Wilder's title reign (pre Ortiz II)

[Cholo_cws]

I read a recent copy of Boxing News that highlighted Deontay Wilder's 10 fight heavyweight title reign. It made me recall a BBC 5Live boxing with Mike Costello and Steve Bunce podcast (in the aftermath of Wilder's win over Dominic Brezeale to be exact) that proclaimed Wilder was only the tenth heavyweight world champion in history to have made nine successful consecutive defences - a draw being a successful defence.
I couldn't help question Wilder's 'achievement' given his weak opposition and in a multi-belt era too, so with too much time on my hands I thought I'd take a look at where Wilder's opponents were ranked by the Transnational Boxing Rankings Board at the time of the fight and also to look at the first ten opponents of Muhammad Ali's second title reign and their ranking with the Ring magazine at the time they faced him. Not an exact science but I think it paints a picture.

WILDER'S OPPONENTS

(World champ Wladimir Klitschko plus 10 other contenders rated at the time.)

17/1/15 STIVERNE...…… #3 contender

13/6/15 MOLINA

26/9/15 DUHAUPAS

16/1/16 SZPILKA

16/7/16 ARREOLA

(as of 8/11/16 World champion Tyson Fury stripped and dropped from rankings - from now 10 contenders alone ranked.)

25/2/17 WASHINGTON

4/11/17 STIVERNE

3/3/18 ORTIZ...……..(had been #3 contender until 12/12/17 but was dropped for failing a drugs test.)

1/12/18 FURY....………..#8

18/5/19 BREAZEALE


ALI'S OPPONENTS

30/10/74 FOREMAN.... # World Champion

24/3/75 WEPNER...… #9

16/5/75 LYLE...……. #8

30/6/75 BUGNER….. #4

1/10/75 FRAZIER...…. #2

20/2/76 COOPMAN

30/4/76 YOUNG...…... #3

25/5/76 DUNN

28/9/76 NORTON...…... #2

16/5/77 EVANGELISTA

The reason I chose Ali was because of the aforementioned 5Live boxing podcast and the bizarre justification of Wilder's weak opposition via a comparison to Ali. On the podcast a listener called Joe must have been similarly unimpressed with Wilder's reign's place in history and he tweeted the programme to say that he couldn't believe that they were giving Wilder credit for this...….. adding that Wilder basically 'lost' the Fury fight and had only fought one other decent opponent (Luis Ortiz.) Mike Costello claimed that they were just looking at the stats which is fair enough I suppose but an actual interesting discussion on the merits of Wilder's opponents was pretty much shut down after Bunce said "I understand 'Big' Joe's complaint and it's a valid complaint because it's a straightforward kneejerk complaint because we all imagine that Muhammad Ali just fought (the likes of) Joe Frazier, Ken Norton and George Foreman..." (- do we?) Mike Costello then mentioned Rudi Lubbers and Jean-Pierre Coopman which was the cue for a lot of gaffawing about the ability of those two. Bunce, who recently wrote and presented a Yahoo History of the Heavyweight Title (for the 60s and 70s) podcast , claimed they'd fought for some north European title (- nothing on boxrec) but it's a shame Bunce didn't display his expertise to point out that obviously Lubbers fought Ali when Ali wasn't even the champion so why he was even mentioned I really don't know.
I just cannot see how any boxing fan let alone a boxing journalist would go down this route to explain away the criticisms of a weak title reign. Quite strange. Anyway, starting with the Ortiz rematch hopefully Wilder's reign will continue to pick up.

[margaret thatcher]

Buncey is a bufoon most of the time, just loves to hear himself shouting and his counter argument is mainly to shout even louder. But oh my, he's a 'character' and we love him for it

Ya, Wilder ain't have a quality filled reign, I'll give you that

[coneye]

Buncey is a bufoon most of the time, just loves to hear himself shouting and his counter argument is mainly to shout even louder. But oh my, he's a 'character' and we love him for it

Ya, Wilder ain't have a quality filled reign, I'll give you that

THIS : clap: I especielly like the word BUFOON ,,

[Tuan_Jim]

Klitschko fans do the same thing with their icons. They bamboozle you with impressive sounding stats rather than focus on the quality of the opposition.

[ewenhay]

His recent record of opponents is pretty good though.

Fury and Ortiz twice in his last 4 fights is good going

[oogiebe]

Do the same comp vs Wlad.

