Comments Thread For: Daily Bread Mailbag: Is Deontay Wilder Destined for Hall of Fame?

[BKM-]

[QUOTE=daggum;n32291006]

You think this is a weak era? I suffered through the Klitschko era where you had the Ibragimov's, Lyakovich, David Haye screwing around, then before that you had Ruiz, Skelton etc. Really having a Big 4 is a lot better than two dominant brothers(who won't fight eachother) crushing everybody far below them.

Also captain hindsight, the guys he's losing to recently were not much better than the opponents he crushed in the past. Secondly it's easy to act like he's 'exposed' now that he's in his late 30s and has all that mileage especially from the brutal Fury fights.

The question is not if Wilder is an ATG, the question is if he's a HOF worthy. Two very different things. Have you looked at the HOF list of HW's in it? You probably haven't. It's far from crazy to include the highest KO % ever with 10 title defences in a big 4 era.[/QUOTE]

Are you having a laugh? Parker Zhang and fury are clearly much better than duhapas spilzka and Washington types. He crushed those guys because they are easily crushable.

Out of those 10 defenses he beat 1 top 10 ring ranked opponent. Thats a bad thing and shows He was matched soft. His ko percentage against top 10 fighters is 25 percent. Yeah he's great at knocking over bums but why celebrate that? In comparison alis is 50 percent, louis' 75, Vitali 75, wlad 53 etc...he simply stuffed his resume with tomatos. Nice win over ortiz but Wilder wasn't great nor a huge puncher. He was mostly hype.

I was actually waiting for it and you did at the end where you mentioned Ortiz, which contradicts this narrative that he started losing because he "finally started facing good opponents". All due respect to Parker and Zhang but they are NOT better than Ortiz, if anything they are quite basic and/or raw in comparison.

Wilder lost his confidence and ability to pull the trigger after his body suffered a lot of damage in two of those Fury fights. In his late 30s now he is losing to current top level opponents. Lets not discredit his entire career now as captain hindsight like boxing fans always do to aging former champions.

Lastly, nobody said Wilder was a great, the question is if he's HOF worthy. I ask you too, are you aware of some of the boxers who are in the Boxing HOF?

[BKM-]

You could even go as far as to say he was arguably the best for a time when Fury was out and AJ wasn't fighting him.

If he fought and knocked out AJ back then (undisputed) or if Reiss stopped the fight (lineal), it'd be enough to tip him right over the cusp he's sitting on.

There was a perfect time for him to take that fight and he could have won in spectacular fashion. He should have fought AJ when he was vulnerable after the Ruiz loss and needed years to gain back his confidence, and that's when Wilder's killer instinct was at it's best and he was young enough to stalk for 12 rounds keeping his one punch KO power the whole fight.

[VislorTurlough]

Moorer is in. All due respect but his LH resume was an off brand belt. Think that barometer qualifies Wilder

[Blackstarr]

You think this is a weak era? I suffered through the Klitschko era where you had the Ibragimov's, Lyakovich, David Haye screwing around, then before that you had Ruiz, Skelton etc. Really having a Big 4 is a lot better than two dominant brothers(who won't fight eachother) crushing everybody far below them.

Also captain hindsight, the guys he's losing to recently were not much better than the opponents he crushed in the past. Secondly it's easy to act like he's 'exposed' now that he's in his late 30s and has all that mileage especially from the brutal Fury fights.

The question is not if Wilder is an ATG, the question is if he's a HOF worthy. Two very different things. Have you looked at the HOF list of HW's in it? You probably haven't. It's far from crazy to include the highest KO % ever with 10 title defences in a big 4 era.

You can’t be serious..

Firstly Ibragimov (ex champ and amateur standout) and Haye (two-weight champ and knockout artist) are a lot better than anyone Wilder has beaten, and I’d put money on a prime Haye beating Wilder any day of the week. The fact the Kiltschkos beat them easily speaks to their greatness, rather than the weakness of the division relative to what we have now.

You all love mentioning Wilder getting “aged out”, ignoring that he looked totally fine against Helenius, and that his highlight career win was against someone older than he is now. Add to that he most recently got destroyed by an even older 41 year old, and that argument looks weak asf.

And it’s damn crazy not to put his KO% into context. Every world class fighter with decent power starts with a near 100% KO ratio at the start of their careers, only for it to drop off as they reach world level. Problem with Wilder is his level of comp has remained at journeyman status even as he climbed to world level, thanks to elite level match-making. Beating just 2 ring-rated fighters in his entire career tells you that.

Adding all this up, I can’t possibly see how he can be considered HoF.

[Blackstarr]

[QUOTE=BKM-;n32291027]

I was actually waiting for it and you did at the end where you mentioned Ortiz, which contradicts this narrative that he started losing because he "finally started facing good opponents". All due respect to Parker and Zhang but they are NOT better than Ortiz, if anything they are quite basic and/or raw in comparison.

Wilder lost his confidence and ability to pull the trigger after his body suffered a lot of damage in two of those Fury fights. In his late 30s now he is losing to current top level opponents. Lets not discredit his entire career now as captain hindsight like boxing fans always do to aging former champions.

Lastly, nobody said Wilder was a great, the question is if he's HOF worthy. I ask you too, are you aware of some of the boxers who are in the Boxing HOF?

