because... the context matter
never said that viewing the best win is the only and one acceptable way but in this case Wilder hasn't go anything else over Joshua so far
You cant judge a fighter by who's better simply by looking at "best win" or "resume".....if that was the case, Spence wouldn't have beaten Brook, Joe Smith wouldn't have beat Fonfara & B Hop, Fury wouldn't have beat Wlad, Algieri wouldn't have beat Prov, Baldomir beating Judah, Raheem beating Morales, etc for example.
You have to view each fighters strengths/weaknesses/flaws, compare, and then you will have your accurate choice of winner.
Going strictly off of "best win/resume" is extremely flawed, bc it's a basically a big triangle theory, under a different name, that you're using (Fighter A beat Fighter B, who is better than Fighter C, so that means fighter A is better than Fighter C....which is a triangle theory)
If Joshua beats Wilder, it will be because of something he does better than Wilder does....not because of him beating a 41 year old Wlad, coming off a loss, and 15 months ring rust.
Last edited: