Lets play Triangle theory with Deontay Wilder, Dylan Whyte and The Gypsy King:

[REDEEMER]

It would definitely change boxing probably for the better. Certainly would make things a lot easier with trying to determine who truly is better when two guys are competitive

One fight most of the time really doesn’t prove anything but a win that night ,if we learned anything outside the Fury vs Wilder fights rematches have gone differently mostly in the heavyweight division even if they don’t happen much outcomes changed more then not .

[GhostofDempsey]

My problem with propping up Ortiz, is that he was untested. His resume prior to Wilder was void of any true contenders. Networks and promoters have a knack for hyping up mediocre talent in order to feed them up to any even more hyped contender or champion. Wilder was always a one-trick pony. Big right hand that found it's way to the chin of smaller, outmatched opponents. Stiverne was one of the worst HW champions in the history of the sport. Prior to meeting Wilder, his claim to fame was a pair of wins over journeyman Arreola. Wilder declined a career high payday against Whyte ($7M) with a promise to meet AJ if he won. He didn't want to fight in the U.K., or at least that was his excuse.

At the moment, Fury's retirement hints seem to be rooted in self-doubt. I think he would rather retire, than risk a loss to Usyk, providing Usyk defeats AJ again. A lot of fighters have fragile egos, they'd rather retire undefeated or coming off of a win, than to risk what they consider a humiliating defeat. I'm not saying Usyk is a sure win over Fury, but I think he gives Fury a better fight than any other HW in contention right now.

If Fury should vacate the WBC belt, we all know what that means. Wilder is offered the shot, and WBC, PBC, and SHO will prop up another no-hoper as his opponent for the vacated title. Wilder wins and goes back to fighting more no-hopers, all the while avoiding Usyk, AJ or another potential loss. If Fury retires, I doubt we see an undisputed HW champion for a long time.

[billeau2]

people are trying to hype up wilder based on fury beating whyte? so by this lack of logic wallin is better than wilder right? he did do much better. wilder's resume is just not very good. his performances are not very good. he was just a hype job at least at this moment. that doesnt mean wilder ****** but was he some elite top fighter? he was basically a hw andre berto. when you look back at his resume you see stirverne who was only ranked based on beating arreola. do we all think arreola is good? and then you have ortiz who has a very slim resume himself and was mostly hype. also ortiz was clearly old and rickety when wilder fought him and still was easily beating him twice until age took its toll.

You have some agenda to make every fighter in the division look "hyped." Your post does point out why Triangle theory is mental exerscize that ultimately is not of much substance...Namely: Idiots with agendas always use it to come to absurd conclusions... Like assumptions about Ortiz who boxed beautifully in the second Wilder fight. And BTW Areola is excellent. In his last fight look at his punch stat numbers. He gave Ruiz a great fight and was in great shape.

Fury said, and I believe when he said this he was being candid, that Wilder was a really tough fight.

[daggum]

You have some agenda to make every fighter in the division look "hyped." Your post does point out why Triangle theory is mental exerscize that ultimately is not of much substance...Namely: Idiots with agendas always use it to come to absurd conclusions... Like assumptions about Ortiz who boxed beautifully in the second Wilder fight. And BTW Areola is excellent. In his last fight look at his punch stat numbers. He gave Ruiz a great fight and was in great shape.

Fury said, and I believe when he said this he was being candid, that Wilder was a really tough fight.

im pretty sure haymon had the agenda to hype wilder up, not me. his resume is pretty crappy and he was headlining ppv's. it was farcical.

i didnt assume ortiz was old. he was old. at least in boxing terms. why deny that? wilder had the chance to fight prime joshua or old ortiz...we know what route he took. knocking over old guys is the definition of hype, and everyone looks like they are boxing beautifully against wilder cause he sucks at boxing. ortiz's stamina gave out cause of his age and because he was in poor shape and that was that.

arreola is not excellent. hes never beaten anyone of note even in his prime. he lost that fight to ruiz about 10-2. he gave a good effort and looked better than a lot of his other fights, but not sure why you are trying to hype arreola up off of a 10-2 loss... oh wait you are using triangle theory to try and hype arreola up because stirverne beat him and then wilder beat stirverne. thats pretty bad.