[margaret thatcher]

If I recall Wlad fought loads of guys who were ranked top 10, it's just the division was never very good

[oogiebe]

If I recall Wlad fought loads of guys who were ranked top 10, it's just the division was never very good

Many who were number 10. There were fighters he never fought who were in the top 10 during his reigns that he never fought. Tua for one. Holyfield; Tyson...

[margaret thatcher]

Tyson and Holyfield just seem like from different times tbh

He had loads of guys that were well ranked at the time. His resume is filled with guys rated by the ring for example. But like I said it's just that the division blew

[margaret thatcher]

Like for example, Eddie Chambers was rated #4 by The Ring

[oogiebe]

Tyson and Holyfield just seem like from different times tbh

He had loads of guys that were well ranked at the time. His resume is filled with guys rated by the ring for example. But like I said it's just that the division blew

i don't disagee that it was a weak era, but if you take a hard look at this defenses, most were lower ranked opponents and some not ranked at all. Take a peak at historical rankings of the ABC's during Wlad's reighn and see who he didn't fight.

[margaret thatcher]

He fought tons of ranked opponents, they are all over his record.

[oogiebe]

He fought tons of ranked opponents, they are all over his record.

Low ranked. Many number 10's. Go look at rankings during his reign. You'll see who he didn't fight.

[margaret thatcher]

This is just ones I can find specific ratings for thatI know of. An online search tells me that he had other opponents ranked as well, but I can't find the specific rankings.

#1 Pulev, Byrd
#2 Pov, Haye (both only behind Vitali so essentially the best he could face)
#3 Chag, Fury
#4 Chambers
#6 Ibragimov, AJ
#7 Jennings
#9 Peter I
#10 Thompson 2 (pretty sure TT was ranked for the first fight too, I have lots of physical copies from around then)

He fought loads of ranked guys, just that the division was weak. I'm pretty sure that even a guy like Jameel McCline and Calvin Brock was rated when he beat him too. Byrd was obviously ranked too for the first fight as he was coming off beating Vitali, I think maybe at 6th or 7th.

[Tuan_Jim]

If I recall Wlad fought loads of guys who were ranked top 10, it's just the division was never very good

Many who were number 10. There were fighters he never fought who were in the top 10 during his reigns that he never fought. Tua for one. Holyfield; Tyson...

Wlad was still fumbling around at WBO level in 2004 when Holyfield and Tyson were 40. They kept building him up but he kept getting KOd in pivotal fights. The 90s class had developed rigor mortis by the time Wladimir had perfected his unmanly art of self-defense and commenced boxing's version of the 19 Long Winters.

[Tuan_Jim]

Tyson and Holyfield just seem like from different times tbh

He had loads of guys that were well ranked at the time. His resume is filled with guys rated by the ring for example. But like I said it's just that the division blew

i don't disagee that it was a weak era, but if you take a hard look at this defenses, most were lower ranked opponents and some not ranked at all. Take a peak at historical rankings of the ABC's during Wlad's reighn and see who he didn't fight.

Rankings are irrelevant. Every Wlad challenger could have been ranked no 1 for all it matters. They were still execrable.

[margaret thatcher]

They were different times really, as far as the top 10 versions are concerned. Can't really hold it against Wlad that for example he never fought Mike Tyson. Holyfield had more overlap but even he was getting clowned by the likes of Byrd when Wlad was there

[oogiebe]

This is just ones I can find specific ratings for thatI know of. An online search tells me that he had other opponents ranked as well, but I can't find the specific rankings.

#1 Pulev, Byrd
#2 Pov, Haye (both only behind Vitali)
#3 Chag, Fury
#4 Chambers
#6 Ibragimov, AJ
#7 Jennings
#9 Peter I
#10 Thompson 2

He fought loads of ranked guys, just that the division was weak. I'm pretty sure that even a guy like Jameel McCline and Calvin Brock was rated when he beat him too. Byrd was obviously ranked too for the first fight, I think maybe at 6th or 7th.

just saying that to say he fought the best of his day doesn't wash. Here's Top 10 ranked fighters who he didn't fight during one of his reigns:
John Ruiz
David Tua
James Tony
Luis Ortiz (WBA #2 2012)
Evander Holyfield
Lennox Lewis
Mike Tyson
Oliver McCall

Here's some low ranked top 10's he fought in title defenses:
Charles Shufford .
Derrick Jefferson
Frans Botha
Ray Mercer (well past it)
Jean Marc Mormeck
Francesco Pianeta
Alex Leapai

[margaret thatcher]

Ya, no doubt he didn't fight literally every fighter ranked top 10. But come on, naming guys like Mike Tyson

Facts are, he didn't fight every ranked guy out there, but he still fought loads of them, and not just the bottom dwellers. And yep, the division was weak as ass.

