BoxRec

crusader wrote:I have no problem with anyone being critical of him, I do have a problem with people saying he's a joke (not that you are) but he is finishing 99% of his opponents, sure he will show holes but name me one fighter outside of Mayweather that doesn't show some vulnerability in certain areas?

Name me one fighter that hasn't been hit by lesser fighters than themselves? There's only one problem with being critical, it's been overly critical. No fighter is perfect, all get hit and some respond differently to challenges based on their level of experience. 30 plus fights with most of them going no more than 4 rounds isn't significant enough experience to not show some vulnerabilities regardless of what anyone thinks.

Of course most fighters show vulnerabilities, but the key is how many, to what extent, and compared to whom? I don't believe that most other top HWs would've shown the same type of shortcomings against a notably limited fighter like Molina, and I believe that's why Wilder has drawn a fair bit of criticism for his performance...which I think is fair.

Wilder isn't a novice anymore (10 years boxing, 34 pro fights, 40 amateur fights at a very high level) and some of the shortcomings he's shown (e.g. throwing wild punches and sticking his chin up when attacked) are things that would've probably been smoothed out by now if he was capable of that. I struggle to recall fighters making major improvements in these areas so long after they started boxing, and I doubt that he will. I also don't think he takes a good shot and that won't change with experience either.[/quote]

Let's talk about vulnerabilities and who has shown many flaws at championship level, Tyson showed how limited he was when he only relied on his power to win bouts, Lewis showed holes in his defense, Manny showed how vulnerable he was when he rushes in, I could go on and on. Ali lost to Spinks who only had 7 pro bouts at the time. Shall I continue???

You go on to quote how many years of experience Wilder has had but you fail to breakdown how long any of those fight really lasted and how much real ring experience it equates to, let's not get beyond ourselves and act as if it's only DW that shows vulnerabilities, flaws or didn't put away limited fighters (look at Ali).

You are just nitpicking one person without considering all the rest with their setbacks, flaws and vulnerabilities.

Let's talk about vulnerabilities and who has shown many flaws at championship level, Tyson showed how limited he was when he only relied on his power to win bouts, Lewis showed holes in his defense, Manny showed how vulnerable he was when he rushes in, I could go on and on. Ali lost to Spinks who only had 7 pro bouts at the time. Shall I continue???

You go on to quote how many years of experience Wilder has had but you fail to breakdown how long any of those fight really lasted and how much real ring experience it equates to, let's not get beyond ourselves and act as if it's only DW that shows vulnerabilities, flaws or didn't put away limited fighters (look at Ali).

You are just nitpicking one person without considering all the rest with their setbacks, flaws and vulnerabilities.

Again, you're missing the point. Many top fighters show vulnerabilities but I don't believe that they showed them to the same extent that Wilder did against such limited opposition. Fighters like Tyson, Lewis, Manny, and Ali also have a long history of beating elite opponents which suggests that they could consistently win at the highest levels in a way that Wilder is yet to prove.

I already noted that most of Wilder's fights have ended early and that this could've impared his progress to some extent, but I've made it very clearly that I believe that many of the flaws he's shown would've been sorted out by know if he were capable of improving them to a significant extent. Aside from his experience in pro bouts he's been in camps with the likes of Haye and Klitschko and fought the best amateurs in the world prior to turning professional (he had more amateur bouts than people like Fury and Jennings--and at a higher level), so for me it's laughable to act like he's still a novice.

You keep responding to me but are just repeating yourself like a parrot, so I don't think I'll reply again unless you make points that you haven't already raised. I've stated that I don't think that Wilder is a joke, that he's a good fighter who is a threat to anyone, that I don't think it's a huge deal that Molina wasn't stopped early, and that Wilder shouldn't be written off on the basis of this one performace. Despite all this you continue to drone on to me about how I'm being unfair to Wilder (and if you don't mean this why do you keep responding to me specifically?), which leads me to suggest that you're overly sesitive and unwilling to tolerate him being criticized, even if it's done in a balanced manner.

Wilder is ripe for criticism as evidenced by the plethora of negativity across the boxing sites. I have contributed my share.

However, I want to point out that Wilder HAS shown significant improvement over the years. He boxed very well against Stiverne. You can denigrate his opponent but it was a virtuoso performance.

He was less than stellar in his last fight but he got the job done, by stoppage.

He is fun to watch because he is a big hitter with a suspect chin. Also, his boxing skills are under rated.

Tanzio wrote:Wilder is ripe for criticism as evidenced by the plethora of negativity across the boxing sites. I have contributed my share.

However, I want to point out that Wilder HAS shown significant improvement over the years. He boxed very well against Stiverne. You can denigrate his opponent but it was a virtuoso performance.

He was less than stellar in his last fight but he got the job done, by stoppage.

He is fun to watch because he is a big hitter with a suspect chin. Also, his boxing skills are under rated.

Very nicely said. There is room for improvement. But he has some decent skill. Saying he is fun to watch is the truth