[dibzvincent143]

Tyson Fury says a lot of things. If you can intuit certain behavoirs Fury is not really deceptive... or, rather, one can see when he is pissing on your leg and telling you it is raining. Some time ago Tyson talked up Wilder as an opponent. He never wavered from his assesment of Wilder, including saying recently after this fight that fighting Wilder is like "holding dynamite in your hands."

Fury has been consistent and the Whyte fight seems to bare out the fact that Wilder is dangerous. Wilder, it turns out, in his ability to hang in there, take punishment, and find a way to deliver shots, may turn out to be Fury's biggest foil for when people debate Fury's place in heavyweight history, years from now.

Thoughts?

Beating wilder is just easier said than done. I doubt before the fury blue print got out that they would have found a way. All would fight him cautiously and box from the outside and later on get caught by something big.

now everyone is saying it’s easy because fury did it.
lmao. You need balls of steel to actually walk wilder down, and you a lot of size and skills to avoid getting shot at before reaching him.

Not easy to avoid the right hand for 36 minutes, i’d pick prime wilder over usyk and joshua.

today a lot of them have a solid chance because the blue print is out there and wilder might be past it already after all the beatings. But still up to them if they can implement the game plan.

[billeau2]

im pretty sure haymon had the agenda to hype wilder up, not me. his resume is pretty crappy and he was headlining ppv's. it was farcical.

i didnt assume ortiz was old. he was old. at least in boxing terms. why deny that? wilder had the chance to fight prime joshua or old ortiz...we know what route he took. knocking over old guys is the definition of hype, and everyone looks like they are boxing beautifully against wilder cause he sucks at boxing. ortiz's stamina gave out cause of his age and because he was in poor shape and that was that.

arreola is not excellent. hes never beaten anyone of note even in his prime. he lost that fight to ruiz about 10-2. he gave a good effort and looked better than a lot of his other fights, but not sure why you are trying to hype arreola up off of a 10-2 loss... oh wait you are using triangle theory to try and hype arreola up because stirverne beat him and then wilder beat stirverne. thats pretty bad.

Crappy? compared to what? Based on what? Look at the division... Look at how it is starting to shape up, and we can now see a hierarchy. Wilder drew waster fom the same well as everyone else. You certainly did assume Ortiz was old... He boxed in a fashion that made him stand out and Wilder caught him... meaning Wilder was a live dog and that Ortiz could box well. That would be a reasonable conclusion. OHHH a pime Joshua! there is no proof yet that Joshua is better than Ortiz. You realize that right? Im talking technically... People can opine but the fact remains, if you play the game, the indications tell you: Joshua had a competative fight with Whyte, Ortiz is in the same heat as joshua right now... And no... not everyone looks good against Wilder, Stiverne for example, during the second match.

Arreola is solid for this era. You said he looked old, now you are admitting he looked good that fight. YES! he certainly did. No...Even in jest I would not use triangle theory the way you just did lol. No... I look at performance. Arreola looked great that fight with Ruiz, look at the punch stat numbers! That "old" man practically set a record throwing shots along with Ruiz.

Thats the trouble with you trolls... I may jest about triangle but you guys eat up BS instead of looking at fights and judging them according to the performance of the fighters. I was never even a fan of Arreola but I can watch a fight unbiased and see when a fighter is in good shape and performs well.

[billeau2]

Beating wilder is just easier said than done. I doubt before the fury blue print got out that they would have found a way. All would fight him cautiously and box from the outside and later on get caught by something big.

now everyone is saying it’s easy because fury did it.
lmao. You need balls of steel to actually walk wilder down, and you a lot of size and skills to avoid getting shot at before reaching him.

