G0mez wrote:There is zero mystique surrounding Chisora.
Nowadays he barks like a rottweiler and fights like a Shitzu.
Fair enough if Sky bundled this on regular tv - but if Sky continue to put Joshua on box office, yet still keep referring to as a novice and still learning - then people are going to be royally annoyed and will eventually turn on AJ. Infact I've noticed a trend of it already.
He's had his well-paid soft fights on box office and now it's time to start giving premium fans a premium bout, one in which AJ is not practically assured a victory.
He is 26 years old, an IBF world champion and 17-0 and can no longer dine on being a learner. Sky traded the L-plates in when they went for a world title and won it.
BJS is 23-0 and a 26 years old. Fury is 27 years old and veterans such as Khan & Cleverly are 29 years old. Joshua has been full-time in a gym for the last 8-9 years and it's time to crack on.
Pulev or Parker seem to be the next step and it's whilst it might be a fight or two early for Pulev, it's definitely the right time for Parker - and that's what they should go for.
An ambitious, unbeaten and well-ranked Parker who is in the ascendancy will give AJ the motivation that he needs at this stage of his career and will do him the world of good - as opposed to some pantomime Chisora fight.
How on earth is it 'too early' for Pulev but not for Parker???
Pulev is a slob, stiff, upright, no defence. He isn't very good and he hasn't done much in the division to be enthralled about. Forget that he's in the top 10, it's meaningless at this point while the division is still so poor and should matter only to Horse. Absolute rather than relative rankings mean a lot more in the division at this particular time.
Joshua will have a tougher time with Parker who has at least shown good skills and some chin and heart, if not the best defence.
G0mez wrote:There is zero mystique surrounding Chisora.
Nowadays he barks like a rottweiler and fights like a Shitzu.
Fair enough if Sky bundled this on regular tv - but if Sky continue to put Joshua on box office, yet still keep referring to as a novice and still learning - then people are going to be royally annoyed and will eventually turn on AJ. Infact I've noticed a trend of it already.
He's had his well-paid soft fights on box office and now it's time to start giving premium fans a premium bout, one in which AJ is not practically assured a victory.
He is 26 years old, an IBF world champion and 17-0 and can no longer dine on being a learner. Sky traded the L-plates in when they went for a world title and won it.
BJS is 23-0 and a 26 years old. Fury is 27 years old and veterans such as Khan & Cleverly are 29 years old. Joshua has been full-time in a gym for the last 8-9 years and it's time to crack on.
Pulev or Parker seem to be the next step and it's whilst it might be a fight or two early for Pulev, it's definitely the right time for Parker - and that's what they should go for.
An ambitious, unbeaten and well-ranked Parker who is in the ascendancy will give AJ the motivation that he needs at this stage of his career and will do him the world of good - as opposed to some pantomime Chisora fight.
How on earth is it 'too early' for Pulev but not for Parker???
Pulev is a slob, stiff, upright, no defence. He isn't very good and he hasn't done much in the division to be enthralled about. Forget that he's in the top 10, it's meaningless at this point while the division is still so poor and should matter only to Horse. Absolute rather than relative rankings mean a lot more.
Joshua will have a tougher time with Parker who has at least shown good skills and some chin and heart, if not the best defence.
Because Pulev is a more proven operator. Also Parker has more flaws than Pulev.
lefty wrote:
Because Pulev is a more proven operator. Also Parker has more flaws than Pulev.
He's had some fights against a couple guys rated vaguely towards the top of the division. Tony Thompson, off the top of my head, and ...that tall but ineffective oaf...Ustinov. Then he got destroyed vs Wlad. It's not a decorated career. It's not inspiring. It's only a top 10 fighter in a strictly relative sense to the garbage around him.
Trust me, nobody should be concerned about Pulev giving Joshua any problems. Josh would open as a 1/6 favourite. At least. And there's a reason for that.
lefty wrote:
Because Pulev is a more proven operator. Also Parker has more flaws than Pulev.
He's had some fights against a couple guys rated vaguely towards the top of the division. Tony Thompson, off the top of my head, and ...that tall but ineffective oaf...Ustinov. Then he got destroyed vs Wlad. It's not a decorated career. It's not inspiring. It's only a top 10 fighter in a strictly relative sense to the garbage around him.
