Probably, that depends on what other people would be saying.Stuarty30 wrote:So you would defend the Scott fight if they chose him?
Joshua vs Breazeale
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
Scott is just as bad a fight as this so you're talking out your rusty bullet hole. I'm not defending this fight all I said was that AJ is in a position that he can't win unless he fights a Fury or a Haye and he's not ready for them yet IMO. He might have a world strap but he's a 16 fight novice who's yet to go beyond 7 rounds at the end of the day. You're trying to create an arguement and create static where there is none.Horse wrote:Probably, that depends on what other people would be saying.Stuarty30 wrote:So you would defend the Scott fight if they chose him?
-
Terminator666
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1665
- Joined: 06 Nov 2007, 10:18
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
Sounds like this opponent could be even worse than Martin?
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
No, he is much better than this clam.Stuarty30 wrote:Scott is just as bad a fight as this so you're talking out your rusty bullet hole.
You are defending it right now.Stuarty30 wrote:I'm not defending this fight all I said was that AJ is in a position that he can't win unless he fights a Fury or a Haye and he's not ready for them yet IMO.
You need better self-awareness.
He's a world champion. He should be fighting opponents that are at least domestic level.Stuarty30 wrote:He might have a world strap but he's a 16 fight novice who's yet to go beyond 7 rounds at the end of the day. You're trying to create an arguement and create static where there is none.
This opponent is abysmal.
Did you watch the Mansour fight?
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
Yes I seen it on YouTube. He won't last more than a couple of rounds, same as Scott. both are as bad as each other in terms of opponents. I am plenty self aware.Horse wrote:No, he is much better than this clam.Stuarty30 wrote:Scott is just as bad a fight as this so you're talking out your rusty bullet hole.
You are defending it right now.Stuarty30 wrote:I'm not defending this fight all I said was that AJ is in a position that he can't win unless he fights a Fury or a Haye and he's not ready for them yet IMO.
You need better self-awareness.
He's a world champion. He should be fighting opponents that are at least domestic level.Stuarty30 wrote:He might have a world strap but he's a 16 fight novice who's yet to go beyond 7 rounds at the end of the day. You're trying to create an arguement and create static where there is none.
This opponent is abysmal.
Did you watch the Mansour fight?
He'll be mandated to fight a live, living breathing danger man soon by the IBF. That's why the IBF title is more 'dangerous' than the British.
Might I suggest you take a leaf out of AJs book and #StayHumble cuz
-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 45238
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
He's not a world champ, he has a meaningless belt, he knows that as well as everybody else, and pretty much said so immediately after the Martin fight.Horse wrote:No, he is much better than this clam.Stuarty30 wrote:Scott is just as bad a fight as this so you're talking out your rusty bullet hole.
You are defending it right now.Stuarty30 wrote:I'm not defending this fight all I said was that AJ is in a position that he can't win unless he fights a Fury or a Haye and he's not ready for them yet IMO.
You need better self-awareness.
He's a world champion. He should be fighting opponents that are at least domestic level.Stuarty30 wrote:He might have a world strap but he's a 16 fight novice who's yet to go beyond 7 rounds at the end of the day. You're trying to create an arguement and create static where there is none.
This opponent is abysmal.
Did you watch the Mansour fight?
The world champ is Fury, everyone and his uncle knows that.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
No, Scott is much better.Stuarty30 wrote:Yes I seen it on YouTube. He won't last more than a couple of rounds, same as Scott. both are as bad as each other in terms of opponents. I am plenty self aware.
Scott has a much better record and is far more proven. They are not as bad as each other at all.
The IBF is having a tournament to decide the next mandatory challenger. He might have a year before he has to fight the winner of that.Stuarty30 wrote:He'll be mandated to fight a live, living breathing danger man soon by the IBF. That's why the IBF title is more 'dangerous' than the British.
Might I suggest you take a leaf out of AJs book and #StayHumble cuz
Hearn and Joshua may well find a way of squirming out of that as well.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
He should still be fighting opponents that aren't awful.jamesmcdonnell wrote:He's not a world champ, he has a meaningless belt, he knows that as well as everybody else, and pretty much said so immediately after the Martin fight.
The world champ is Fury, everyone and his uncle knows that.
-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 45238
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
There's not really a lot to choose from, they are all pretty poor. Let's be honest.Horse wrote:He should still be fighting opponents that aren't awful.jamesmcdonnell wrote:He's not a world champ, he has a meaningless belt, he knows that as well as everybody else, and pretty much said so immediately after the Martin fight.
