are often not even legit contenders... Grow up!:lol1:

While Inoue is the real deal I think Wilder is vastly overrated and a hype job. If his power was so terrifying, Haymon would have had the confidence to put him in with AJ Usyk and Whyte, and not just a blubberhouse fading circus clown (Fury). You see, Wilder was built on PBC set ups and then after the phony record was established, they targeted the clearly in decline Fury. Fury never was as good as he was after beating Klitschko. Wilder's power wasn't evident vs Fury, Zhang, he only really beat PBC set ups. Wilder may be the most overrated overhyped heavyweight contender in history. And we all know Al Haymon had the logistics and unethical tendencies to fabricate Deontay Wilder. To fill the void of there being no good American heavyweights. Wow congr-ats on an accurate post.

You can settle this for yourself daggum. Let them both get a free punch in your face. Wilder should go first because he is older. If you wake up , then let Inoue go. Them you tell all of us. Wilder barely hurt tiny Charlie zeleonoff with a full force blow. I would eat it up and ko him. Innoue is a real boxer and would floor me

Nash was in attendance (they needed someone from the Boxingscene Hall of Fame as witness) when Wilder counted out every dollar in front of Joshua and Earn with Hearn.Nash out - His Majesty You were in attendance in their dms? Wow I think that's called hacking. You are under arrest

There's so many gray areas in this loaded question. I wouldnt know how to answer. P4P inoue. However if you offered me money. I rather take a punch from Inoue with gloves on then the Windmill Deontay wilder. Deontay only knows how to throw haymakers. From a career standpoint up to the 3rd Tyson Fury fight it is proven if Deontay CAN land that haymaker you are going to get dropped badly. Tyson Fury was able to absorb those haymakers because he outweighed Deontay by 60lbs atleast. I can take inoues best punch at 200lbs (roughly what i weigh) But I am not taking Deontay haymaker if the money is the same. P4P - Inoue. Overall if he actually lands - Deontay pre Fury. How many good fighters did wilder ko before Fury though? Ortiz who was 40? Seems strange his power was very diminished agaisnt all the good fighters he fought. Sure knocking down Fury is nice but it's been done many times. No one would say usyk is the biggest puncher ever, maybe if he fought 40 bums they would...maybe people are catching on to the scam now

Your poll is skewed, daggum. The title asks who was the bigger puncher, but the criteria for the vote is vs top 10 opponents. Everyone knows that Wilder's skill set was inferior to Inuoe's, which is why he was carefully matched for years. However, Deontay's punching power cannot be denied. If he landed that right hand, it was nite nite 9.9 times out of 10. You are so close to seeing the right answer but all those bum fights truly made an impression on you