If Wilder loses...

[holmcall]

He becomes another Michael Grant

[Spicoli]

He becomes another Michael Grant

I think Grant gets a bad rap in hindsight, at least as far as early competition v Wilders and before he was ko'd by a jab. Grant showed big balls and solid sharp ability before that. It was dopes like Kellerman making him the poster boy for "needing a new super heavyweight division" who got swallowed up in hype.

[EL DINAMITA]

Depends on how he loses but if he gets dogged out quick, he'd be the next Tyrone Brunson..

[Maravilla2012]

Wilder is a question mark but if he loses he doesn't fall far I think. Hes untested its not like he'd lose to an unknown heavyweight. Stiverne is a legit heavyweight so Wilder losing to him shouldn't be a big deal its a 50/50 fight ( if Wilder is the real deal ). I'm more interested on how he would handle the loss. Would he crumble and end up being another over hyped fighter? Or will he go back to his gym and improve the fighter he is and come back better?

[Max Power]

Modern HW is held to such a ridiculous standard these days.

In the past, double digit losses were a sign of character.

Today even a single loss and you are apparently "exposed" as a bum LOL

[Master]

Modern HW is held to such a ridiculous standard these days.

In the past, double digit losses were a sign of character.

Today even a single loss and you are apparently "exposed" as a bum LOL

With so much TV exposure fighters fight less and are more manufactured to win titles. They have less time to develop and learn the skills they need to be successful.

[Max Power]

Modern HW is held to such a ridiculous standard these days.

In the past, double digit losses were a sign of character.

Today even a single loss and you are apparently "exposed" as a bum LOL

With so much TV exposure fighters fight less and are more manufactured to win titles. They have less time to develop and learn the skills they need to be successful.

That's not true. Instead of fighting bum fights more often, they fight quality opponents less often and have far more sparring and mitt work in between fights.

In the past bummy opponents sometimes got top ranked. In the past fighters earned title shots by beating unranked bums and even by LOSING fights.

Atleast today, even if a guy like Wilder has bummed his way to 31-0, he atleast will never again be able to fight a bummy opponent if he manages to beat a good one now.

Your mate Muhammad decided to stage a title defence against a cruiser bum, Jimmy Young and never landed a significant punch in the entire fight and lost clearly, yet again, unsurprisingly, robs the guy of the win. And shortly after again, takes on another cruiser bum, this time a 6 fight green, there's some REAL skilful experience there! And who won that fight too?

Take a look at this article...

Are bums of the Klitschko era better than top fighters of Ali's era? | Box statistics, analysis of boxing history records, stats of boxing eras

Pretend you don't know who the boxers are whilst reading the stats.

I will tell you right now, boxer 2010 is modern day bum-buster Deontay Wilder.

And boxer 1970 is PAST-day bum-buster+cruiser-cruncher Kenny Norton.

Calling the competition of Wilder pathetic is only RELATIVE to this era.

Compared with previous eras, Wilder's competition isn't quite as bad as your trying to sell, and this is the WORST case in recent times of bum-busting we have seen from a top ranked opponent!

Besdies, because Wilder fights bums, he does so more often, in fact he has among the quickest fight turn-overs.

Obviously the tougher the opponents you fight, the more preparation and recovery between events necessary and the less often you can and should fight them!