The excuse of Joshua to avoid Ortiz and Wilder is...

[RScarf1]

Washington had a boxrec rating a lot higher than No. 135 at the time Wilder beat him, but I agree that his title defenses are against borderline world-class boxers and he needs to step up. Boxing Monthly magazine has him on its cover and that he wants to save heavyweight boxing in America. We're all waiting to see when that happens.

Well then, in order for that to happen we need the big fights. Who is holding up the biggest heavyweight fights? Its not Wilder.

It all depends on whether or not Joshua wants to keep his IBF and WBA belts. If he does then he has to fight his mandatories before he can face Wilder.
Wilder will just have to wait a little longer, and perhaps in the meantime he can defend his WBC title against one or two meaningful opponents.

I agree. Joshua has to make his mandatory defenses against Pulev and Ortiz in order to retain his titles. I think the main problem is the WBC who has Bermane Stiverne as No. 1 contender even after he missed a mandatory drug test for the VADA program. By the way, Washington is currently No. 37 in the world by boxrec and this is after his losses to Wilder and Jarrell Miller. I believe Washington was around No. 20 at the time he fought Wilder.

Wilder is not the best in the world right now, but he can prove that he is the best in America by defeating Charles Martin who was IBF champ before he lost to Joshua. Martin is rated No. 11 by the WBC, so maybe they would allow a voluntary defense against him. Unless there is going to be a unification having Joshua vs. Wilder, then I think the WBC should allow for a real challenge. Ortiz is No. 2 in WBC, so that also could be an option if the WBC enforces its rules regarding missed mandatory drug tests. However, since Don King promotes Stiverne, it seems that the WBC is making an exception in his case.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Charles Martin? So your suggested path for Wilder is to face his worst challenger ever? I don't see that first round KO helping him any with fans.

[gilgamesh]

I agree. Joshua has to make his mandatory defenses against Pulev and Ortiz in order to retain his titles. I think the main problem is the WBC who has Bermane Stiverne as No. 1 contender even after he missed a mandatory drug test for the VADA program. By the way, Washington is currently No. 37 in the world by boxrec and this is after his losses to Wilder and Jarrell Miller. I believe Washington was around No. 20 at the time he fought Wilder.

Wilder is not the best in the world right now, but he can prove that he is the best in America by defeating Charles Martin who was IBF champ before he lost to Joshua. Martin is rated No. 11 by the WBC, so maybe they would allow a voluntary defense against him. Unless there is going to be a unification having Joshua vs. Wilder, then I think the WBC should allow for a real challenge. Ortiz is No. 2 in WBC, so that also could be an option if the WBC enforces its rules regarding missed mandatory drug tests. However, since Don King promotes Stiverne, it seems that the WBC is making an exception in his case.

There are better American challengers out there than Charles Martin. Martin isn't even Top 20 right now. I saw Martin's last fight in person, he knocked out some fat dude in 1 round. Didn't do anything to get him back in the limelight, but it at least keeps him in "active" status. That's about all it did for him, well that, and whatever they paid him for it, which I doubt was much.

[RScarf1]

I think Wilder needs to build up his fan base in America and beating American contenders would help with that. I think Martin is a legitimate top 15 contender and he was a former world champion (even though it was a brief reign) and would still be a credible opponent and Wilder's best win if he defeated him. If Martin really sucks, then what is the risk for Wilder?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Fighting Martin wouldn't raise his profile an inch. There would be no risk for Wilder. Why would you even ask that question? Who doesn't want 'champions' taking risks?

[RScarf1]

Fighting Martin wouldn't raise his profile an inch. There would be no risk for Wilder. Why would you even ask that question? Who doesn't want 'champions' taking risks?

I think it would be a risk and it would be a better opponent than anyone he has faced. His opponents have been either barely world-class or not. At least it would be a common opponent with Joshua.

[Lackeos]

Washington had a boxrec rating a lot higher than No. 135 at the time Wilder beat him

Okay, you haven't seemed to learned the difference between a rating and a ranking. A rating is a point-value to estimate how good you are. A ranking is where you land in an ordered list of fighters from top to bottom. Washington's boxrec rating at the time that he fought Wilder was 92, which currently equates to about a #18 ranking.

But damn, Wilder is over here, defending his title against opponents with ratings of 66, 75, 76, and 92. Meanwhile, we're supposed to criticize Joshua for wanting to fight a guy with a 258 rating after he fought a guy with a 569 rating, and also fought a guy with a 247 rating a few fights before that.

[Ossyrules]

especially no criticism of Joshua for not making the fight fans want to see.

