- Joined
- May 12, 2016
- Messages
- 14,023
- Reaction score
- 10,943
Dude you're having a meltdown over this lol. No, getting a title shot from one of the sanctioning bodies doesn't necessarily make you a legitimate contender. Their rankings are only for their specific organization (and there's 4 of them total). They also don't rank champions. Just what they consider "contenders" which you only need to beat regional level guys to climb up their rankings.But seriously WHAT DEFINES A CAN in boxing? I can't understand how this is so hard for boxing guys to define.
@Kovalev's "Man Bag" you said "All you have to do is count the champs, former champs, and contenders he fought." wasn't every fighter he defended against a contender? Literally getting to a title fight in one of the major 4 sanctioning bodies makes you a contender. Blabbing on about AJ fought better guys or his contenders > your contenders reeks of "My Dad can beat up your Dad" silliness. Maybe AJ's competition was more difficult then Wilder's but that is certainly subjective. How can 10 defenses of a major title against guys with 25 fights on average and less than 2 losses average be a bunch of CANS. Is a Can any fighter who you don't like? Is it anyone with more then 2 losses? AJ has 3 losses so is he a can?
Seriously WTF is the definition of a CAN in boxing? In MMA Jay Ellis is certainly a can with a 16-109 record. What is the line in boxing?
Cans are fighters that never had a chance to win. No hopers. Cab drivers. Journeymen. Call them what you like. There's no debate, Joshua has beaten much higher quality opposition than Wilder and Fury for that matter. Most rankings are subjective but we also have computerized rankings like BoxRec's that are objective. An algorithm determines their rating.
Anyway, believe whatever you like. Just don't be surprised when fans that actually follow boxing closely, like us, all tell you the same thing.