If Wilder loses...

[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!

[Master]

How many times did you mention bum?

[Max Power]

How many times did you mention bum?

For Christ sake I am not covering for Wilder, he fights "those guys" alright. It's just I think your perspective is blinded.

[Master]

How many times did you mention bum?

For Christ sake I am not covering for Wilder, he fights "those guys" alright. It's just I think your perspective is blinded.

Do you understand the concept of irony?

[Max Power]

How many times did you mention bum?

For Christ sake I am not covering for Wilder, he fights "those guys" alright. It's just I think your perspective is blinded.

Do you understand the concept of irony?

Yes @Master,

I DO see the conundrum here.

Wilder is NOT the standard that ALL the boxers in the HW division have elevated themselves by.

He is a project to see if this method can work.

Personally I don't like it. I think something should be done as you climb the rankings so that you are unable to climb higher until you BEAT higher ranked fighters.

That makes intuitive sense. That way you can make your extra small cash by pasting these guys left and right but forcing you to step it up if you wanna crack the big time.