The haters have hated for 5 years and Wilder is still the champion.

[Bitedown]

Wilders' resume as a champion is perhaps one of the worst ever. We can all admit he's a puncher. Fact is Fury and Joshua have better resumes and they have fought halve that of Wilder, in a pretty weak era.

Fury has fought Wlad and Wilder....that’s really it

But it’s HW you pretty much fight nobodies until you don’t..

[Curtis Harper]

People hate May and he's been retired for 5 years

[techliam]

Obviously I know how the “Ten point must” system works. I’m talking about perception of a fight as a whole. They used to go until someone could no longer toe the line. Street fights go until someone quits. When u survive by the bell in the final round, someone can say u almost lost, or barely won, or it was close in the end, because it’s true. On paper winning 11 out of 12rnds looks great, but not so great if ur the one barely surviving in the 12th.

Of course

But I don’t recognise any view of a fight that doesn’t go by the rules of the sport

For example, if you argue Wilder has a case because in a street fight it would be entirely different, there is only one response - it’s boxing not a street fight

I understand your point, but anyone who looks at fights like this needs to point out that they are not looking at it through a boxing perspective

[techliam]

You don't think that's cutting hairs and playing semantics?

You are using triangle theory to claim one has proven more than the other.

Nothing to do with performance, nothing to do with technique, nothing to do with any physical sequence that ever took place in the ring. Just a name used as evidence to suggest one man ought to be elevated above another. Better than, more proven.....whatever, at the core of it what you are saying is your evidence to suggest A is above C in any regard is A having defeated B who themselves defeated C.

Well your argument needs to be thrown towards somebody else, because what you’re claiming is not what I argued, not even remotely

Also, a resume includes fighting somebody, which happens in the ring. I’m not sure how you managed to conclude that it’s outside of the ring?

How fighters win fights, the differences in scorecards, timing of opponent etc all go into ranking fighters. At the same time, even if it was a blowout, it means little against overmatched opponents. It is more than possible for C to be ranked higher than A, even though A beat B. Depends on the overall resume, which you’re trying to discredit for some reason. As for how this affects Wilder, I have no idea. Wilders problem is that he hasn’t fought anybody worthwhile other than Fury, and there he was extremely lucky to sc**** a draw. Seems like I’m posting things completely irrelevant to the thread

[joseph5620]

That’s funny giving the forum thrives on actual discredit of legit opponents for AJ while Wilder fights guys who get title fights for no reason,I’ll ask you since you like to spin actual facts .

Does struggles with Hammer warrant a title fight for Ortiz ? Yes or no giving we’re discussing poor performances and fighting weak opponents ?

What struggle? He pretty much won every round.

[Marchegiano]

Well your argument needs to be thrown towards somebody else, because what you’re claiming is not what I argued, not even remotely

Also, a resume includes fighting somebody, which happens in the ring. I’m not sure how you managed to conclude that it’s outside of the ring?

How fighters win fights, the differences in scorecards, timing of opponent etc all go into ranking fighters. At the same time, even if it was a blowout, it means little against overmatched opponents. It is more than possible for C to be ranked higher than A, even though A beat B. Depends on the overall resume, which you’re trying to discredit for some reason. As for how this affects Wilder, I have no idea. Wilders problem is that he hasn’t fought anybody worthwhile other than Fury, and there he was extremely lucky to sc**** a draw. Seems like I’m posting things completely irrelevant to the thread

Well yeah, that's even more removed, that's exactly my beef.

A beats B, B over C, does not mean A will be C

A beats B, C has no one the caliber of B on his record, A is more proven.

Eh? Isn't caliber just even more convoluted subjectivity?

You're saying it is silly to exalt one over another even though one has a direct win over another's direct loss BUT it's okay to elevate one over another even without a direct win because he has a win you think is higher caliber than any of the latter's wins.

That's even more removed, convoluted, and subjective than triangle theory.

Why aren't fighters compared at comparable calibers then?

If Wilder has no good wins why not compare his bad wins to others bad wins and explain how Wilder's became so much more devastating than anyone else's.

Even Marciano has a Lowry. Ever bruiser, every skill king, everyone of them fought cans, but we use resume as a reason to just disregard that part of their record rather than a reason to compare only that part of their records. We just say X has the better names and so wins this comparison....subjective, convoluted, and very close to triangle theory.

[eco1]

And should NOT be, cause he lost his 1st fight with Fury.

[Monzon99]

Because Wilder is rigged not to lose and Haymon has Sulaiman in his pocket to block all threats he can't fix from getting a shot at thebig alabama fraud.

Wilder is a fake counterfeit fraud pretender.

[Monzon99]

Haymon is saving fatso ruiz to dive for wilder, then the media will be manipulated to say since wilder kod ruiz (dive) then that means wilder is better than Joshua. Wilder and Haymon will use this to duck Joshua and $100m because they know wilder is a fraud and can't beat Joshua.

[Monzon99]

Haymon is essentially splitting the hwt division into two halves - the real half with Joshua, Usyk, Pulev, Hrgovic, Povetkin etc.
And the WWF half with wilder fury ruiz breazeale kownacki ortiz etc. Wilder will never go to the real side, he is protected in the WWF half.