Trust me, nobody should be concerned about Pulev giving Joshua any problems. Josh would open as a 1/6 favourite. At least. And there's a reason for that.
And Besides a 35 yr old Takam (where his power looked mediocre at best) who Parker scored a 115-113 against, who has Parker beaten for you to rate him so highly?
lefty wrote:
Because Pulev is a more proven operator. Also Parker has more flaws than Pulev.
He's had some fights against a couple guys rated vaguely towards the top of the division. Tony Thompson, off the top of my head, and ...that tall but ineffective oaf...Ustinov. Then he got destroyed vs Wlad. It's not a decorated career. It's not inspiring. It's only a top 10 fighter in a strictly relative sense to the garbage around him.
Trust me, nobody should be concerned about Pulev giving Joshua any problems. Josh would open as a 1/6 favourite. At least. And there's a reason for that.
And Besides a 35 yr old Takam (where his power looked mediocre at best) who Parker scored a 115-113 against, who has Parker beaten for you to rate him so highly?
I never said I rate him that highly, just higher than Pulev. I would also pick that same 35 year old Takam over the current Pulev. And if you need me to reel off a fighter who Takam has beaten, because sometimes eyes and common sense aren't enough and I need that stat to have a license to rate him highly, then Thompson. who is Pulev's best win too
But who is Thompson's best win? Anyone? David Price?
Riddick Blowe wrote:
He's had some fights against a couple guys rated vaguely towards the top of the division. Tony Thompson, off the top of my head, and ...that tall but ineffective oaf...Ustinov. Then he got destroyed vs Wlad. It's not a decorated career. It's not inspiring. It's only a top 10 fighter in a strictly relative sense to the garbage around him.
Trust me, nobody should be concerned about Pulev giving Joshua any problems. Josh would open as a 1/6 favourite. At least. And there's a reason for that.
And Besides a 35 yr old Takam (where his power looked mediocre at best) who Parker scored a 115-113 against, who has Parker beaten for you to rate him so highly?
I never said I rate him that highly, just higher than Pulev. I would also pick that same 35 year old Takam over the current Pulev. And if you need me to reel off a fighter who Takam has beaten, because sometimes eyes and common sense aren't enough and I need that stat to have a license to rate him highly, then Thompson. who is Pulev's best win too
But who is Thompson's best win? Anyone? David Price?
In this shallow division, records don't matter as much. Because, when you go to dissect some shitty fighter and their crappy career, painstakingly going through who he has beaten, and who they have beaten in turn to try and ascertain some meaning about how it affects other fighters in the division, when it's said and done you'll always just end up having to rely on the eye test.
Get this: Malik Scott is in the heavyweight top 10. Based on a win against...guess who?
Last edited by Bard of Boxrec on 14 Jul 2016, 08:11, edited 2 times in total.
In this shallow division, records don't matter as much. Because, when you go to dissect some shitty fighter and their crappy career, painstakingly going through who he has beaten, and who they have beaten in turn to try and ascertain some meaning about how it affects other fighters in the division, when it's said and done you'll always just end up having to rely on the eye test.
Even going on the eye test though- there's nothing overly special looking about Parker bar his hand speed. His boxing ability is limited, he plods and his power looks distinctly overrated. His opposition bar Takam makes Pulev's opposition look A- class.
In this shallow division, records don't matter as much. Because, when you go to dissect some shitty fighter and their crappy career, painstakingly going through who he has beaten, and who they have beaten in turn to try and ascertain some meaning about how it affects other fighters in the division, when it's said and done you'll always just end up having to rely on the eye test.
Even going on the eye test though- there's nothing overly special looking about Parker bar his hand speed. His boxing ability is limited, he plods and his power looks distinctly overrated. His opposition bar Takam makes Pulev's opposition look A- class.
Pulev has a pretty good resume compared to other contenders. But I have to agree with Riddick, Parker looks the better fighter to me. Handspeed, variety of punches, power, and pretty decent on his feet for a big man.
Riddick Blowe wrote:
In this shallow division, records don't matter as much. Because, when you go to dissect some shitty fighter and their crappy career, painstakingly going through who he has beaten, and who they have beaten in turn to try and ascertain some meaning about how it affects other fighters in the division, when it's said and done you'll always just end up having to rely on the eye test.
Even going on the eye test though- there's nothing overly special looking about Parker bar his hand speed. His boxing ability is limited, he plods and his power looks distinctly overrated. His opposition bar Takam makes Pulev's opposition look A- class.
Pulev has a pretty good resume compared to other contenders. But I have to agree with Riddick, Parker looks the better fighter to me. Handspeed, variety of punches, power, and pretty decent on his feet for a big man.
Well I guess we'll find out when he steps up to the higher level.
In this shallow division, records don't matter as much. Because, when you go to dissect some shitty fighter and their crappy career, painstakingly going through who he has beaten, and who they have beaten in turn to try and ascertain some meaning about how it affects other fighters in the division, when it's said and done you'll always just end up having to rely on the eye test.
Even going on the eye test though- there's nothing overly special looking about Parker bar his hand speed. His boxing ability is limited, he plods and his power looks distinctly overrated. His opposition bar Takam makes Pulev's opposition look A- class.
All I said is that I rate him higher than Pulev and my position is that we don't need more than the Takam fight to judge that. This fight was the perfect barometer of Parker vs the division, it told us everything we need to know about him. He took shots, he struggled a bit, but he won close but clear against a solid guy. He showed some speed, some skills, a less than good defence. In my opinion, he showed he was better than Pulev, who has a comparably bad defence, a higher degree of plod, arguably less power and is less skillful.
Riddick Blowe wrote:
In this shallow division, records don't matter as much. Because, when you go to dissect some shitty fighter and their crappy career, painstakingly going through who he has beaten, and who they have beaten in turn to try and ascertain some meaning about how it affects other fighters in the division, when it's said and done you'll always just end up having to rely on the eye test.
Even going on the eye test though- there's nothing overly special looking about Parker bar his hand speed. His boxing ability is limited, he plods and his power looks distinctly overrated. His opposition bar Takam makes Pulev's opposition look A- class.
All I said is that I rate him higher than Pulev and my position is that we don't need more than the Takam fight to judge that. This fight was the perfect barometer of Parker vs the division, it told us everything we need to know about him. He took shots, he struggled a bit, but he won close but clear against a solid guy. He showed some speed, some skills, a less than good defence. In my opinion, he showed he was better than Pulev, who has a comparably bad defence, a higher degree of plod, arguably less power and is less skillful.
I disagree about the plodding. I think he's better on his feet. Pulev is a lighter hitter than Parker, I agree on that. Pulev definitely has a better jab than Parker though and Klitschko was finding that hard to deal with himself before landing the huge left hook. It's a shame we can't see Pulev vs Parker first to be honest.
lefty wrote:I disagree about the plodding. I think he's better on his feet. Pulev is a lighter hitter than Parker, I agree on that. Pulev definitely has a better jab than Parker though and Klitschko was finding that hard to deal with himself before landing the huge left hook. It's a shame we can't see Pulev vs Parker first to be honest.
Why would you want to see them fight each other first?
They should both be fighting Joshua. He's meant to be a world champion.
lefty wrote:I disagree about the plodding. I think he's better on his feet. Pulev is a lighter hitter than Parker, I agree on that. Pulev definitely has a better jab than Parker though and Klitschko was finding that hard to deal with himself before landing the huge left hook. It's a shame we can't see Pulev vs Parker first to be honest.
Why would you want to see them fight each other first?
They should both be fighting Joshua. He's meant to be a world champion.
I'd just like to see them fight first to see who's better, I'd still like to see them fight Joshua obviously.
Puluev would be the most meaningful opponent and could pose Joshua a lot of problems.
I can't believe anyone is being serious about Price. Result wise, I'm afraid he won't do any better than Gary Cornish. He still has a lot of rebuilding to do IMO.
I don't really care I am bored stiff with Joshua. Somebody wake me up when / if he fights someone with a pulse. Until then I refuse to watch him and buy into all the bullshit hype.
Ian1973 wrote:I don't really care I am bored stiff with Joshua. Somebody wake me up when / if he fights someone with a pulse. Until then I refuse to watch him and buy into all the bullshit hype.
I think he'll fight a few more unbeaten pregnant Americans before he really steps up, they are making too money from it.
Ian1973 wrote:I don't really care I am bored stiff with Joshua. Somebody wake me up when / if he fights someone with a pulse. Until then I refuse to watch him and buy into all the bullshit hype.
Yeah, I didn't even watch the last one. I'm of the same mind.
lefty wrote:I disagree about the plodding. I think he's better on his feet. Pulev is a lighter hitter than Parker, I agree on that. Pulev definitely has a better jab than Parker though and Klitschko was finding that hard to deal with himself before landing the huge left hook. It's a shame we can't see Pulev vs Parker first to be honest.
Why would you want to see them fight each other first?
They should both be fighting Joshua. He's meant to be a world champion.
Ian1973 wrote:I don't really care I am bored stiff with Joshua. Somebody wake me up when / if he fights someone with a pulse. Until then I refuse to watch him and buy into all the bullshit hype.
Yeah, I didn't even watch the last one. I'm of the same mind.
Didn't expect this from you, I thought you were capable of just switching off from the hype. Breazeale turned out to be a tough guy who took Joshua rounds and actually tried, definitely a fine opponent for a 16-0 guy or whatever he was at the time.
Ian1973 wrote:I don't really care I am bored stiff with Joshua. Somebody wake me up when / if he fights someone with a pulse. Until then I refuse to watch him and buy into all the bullshit hype.
Yeah, I didn't even watch the last one. I'm of the same mind.
Didn't expect this from you, I thought you were capable of just switching off from the hype. Breazeale turned out to be a tough guy who took Joshua rounds and actually tried, definitely a fine opponent for a 16-0 guy or whatever he was at the time.
Well, I got a bit sick of the hype after the previous farce, so figured no way I'm paying 18 quid to watch another massacre. Although it went 7 rounds, sounds like it was very one-sided, and deffo not worth 18 quid of my money.
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Yeah, I didn't even watch the last one. I'm of the same mind.
Didn't expect this from you, I thought you were capable of just switching off from the hype. Breazeale turned out to be a tough guy who took Joshua rounds and actually tried, definitely a fine opponent for a 16-0 guy or whatever he was at the time.
Well, I got a bit sick of the hype after the previous farce, so figured no way I'm paying 18 quid to watch another massacre. Although it went 7 rounds, sounds like it was very one-sided, and deffo not worth 18 quid of my money.
Would you shell out 18 quid if they announced Pulev? Pulev is better 'on paper' but will be wiped out a lot quicker, with that chin sticking in the air and the head movement of a deep-sea diver.
Riddick Blowe wrote:
Didn't expect this from you, I thought you were capable of just switching off from the hype. Breazeale turned out to be a tough guy who took Joshua rounds and actually tried, definitely a fine opponent for a 16-0 guy or whatever he was at the time.
Well, I got a bit sick of the hype after the previous farce, so figured no way I'm paying 18 quid to watch another massacre. Although it went 7 rounds, sounds like it was very one-sided, and deffo not worth 18 quid of my money.
Would you shell out 18 quid if they announced Pulev? Pulev is better 'on paper' but will be wiped out a lot quicker, with that chin sticking in the air and the head movement of a deep-sea diver.
Probably not. I'll pay a PPV when he fights someone I consider a good matchup in terms of entertainment. Fury for instance.
I'm not prepared to spend 20 quid if it's not going to entertain me. I can get pissed for that money.
Ian1973 wrote:I don't really care I am bored stiff with Joshua. Somebody wake me up when / if he fights someone with a pulse. Until then I refuse to watch him and buy into all the bullshit hype.
Yeah, I didn't even watch the last one. I'm of the same mind.
Didn't expect this from you, I thought you were capable of just switching off from the hype. Breazeale turned out to be a tough guy who took Joshua rounds and actually tried, definitely a fine opponent for a 16-0 guy or whatever he was at the time.
Yeah I'm sorry but I'm not sure Breazeale's effort would quite qualify as 'actually tried'. Tried what? Getting his in the face with Joshua's fist? All Breazeale proved in that fight is he has some mettle, and refused to go down. But he brought limited nothing to that fight.
The fights I would pay 18 pound to watch would be; Parker, Haye, Fury (H)....
Probably pay 9 pound for; Pulev, Chisora, Stiverne....
But the rest would have to be a Saturday fight night jobbie....