[oogiebe]

i don't disagee that it was a weak era, but if you take a hard look at this defenses, most were lower ranked opponents and some not ranked at all. Take a peak at historical rankings of the ABC's during Wlad's reighn and see who he didn't fight.

Rankings are irrelevant. Every Wlad challenger could have been ranked no 1 for all it matters. They were still execrable.

This is about saying Wlad fought the best of his weak era. It just ain't the truth.

[oogiebe]

Ya, no doubt he didn't fight literally every fighter ranked top 10. But come on, naming guys like Mike Tyson

Facts are, he didn't fight every ranked guy out there, but he still fought loads of them, and not just the bottom dwellers. And yep, the division was weak as ass.

Don't focus in on one. Tyson was top five ranked during Wlad's first reign. Believe me, I'm not saying Mike stood a chance. Again, and it's not against you, but I'm tired of folks saying Wlad fought the best in a weak era. He didn't.

[Tuan_Jim]

Oh Wlad always took the path of least resistance. If he lost he let his brother avenge him. He put off rematches with Brewster and Peter for years till both men were past it. It's a little remembered fact that in 2006 he had the option of challenging big hitting Brewster for the WBO belt or pitty pat Byrd for the IBF belt. Brewster had destroyed him and Byrd had not only lost comprehensively to him already but was also in visible decline. Who did Wlad prefer to fight? Byrd.

[margaret thatcher]

Ya, no doubt he didn't fight literally every fighter ranked top 10. But come on, naming guys like Mike Tyson

Facts are, he didn't fight every ranked guy out there, but he still fought loads of them, and not just the bottom dwellers. And yep, the division was weak as ass.

Don't focus in on one. Tyson was top five ranked during Wlad's first reign. Believe me, I'm not saying Mike stood a chance. Again, and it's not against you, but I'm tired of folks saying Wlad fought the best in a weak era. He didn't.

Pretty much no one fights everyone out there. And his career spanned multiple eras really, even with a belt he was still upcoming as a 20 something year old back in the early 2000s. He absolutely was fighting at pretty much the highest levels out there in his big reign.

Tyson, Holyfield, Tua...these guys were all pretty much done by the early 2000s, getting clowned by the likes of Byrd, Toney, etc.

[oogiebe]

Oh Wlad always took the path of least resistance. If he lost he let his brother avenge him. He put off rematches with Brewster and Peter for years till both men were past it. It's a little remembered fact that in 2006 he had the option of challenging big hitting Brewster for the WBO belt or pitty pat Byrd for the IBF belt. Brewster had destroyed him and Byrd had not only lost comprehensively to him already but was also in visible decline. Who did Wlad prefer to fight? Byrd.

True. Very strategic opponent choice. BTW, that Brewster fight was the one of the strangest things I"ve ever seen in the ring. The man exhausted himself beating Brewster. Never saw someone so comprehensively spent.

[Tuan_Jim]

Ya, no doubt he didn't fight literally every fighter ranked top 10. But come on, naming guys like Mike Tyson

Facts are, he didn't fight every ranked guy out there, but he still fought loads of them, and not just the bottom dwellers. And yep, the division was weak as ass.

Don't focus in on one. Tyson was top five ranked during Wlad's first reign. Believe me, I'm not saying Mike stood a chance. Again, and it's not against you, but I'm tired of folks saying Wlad fought the best in a weak era. He didn't.

You don't think Mike Tyson had a chance against Wlad in 2000? Totally disagree. Wlad crapped his pants under Corrie Sanders' attacks! I'd give Tyson a serious chance to stopping Wlad in 1. This thread has deviated wildly from the OP.

My summary: Wladimir fought awful opponents and avoided a lot of good ones. He got KOd by awful opponents. All of his awful opponents were ranked somewhere in the top 10. That doesn't matter. Sorry to everybody for derailing this thread.