Why would anyone criticize Joshua for fighting Wlad and Pulev consecutively? That's pretty amazing. Wlad is basically the only other heavyweight in recent history to fight two opponents in a row who were that good (I'm referring to Fury and Joshua), and in Wlad's case, he didn't beat either of them. Wilder hasn't fought anyone as good as Pulev, nor anyone as good as Wlad, let alone back-to-back. Povetkin hasn't fought two opponents that good. Ortiz hasn't fought two opponents that good. Fury hasn't fought two opponents that good. Vitali arguably hasn't fought two opponents that good (I consider Byrd to be better than Pulev, but not necessarily the slightly pre-prime version of Byrd), definitely not both in a row, and he definitely didn't beat them at any rate. Seriously, when a guy beats the #1 heavyweight, and follows that up by beating the #5-7 heavyweight, there is really no need to criticize him until he falls into a pattern of fighting numerous guys outside the top 15 in a row.

Which brings me to Wilder. This guy fought Eric Molina, then Johann Duhaupas, then Artur Szpilka, then Chris Arreola, then Gerald Washington. That's weak as f*ck for the amount of hype that I've had to put up with. 5 title defenses, and none of them had a boxrec rating higher than 135. I promise I will always criticize every fighter who gets as much hype as Wilder while defending his title against a string of 5 challengers like that. Even if Joshua fights 5 sh*tty contenders in a row like that, I swear I will criticize him for it.

Generally speaking, I almost never criticize a boxer for fighting a weak opponent (Pulev isn't even weak) after beating the #1 guy in the division. Rarely is criticism warranted until a fighter is fighting at least two weak opponents in a row, perhaps not even then. Generally once a fighter's accomplishments are as good as his hype (which they are in Joshua's case, and they are not in Wilder's case), then I don't mind as much if they start taking it easy for a bit. Mayweather is one of the few fighters I might have been unreasonably tough on, but given how obviously great he was, he had a responsibility to really push his limits.

So you disagree with Hearn from the article I posted? A year or two younger Wlad would have finished Joshua, and we wouldn't be having this conversation. A win vs a 41yr old Wlad is a good win, but not great considering his age. I would say the same about Floyd, Pac, etc losing at that age.

The only opponents I defend on Wilfred resume are 2 he fought coming off broken hands, and 1 he fought when Povetkin fell through. The criticism he gets is deserved, but gets no credit for wanting to fight Ortiz and Joshua. They don't want the fight it seems. The only offer Wilder has turned down was Whyte, because he was promised Joshua next.

It's deja vu with you.

As said many times, there's solid evidence 39 year old Wlad wouldn't have finished Joshua just like 41 year old Wlad couldn't/didn't. I can't be bothered to repeat it. It's such weak assessment from you.

Beating Wlad is the golden win in heavyweight division. It makes him the man. For someone whose fought about 60 rounds that's good going so far

[Ossyrules]

Washington had a boxrec rating a lot higher than No. 135 at the time Wilder beat him

Okay, you haven't seemed to learned the difference between a rating and a ranking. A rating is a point-value to estimate how good you are. A ranking is where you land in an ordered list of fighters from top to bottom. Washington's boxrec rating at the time that he fought Wilder was 92, which currently equates to about a #18 ranking.

But damn, Wilder is over here, defending his title against opponents with ratings of 66, 75, 76, and 92. Meanwhile, we're supposed to criticize Joshua for wanting to fight a guy with a 258 rating after he fought a guy with a 569 rating, and also fought a guy with a 247 rating a few fights before that.

You're on the money this thread

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Fighting Martin wouldn't raise his profile an inch. There would be no risk for Wilder. Why would you even ask that question? Who doesn't want 'champions' taking risks?

I think it would be a risk and it would be a better opponent than anyone he has faced. His opponents have been either barely world-class or not. At least it would be a common opponent with Joshua.

I doubt Showtime would even approve him as an opponent.

[RScarf1]

Okay, you haven't seemed to learned the difference between a rating and a ranking. A rating is a point-value to estimate how good you are. A ranking is where you land in an ordered list of fighters from top to bottom. Washington's boxrec rating at the time that he fought Wilder was 92, which currently equates to about a #18 ranking.

Okay, I understand the difference between rating points and ranking. I don't keep track of that. In my opinion, if you are legitimately ranked top 25 in a division, then you are world-class.

[RScarf1]

Fighting Martin wouldn't raise his profile an inch. There would be no risk for Wilder. Why would you even ask that question? Who doesn't want 'champions' taking risks?

I think it would be a risk and it would be a better opponent than anyone he has faced. His opponents have been either barely world-class or not. At least it would be a common opponent with Joshua.

I doubt Showtime would even approve him as an opponent.

Well, Showtime approved Eric Molina and Artur Szpilka as opponents for Wilder. I think they would approve Martin.