Not easy to avoid the right hand for 36 minutes, i’d pick prime wilder over usyk and joshua.

today a lot of them have a solid chance because the blue print is out there and wilder might be past it already after all the beatings. But still up to them if they can implement the game plan.

Very well said. There should be a name for the process where something is very difficult in boxing that great fighters can make look easy... Fighting a guy who can take your head off? the great fighters often manage to do it... but its never easy! Wilder has quick feet and the punch speaks for itself. And even in success Fury went down hard.

I agree with you that Wilder is probably past prime after that trilogy with Fury... But at his best? I would give him a chance against Usyk and I think he probably catches Joshua. My own POV is, while I don't like using Triangle theory, sometimes... it makes sense lol. Fury said, and demonstrated how good Wilder is lol, when he made easyb work of Whyte.

[Marchegiano]

This thread seems to have totally gone off topic.

The question is not does Wilder make your pussy wet or dry. The question is, is Wilder Fury's best testament to ability.

Y'all remember that time the Gypsy King was plastered to the canvas then opened his eyes and sat up like his name was Jason Voorhees?

You don't think that will always be Tyson's single most impressive feat? Nah, some run-of-the-mill KO, not any more devastating or damaging than any of the endless supply of KOs boxing has on offer, against some rando didn't do anything. That's a performance that folks will look up because their grandads told them to, then they'll see Tyson sit up after, when they dig into him a little....**** makes sense.

Or hows abouts when he beat an old man who never applied more than a handful of punches and hugging to his craft? beat him with nothing but a pivot. Super impressive.

Does Tyson pivot against Wilder? Does he bully? Does he get up from the dead? Does use his long jab? Does he bend at the waist then draw back to his side? Hows about the check hook? Hows about punch variety in general?

Nah man, the three punches it takes to beat a fat **** like Chisora, the single step it took to beat Wlad, and Dillian Whyte may have been so utterly dominated the only rounds he won on anyone's score cards are gift rounds because they felt bad for the fool but he totes pushed Fury into showing his rarest form to date

Mooks

[Earl-Hickey]

Problem for Wilder, you can't spend 10 years in the sport have a best win (by far) of Luis Ortiz and make a sincere claim to be any kind of great fighter.

Problem for Ortiz, you can't spend 15 years in the sport and have a best win of Bryant Jennings and claim to be any kind of great fighter.

Eye test this, who ducked that, the only thing that matters are results and Wilder and Ortiz don't have them and that's their own faults.

[Earl-Hickey]

im pretty sure haymon had the agenda to hype wilder up, not me. his resume is pretty crappy and he was headlining ppv's. it was farcical.

i didnt assume ortiz was old. he was old. at least in boxing terms. why deny that? wilder had the chance to fight prime joshua or old ortiz...we know what route he took. knocking over old guys is the definition of hype, and everyone looks like they are boxing beautifully against wilder cause he sucks at boxing. ortiz's stamina gave out cause of his age and because he was in poor shape and that was that.

arreola is not excellent. hes never beaten anyone of note even in his prime. he lost that fight to ruiz about 10-2. he gave a good effort and looked better than a lot of his other fights, but not sure why you are trying to hype arreola up off of a 10-2 loss... oh wait you are using triangle theory to try and hype arreola up because stirverne beat him and then wilder beat stirverne. thats pretty bad.

It's true, even absoloute scrubs like Duhaupas, Szpila and Molina had a lot of success against Wilder and put hands on him.

Fury vs Wilder 2 was the only one of the 3 fights where fury was fully fit and motivated and Wilder got beat from pillar to post. Wilder had some success (briefly) against the unmotivated fury who otto Wallin gave a tough fight.

Wilder is smoke and mirrors, people want to assume he ko's all these guys well let's see it. Obviously he has the power to potentially ko anyone (not named fury) but let's actually see it, get him in there with Usyk, Joyce, Hrgovic etc and let's SEE IT