What makes you say Ortiz is better Zhang and Parker? Zhang is a lot bigger, was a far more accomplished amateur, has more power and has better wins. Parker also has better wins than Ortiz, has better feet and hand speed, and has much greater stamina. I’m really curious about your reasoning.

And yes Wilder suffered a lot of damage in the Fury fights, but doesn’t that speak to his lack of durability, which counts against him? Breadman alluded to this, and let’s not forget Usyk was eating up these same clean body and head shots that Fury was putting away Wilder with.

[BKM-]

You can’t be serious..

Firstly Ibragimov (ex champ and amateur standout) and Haye (two-weight champ and knockout artist) are a lot better than anyone Wilder has beaten, and I’d put money on a prime Haye beating Wilder any day of the week. The fact the Kiltschkos beat them easily speaks to their greatness, rather than the weakness of the division relative to what we have now.

You all love mentioning Wilder getting “aged out”, ignoring that he looked totally fine against Helenius, and that his highlight career win was against someone older than he is now. Add to that he most recently got destroyed by an even older 41 year old, and that argument looks weak asf.

And it’s damn crazy not to put his KO% into context. Every world class fighter with decent power starts with a near 100% KO ratio at the start of their careers, only for it to drop off as they reach world level. Problem with Wilder is his level of comp has remained at journeyman status even as he climbed to world level, thanks to elite level match-making. Beating just 2 ring-rated fighters in his entire career tells you that.

Adding all this up, I can’t possibly see how he can be considered HoF.

Your reasoning is exceptionally flawed. Ibragimov having a good amateur career is completely meaningless, so is Haye being a champ at Cruiserweight. Irrelevance while saying nothing, really. Sultan retired after losing every round to Wlad. His best win is against a past prime Briggs, a 45 year old Holyfield, and the 4th best opponent he faced in Ray Austin ended up a draw. This is your definition of a good HW, better than Ortiz?

You confused yourself there. The reason I mentioned those names is to make it clear that we have seen much worse HW era's than this one(or rather, the one that's coming to an end soon). The Klitschko era was so much worse than Fury-Usyk-Joshua-Wilder.

Also Wilder only looked totally fine against Helenius because he blasted him out of there in a minute. When the first punch doesn't land you get to actually see how much a fighter truly has left. So now do you want me to explain to you why a beatdown like Fury 2 & 3 is bad for your career especially when you comeback at the wrong end of your late 30s?

[daggum]

I was actually waiting for it and you did at the end where you mentioned Ortiz, which contradicts this narrative that he started losing because he "finally started facing good opponents". All due respect to Parker and Zhang but they are NOT better than Ortiz, if anything they are quite basic and/or raw in comparison.

Wilder lost his confidence and ability to pull the trigger after his body suffered a lot of damage in two of those Fury fights. In his late 30s now he is losing to current top level opponents. Lets not discredit his entire career now as captain hindsight like boxing fans always do to aging former champions.

Lastly, nobody said Wilder was a great, the question is if he's HOF worthy. I ask you too, are you aware of some of the boxers who are in the Boxing HOF?

they are much better than ortiz. parker has beaten ruiz, zhang, and wilder. 3 top 5 guys. ortiz has 1 top 10 win in his career over jennings and i dont think anyone thinks jennings is anywhere near as good as ruiz, zhang, wilder. zhang beat joyce twice who has a much better resume than ortiz with wins over dubois and parker. zhang also beat wilder, and a debatable loss to hrgovic. i would say thats quite a bit better than ortiz. you might be doing some kind of fantasy boxing where ortiz was some great proven fighter but reality is he has a slim resume

[MrShakeAndBake]

To be in Hall of fame you have to be at the top, beat the top guys. Wilder career is miles from that.

[daggum]

To be in Hall of fame you have to be at the top, beat the top guys. Wilder career is miles from that.

wilder was at the "top" in a manufactured way. does that count?

[Blackstarr]

Your reasoning is exceptionally flawed. Ibragimov having a good amateur career is completely meaningless, so is Haye being a champ at Cruiserweight. Irrelevance while saying nothing, really. Sultan retired after losing every round to Wlad. His best win is against a past prime Briggs, a 45 year old Holyfield, and the 4th best opponent he faced in Ray Austin ended up a draw. This is your definition of a good HW, better than Ortiz?

You confused yourself there. The reason I mentioned those names is to make it clear that we have seen much worse HW era's than this one(or rather, the one that's coming to an end soon). The Klitschko era was so much worse than Fury-Usyk-Joshua-Wilder.

Also Wilder only looked totally fine against Helenius because he blasted him out of there in a minute. When the first punch doesn't land you get to actually see how much a fighter truly has left. So now do you want me to explain to you why a beatdown like Fury 2 & 3 is bad for your career especially when you comeback at the wrong end of your late 30s?

You think either Ortiz or Wilder would have fared any better than Ibragimov against Klitschko? Haye was also a champ at HW, as was Ibragimov…and yes that record is what makes Ibragimov far better than the likes of Helenius, Breazeale, Szipilka, Washington and the countless of other similar names on Wilder’s record. Now care to break down Ortiz’s resume as well?

You don’t need to explain how that beatdown isn’t good for someone’s health, but the fact that Wilder got destroyed in that manner in the first place without bouncing back is very telling and 100% counts against him in the HoF argument.