wesshaw1985 wrote:Question - who has the better resume over the past 12 months?
Joshua - Whyte, Martin, Breazeale and Molina?
Ortiz - Jennings, Thompson, Scott and Allen?
Joshua.
Thompson is the best 'name' on either list but he's well past it and has been for years. I think Breazeale would beat all four of Ortiz's victims and possibly Whyte would too.
dirk2686 wrote:But unless you think he's an absolute dickhead, I don't get the desire from so many to see Joshua get battered.
I do think that.
That's fair enough. But when you (Horse) do that silly little p4p thing it does suggest you're a massive Fury thing. I don't think I've ever found anyone who massively rates Fury who also rates Joshua. They all seem to hate him.
wesshaw1985 wrote:Question - who has the better resume over the past 12 months?
Joshua - Whyte, Martin, Breazeale and Molina?
Ortiz - Jennings, Thompson, Scott and Allen?
Joshua.
Thompson is the best 'name' on either list but he's well past it and has been for years. I think Breazeale would beat all four of Ortiz's victims and possibly Whyte would too.
I think Jennings was the best win, as his last three had been a dominant KO of Szpilka, a decision over Perez, and a loss to Wlad in which he gave WK some issues (Ortiz clearly outperformed Wlad there). Even Jennings' stoppage of Fedosov before this string of fights rates highly compared to what the others had accomplished over the last few years prior to their bouts with Ortiz/AJ, and there was no 'wow, he looked like shit' performance in the vein of Thompson-Scott or Breazeale-Kassi (a fight which could've easily gone against DB).
The circa 2014 version of Jennings would have a good chance of beating anyone AJ has faced in my view, and I think he's become underrated.
wesshaw1985 wrote:Question - who has the better resume over the past 12 months?
Joshua - Whyte, Martin, Breazeale and Molina?
Ortiz - Jennings, Thompson, Scott and Allen?
Joshua.
Thompson is the best 'name' on either list but he's well past it and has been for years. I think Breazeale would beat all four of Ortiz's victims and possibly Whyte would too.
I think Jennings was the best win, as his last three had been a dominant KO of Szpilka, a decision over Perez, and a loss to Wlad in which he gave WK some issues (Ortiz clearly outperformed Wlad there). Even Jennings' stoppage of Fedosov before this string of fights rates highly compared to what the others had accomplished over the last few years prior to their bouts with Ortiz/AJ, and there was no 'wow, he looked like poo' performance in the vein of Thompson-Scott or Breazeale-Kassi (a fight which could've easily gone against DB).
The circa 2014 version of Jennings would have a good chance of beating anyone AJ has faced in my view, and I think he's become underrated.
As for the question proposed in the title, I'd have to go with AJ.
I think his aggressive style would give Ortiz more chances to land than he had against Scott, but the offensive threat coming back at Ortiz would also be far greater than he's accustomed to. As I see it, AJ is faster than Ortiz, hits at least as hard, and puts his shots together more tightly in combination. Moreover, Ortiz has a habit of doing very little for large portions of rounds (partially due to his counterpunching nature, but I also feel there may be stamina issues involved) , and with that approach I think he'd struggle to keep AJ off.
Basically, you'd have two powerhouses, but one seems a lot fresher than the other to me.
AJ for me, but I think Ortiz would take him in deep water. Ortiz is very defensive as we know, and has a decent chin. It's a shame he is getting old before having a chance to fight at the top level. Hopefully he will get a mandatory at Wilder as he will be No1 after the joke Stiverne matchup.
Joshua has taken a few "0"s from his opponents, no one seems to give him any credit for beating the unbeaten. Wlad will test him, after that it should be clear that his belts are deserved if he wins convincingly- which I think he will.
KiwiRider wrote:Joshua has taken a few "0"s from his opponents, no one seems to give him any credit for beating the unbeaten.
Why should they?
Who cares about unbeaten records?
If a fighter is unbeaten, there is no road map on how to go about it. The only weak point for AJ so far is that one guy, one time, made his knees buckle for half a second. Then, like all his opponents, AJ took him apart.
KiwiRider wrote:If a fighter is unbeaten, there is no road map on how to go about it. The only weak point for AJ so far is that one guy, one time, made his knees buckle for half a second. Then, like all his opponents, AJ took him apart.
But, who's he beaten?
Taking apart average fighters isn't going to make me swoon for him.
KiwiRider wrote:Joshua has taken a few "0"s from his opponents, no one seems to give him any credit for beating the unbeaten.
Why should they?
Who cares about unbeaten records?
If a fighter is unbeaten, there is no road map on how to go about it. The only weak point for AJ so far is that one guy, one time, made his knees buckle for half a second. Then, like all his opponents, AJ took him apart.
did you give Haye credit for taking Arnold Gjergjajs "0"?
By the same logic, how much credit will you give Wlad when he takes AJs "0"?
I think Ortiz is getting progressively heavier, having more frequent lazy spells during fights and surely becoming more and more dissolusooned with the business mentally. It really is now or never for him.
crusader wrote:Ya, Gary Cornish had been an unsolvable puzzle until AJ figured him out.
Made me proper LOL.
AJ beats Ortiz. Other than being able to punch I don't see anything in Ortiz's arsenal to trouble AJ.
People are right to be sceptical of calling AJ the second coming whilst he's had such an easy ride but if he beats Wlad nobody can deny he's the real deal - which I think he is, although I also thought Price was
I thought the only person to give AJ problems would be Haye (styles make fights and all that) but after the Bellew fight I think he's done at the top level. I even think Fury gets blasted out early by Mr Stay Humble/Hungry.
