Who's the biggest fraud in Boxing currently?

[Willow The Wisp]

You have pointed... And been exposed for pointing off into space because your sense of skill is all tied up with Joshua's relative performance and with relative measures that are not objective. You take two pigs and put lipstick on one of them and claim one is better than the other... you ful! People like you are blind. Chris Areola threw more punches in his fight with Ruiz, yet fuls like you call him old... Ortiz was undefeated until he fought Wilder yet you claim his record, which was not any different from the rest of the pack, made him a weak opponent. Wilder knocked down one of the two best heavyweights, did Joshua manage that? Usyk who has no axe to grind stated unequivocally that Fury was a much harder fight for him than Joshua.

And now that Parker and Dubois have hit their stride you want to forget their losses to the same level of competition. Your silly argument boils down to: "well Wilder did not fight Joshua, so he fought substandard competition. If you look at fighters like Stiverne, martin, etc and compare their entire career to fighters like Dubois and parker they are not in a different class regarding ability. Parker has hit a peak and Dubois also has hit a stride, after losing to the same class of fighters... The proof being: NONE OF THESE GUYS has been able to defeat one of the top dogs! Facts! Wilder came closest... Dubois gets some credit, but assuming that shot was not called low, we do not know if Usyk would have gotten up, or not. Just stop it ful!

Another excellent post of yours.
I suppose.....that showing support for your favorite fighters, even at the expense of knowledge and reason; is a big part of fandon in any competitive sport.
But purposely denigrating an athlete who slugs their way to the top in the hardest sport there is....that is just strange.

That outlines the only point I'm making when I respond to these type of threads.


Wilder vs. Usyk, Fury, Joshua, Ortiz, Ruiz, Parker, Zhang, etc?
Not my fight.


I simply use Wilder; with the most wins, most knockouts, most title defenses of any top heavyweight of this era; as a focal point for my contention, that these are the world's top athletes; and that lesser individuals like daggum and Pac=Duran are not worthy to disparage his accomplishments.

Very straightforward.

[daggum]

You have pointed... And been exposed for pointing off into space because your sense of skill is all tied up with Joshua's relative performance and with relative measures that are not objective. You take two pigs and put lipstick on one of them and claim one is better than the other... you ful! People like you are blind. Chris Areola threw more punches in his fight with Ruiz, yet fuls like you call him old... Ortiz was undefeated until he fought Wilder yet you claim his record, which was not any different from the rest of the pack, made him a weak opponent. Wilder knocked down one of the two best heavyweights, did Joshua manage that? Usyk who has no axe to grind stated unequivocally that Fury was a much harder fight for him than Joshua.

And now that Parker and Dubois have hit their stride you want to forget their losses to the same level of competition. Your silly argument boils down to: "well Wilder did not fight Joshua, so he fought substandard competition. If you look at fighters like Stiverne, martin, etc and compare their entire career to fighters like Dubois and parker they are not in a different class regarding ability. Parker has hit a peak and Dubois also has hit a stride, after losing to the same class of fighters... The proof being: NONE OF THESE GUYS has been able to defeat one of the top dogs! Facts! Wilder came closest... Dubois gets some credit, but assuming that shot was not called low, we do not know if Usyk would have gotten up, or not. Just stop it ful!

Guys like stiverne are not as good as Parker or Dubois. You are calling me a fan? You are saying I'm not objective? Projection. Parker literally has 3 top 5 wins. Stiverene 0. You are the fan if you think that's the same level. You want to know why no wilder opponent went on to do great things after losing to Wilder? It's because they weren't good. Parker and Dubois did great things because they were.

Also wilder knocked down 1 one of the 2 best heavyweights? That's nice he still lost and joshua kod Klitschko when he was ranked 1. A little better

ANTHONY JOSHUA VS. WLADIMIR KLITSCHKO
Date: April 29
Location: Wembley Stadium, London
Division: Heavyweights (for Joshua’s IBF and vacant WBA titles)
RING Ratings: Klitschko No. 1; Joshua No. 5

[billeau2]

Guys like stiverne are not as good as Parker or Dubois. You are calling me a fan? You are saying I'm not objective? Projection. Parker literally has 3 top 5 wins. Stiverene 0. You are the fan if you think that's the same level. You want to know why no wilder opponent went on to do great things after losing to Wilder? It's because they weren't good. Parker and Dubois did great things because they were.

Also wilder knocked down 1 one of the 2 best heavyweights? That's nice he still lost and joshua kod Klitschko when he was ranked 1. A little better

ANTHONY JOSHUA VS. WLADIMIR KLITSCHKO
Date: April 29
Location: Wembley Stadium, London
Division: Heavyweights (for Joshua’s IBF and vacant WBA titles)
RING Ratings: Klitschko No. 1; Joshua No. 5

Look at your vocabulary: "Top wins" "Rankings" "Great things" These are all weak descriptive terms with no real gravitas. And then we get the Joshua baloney. No Klit was aged and had been in a real tough fight with the Gypsy King before... and Joshua almost went down for the fight, not a dominant win by any stretch. But there we go again because: Klit was "Ranked" right? lol.

Real descriptors of ability are specific and objective, not relative measures that can be compared by individuals with no knowledge or understanding of the sport... These real measures are often not black and white, and defy easy comparable terms that are for simpletons like you. Once again we have a post with relative measures and Joshua... Just as I have claimed throughout is your way. Change it up... you been here a minute lol, never too late to learn a few things.

[billeau2]

Another excellent post of yours.
I suppose.....that showing support for your favorite fighters, even at the expense of knowledge and reason; is a big part of fandon in any competitive sport.
But purposely denigrating an athlete who slugs their way to the top in the hardest sport there is....that is just strange.

That outlines the only point I'm making when I respond to these type of threads.


Wilder vs. Usyk, Fury, Joshua, Ortiz, Ruiz, Parker, Zhang, etc?
Not my fight.


I simply use Wilder; with the most wins, most knockouts, most title defenses of any top heavyweight of this era; as a focal point for my contention, that these are the world's top athletes; and that lesser individuals like daggum and Pac=Duran are not worthy to disparage his accomplishments.

Very straightforward.

Listen bub I an ranked the number 5 poster compared to the number 100 poster! That makes me a phenomena!!! I am thinking of starting my own alphabet group, charging some sanctioning fees and calling me self a chump... I mean a champ! Daggum is ranked number 3 but in a fictional dust up with the number 2 poster I would do better!!!

[billeau2]

wilder has a 25% ko ratio against top 10 opposition.

that draw should have been a fury win.

he might have done a lot of things in his career, but yet he didnt and his resume is crap.

wilders losses came when he stepped up in competition. his career ended because he couldnt compete

This is truly cringe... Truly cringe... . Does that mean his Ko ratio jumps back to 80% when he fought the number 11th ranked guy? Even if what yo said was somehow true... How would we go about determining this stat? According to whom? what top 10 list?