[KiwiRider]

I agree. Joshua has to make his mandatory defenses against Pulev and Ortiz in order to retain his titles. I think the main problem is the WBC who has Bermane Stiverne as No. 1 contender even after he missed a mandatory drug test for the VADA program. By the way, Washington is currently No. 37 in the world by boxrec and this is after his losses to Wilder and Jarrell Miller. I believe Washington was around No. 20 at the time he fought Wilder.

Wilder is not the best in the world right now, but he can prove that he is the best in America by defeating Charles Martin who was IBF champ before he lost to Joshua. Martin is rated No. 11 by the WBC, so maybe they would allow a voluntary defense against him. Unless there is going to be a unification having Joshua vs. Wilder, then I think the WBC should allow for a real challenge. Ortiz is No. 2 in WBC, so that also could be an option if the WBC enforces its rules regarding missed mandatory drug tests. However, since Don King promotes Stiverne, it seems that the WBC is making an exception in his case.

There are better American challengers out there than Charles Martin. Martin isn't even Top 20 right now. I saw Martin's last fight in person, he knocked out some fat dude in 1 round. Didn't do anything to get him back in the limelight, but it at least keeps him in "active" status. That's about all it did for him, well that, and whatever they paid him for it, which I doubt was much.

I saw the YouTube clip of Martin's last fight. It was terrible. The opponent, not nessearily Martin. But it left me wondering why? What a waste of time for him even getting in the ring. Martin is not a draw card for Wilder to fight. He has a belt for a few months, but AJ exposed him to the world. Cornish did 5 times better against AJ than Martin.
Because of that, there is a stigma of fighting a guy another champion blew through. In the same way there is no point in AJ fighting, well anyone Wilder has fought

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I think it would be a risk and it would be a better opponent than anyone he has faced. His opponents have been either barely world-class or not. At least it would be a common opponent with Joshua.

I doubt Showtime would even approve him as an opponent.

Well, Showtime approved Eric Molina and Artur Szpilka as opponents for Wilder. I think they would approve Martin.

They're both more proven than martin. They won't pay for the Stiverne rematch, they wouldn't pay for Martin.

[Badhusker]

Washington had a boxrec rating a lot higher than No. 135 at the time Wilder beat him, but I agree that his title defenses are against borderline world-class boxers and he needs to step up. Boxing Monthly magazine has him on its cover and that he wants to save heavyweight boxing in America. We're all waiting to see when that happens.

Well then, in order for that to happen we need the big fights. Who is holding up the biggest heavyweight fights? Its not Wilder.

It all depends on whether or not Joshua wants to keep his IBF and WBA belts. If he does then he has to fight his mandatories before he can face Wilder.
Wilder will just have to wait a little longer, and perhaps in the meantime he can defend his WBC title against one or two meaningful opponents.

Who would be meaningful opponents? Martin? No Breazeale? No. Folks that watch heavyweight fights want fights between Joshua, Wilder, Ortiz, and Parker. No one else matters that much imo.

[RScarf1]

I doubt Showtime would even approve him as an opponent.

Well, Showtime approved Eric Molina and Artur Szpilka as opponents for Wilder. I think they would approve Martin.

They're both more proven than martin. They won't pay for the Stiverne rematch, they wouldn't pay for Martin.

The best currently active heavyweights Wilder has beaten are Malik Scott, Johann Duhaupas, and Eric Molina. Martin is better than all three of them.
People are dismissing Martin because of his knockout loss to Joshua and that is what people thought about Wladimir Klitschko when he lost by knockout. Then he came back and had a successful career. I know people want to see the champions Joshua, Wilder, and Parker fight each other, but if that doesn't happen, then they should have to defend against others such as Martin, Ortiz, or Pulev.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Well, Showtime approved Eric Molina and Artur Szpilka as opponents for Wilder. I think they would approve Martin.

They're both more proven than martin. They won't pay for the Stiverne rematch, they wouldn't pay for Martin.

The best currently active heavyweights Wilder has beaten are Malik Scott, Johann Duhaupas, and Eric Molina. Martin is better than all three of them.
People are dismissing Martin because of his knockout loss to Joshua and that is what people thought about Wladimir Klitschko when he lost by knockout. Then he came back and had a successful career. I know people want to see the champions Joshua, Wilder, and Parker fight each other, but if that doesn't happen, then they should have to defend against others such as Martin, Ortiz, or Pulev.

Are you his manager?

[KiwiRider]

Well, Showtime approved Eric Molina and Artur Szpilka as opponents for Wilder. I think they would approve Martin.

They're both more proven than martin. They won't pay for the Stiverne rematch, they wouldn't pay for Martin.

The best currently active heavyweights Wilder has beaten are Malik Scott, Johann Duhaupas, and Eric Molina. Martin is better than all three of them.
People are dismissing Martin because of his knockout loss to Joshua and that is what people thought about Wladimir Klitschko when he lost by knockout. Then he came back and had a successful career. I know people want to see the champions Joshua, Wilder, and Parker fight each other, but if that doesn't happen, then they should have to defend against others such as Martin, Ortiz, or Pulev.

I'm dismissing Martin because he isn't very good. He didn't just lose to AJ, he was blasted out and I expect Wilder would do pretty much the same. After that loss he has done less than Stiverne since. Sure he had the arm injury, and that was sad, but even before that he should have taken the money and invested it wisely for his family's future. Because he does not have a future inside the top 10 let alone another belt.
I would rate him outside the top 5 in America alone.

[RScarf1]

They're both more proven than martin. They won't pay for the Stiverne rematch, they wouldn't pay for Martin.

The best currently active heavyweights Wilder has beaten are Malik Scott, Johann Duhaupas, and Eric Molina. Martin is better than all three of them.
People are dismissing Martin because of his knockout loss to Joshua and that is what people thought about Wladimir Klitschko when he lost by knockout. Then he came back and had a successful career. I know people want to see the champions Joshua, Wilder, and Parker fight each other, but if that doesn't happen, then they should have to defend against others such as Martin, Ortiz, or Pulev.

Are you his manager?

No, but I probably should be.

[RScarf1]

I'm dismissing Martin because he isn't very good. He didn't just lose to AJ, he was blasted out and I expect Wilder would do pretty much the same. After that loss he has done less than Stiverne since. Sure he had the arm injury, and that was sad, but even before that he should have taken the money and invested it wisely for his family's future. Because he does not have a future inside the top 10 let alone another belt.
I would rate him outside the top 5 in America alone.

I'm kind of surprised at the opinions on the forum about Martin. He's 25-1-1, 23 KOs. His only loss is to Joshua who no one has beaten. He's ranked No. 8 by BoxRec, No. 11 by the WBC, and No. 12 by the IBF. Outside of the top 5 in America? Really? So you think Jarrell Miller is better than Martin?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Yes, so is the guy he just beat. Martin isn't good. I'm surprised you think he is, first person I've ever heard that from. Well, except for kalan.

[KiwiRider]

I'm dismissing Martin because he isn't very good. He didn't just lose to AJ, he was blasted out and I expect Wilder would do pretty much the same. After that loss he has done less than Stiverne since. Sure he had the arm injury, and that was sad, but even before that he should have taken the money and invested it wisely for his family's future. Because he does not have a future inside the top 10 let alone another belt.
I would rate him outside the top 5 in America alone.

I'm kind of surprised at the opinions on the forum about Martin. He's 25-1-1, 23 KOs. His only loss is to Joshua who no one has beaten. He's ranked No. 8 by BoxRec, No. 11 by the WBC, and No. 12 by the IBF. Outside of the top 5 in America? Really? So you think Jarrell Miller is better than Martin?

Charles Martin has an impressive record. That is until you delve into it. Once you done that, you will see why he has been judged on the Joshua fight, because it's the only live opponent he has faced. I think that fight did him the world of good. Ever since then he has been respectful and a decent guy. Before that fight he was shouting -
"I walk this earth like a God!!"
And in his own words he was in a bad place back then. I like him now, I just don't think he is any good.
And while I'm not particularly a Miller fan, yes I think Miller, Breazeale, Washington, Klownaki, and especially Wilder would waste him and Ruiez would out point him. And thats just in the American HW division.

[asdfjkl]

Charles Martin indeed has a padded record, he simply never stood up except for one uncredebly lucky win against a cruiserweight with a lot of luck called Glazkov. Somehow on paper it's a 3 round KO and that launched him.

[RScarf1]

Charles Martin indeed has a padded record, he simply never stood up except for one uncredebly lucky win against a cruiserweight with a lot of luck called Glazkov. Somehow on paper it's a 3 round KO and that launched him.

His opponents mostly had winning records and a few also had undefeated records. There are no big names on his record, but I don't think it is padded. I think he didn't get the opportunities such as what is happening now. He lost by knockout to the best heavyweight. So did Joe Frazier when George Foreman beat him. All I'm saying is that he should get another chance. If he loses again by knockout, then people can say that he is a pretender and not a contender. People are saying that anyway right now, but after another knockout loss, then it would be justified.

[KiwiRider]

Heck, why not.
His arm has been tested and he says it's OK
Only problem is his profile, better fights need public interest. His last fight almost went unnoticed. It was a test and his injuries passed.
A top five US opponent would bring him back if he got the win. Or push him into obscurity if he lost.
But like Stiverne, I'm not sure there is any public interest enough to generate the money needed to make that fight.