The world champ is Fury, everyone and his uncle knows that.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
Well, I disagree, but I have much less contempt for the heavyweight division than many on here do.jamesmcdonnell wrote:There's not really a lot to choose from, they are all pretty poor. Let's be honest.
-
Bard of Boxrec
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 13114
- Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
Horse can't be honest. He doesn't watch a fight, he watches two walking statistics throw numbers and percentages at each other rather than punches.jamesmcdonnell wrote:There's not really a lot to choose from, they are all pretty poor. Let's be honest.Horse wrote:He should still be fighting opponents that aren't awful.jamesmcdonnell wrote:He's not a world champ, he has a meaningless belt, he knows that as well as everybody else, and pretty much said so immediately after the Martin fight.
The world champ is Fury, everyone and his uncle knows that.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
And you're staring at Joshua's rippling muscles and enjoying yourself very much indeed.Riddick Blowe wrote:Horse can't be honest. He doesn't watch a fight, he watches two walking statistics throw numbers and percentages at each other rather than punches.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
You could've fooled meHorse wrote:Well, I disagree, but I have much less contempt for the heavyweight division than many on here do.jamesmcdonnell wrote:There's not really a lot to choose from, they are all pretty poor. Let's be honest.
-
Bard of Boxrec
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 13114
- Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
You don't even need a television. You're probably just content to stare at records on Boxrec and imagine what the fights would be like based on who has fought who.Horse wrote:And you're staring at Joshua's rippling muscles and enjoying yourself very much indeed.Riddick Blowe wrote:Horse can't be honest. He doesn't watch a fight, he watches two walking statistics throw numbers and percentages at each other rather than punches.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
Horse you seriously need to get laid or join a Zumba class. You are worrying me.Horse wrote:And you're staring at Joshua's rippling muscles and enjoying yourself very much indeed.Riddick Blowe wrote:Horse can't be honest. He doesn't watch a fight, he watches two walking statistics throw numbers and percentages at each other rather than punches.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
Not exactly a difficult task.Stuarty30 wrote:You could've fooled me
-
Bard of Boxrec
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 13114
- Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
You need to do a better job of protecting the nation's (wo)menStuarty30 wrote:
Horse you seriously need to get laid
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
And you treat an easy win against a bum like it is an easy win against a world class opponent.Riddick Blowe wrote:You don't even need a television. You're probably just content to stare at records on Boxrec and imagine what the fights would be like based on who has fought who.
There are levels and records are good at telling us who is at what level.
Only a fool would ignore records and solely rely on the 'eye test'.
-
Bard of Boxrec
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 13114
- Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
I don't solely rely on the 'eye test' and nowhere is there evidence that I do.Horse wrote:And you treat an easy win against a bum like it is an easy win against a world class opponent.Riddick Blowe wrote:You don't even need a television. You're probably just content to stare at records on Boxrec and imagine what the fights would be like based on who has fought who.
There are levels and records are good at telling us who is at what level.
Only a fool would ignore records and solely rely on the 'eye test'.
You would probably pick a prime 160lb Jermain Taylor over GGG.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
The way that you talk about Joshua suggests that you rely on the 'eye test' far more than a person should.Riddick Blowe wrote:I don't solely rely on the 'eye test' and nowhere is there evidence that I do.
You would probably pick a prime 160lb Jermain Taylor over GGG.
You have dismissed the importance of Joshua not having fought anyone decent yet several times and mock the idea that when he steps up he might find things a bit more difficult.
Records matter.
-
Bard of Boxrec
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 13114
- Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
Of course they do. But in this weak as shite division, there is less worth in them than you think. Trust me. (Gets back on merry-go-round)Horse wrote: Records matter.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
I do not trust you.Riddick Blowe wrote:Of course they do. But in this weak as shite division, there is less worth in them than you think. Trust me.
If the division was as bad as you suggest, then Joshua would have cut a swathe through the upper echelons by now.
Yet he hasn't even fought anyone that is clearly a top 30 ranked heavyweight.
Joshua can hit very hard and so can look impressive at the lower levels. Things tend to change when these punchers step up though.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
You lads better calm doon or fast Eddie will have you on the undercard. What does it say about our game when a relative novice can not only win but defend a world titleHorse wrote:Not exactly a difficult task.Stuarty30 wrote:You could've fooled me
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
jank fight, just like all joshuas fights.
Re: Joshua vs Breazeale
A step down from Martin IMO.