Luis Fernando12 wrote: ↑28 Mar 2018, 12:50
candyslim wrote: ↑28 Mar 2018, 03:43
Briedis is a good cruiserweight but not special. I appreciate that cruiser is a very strong division and it took the best of them to defeat him, but I struggle to envisage Usyk impacting the very pinnacle of the heavyweight division never mind Briedis (or Gassiev). I can't see Briedis standing up to Anthony Joshua like Whyte did, and the same goes for Manuel Charr.
You know I once bought a book on "Logic". I thought it would be interesting and useful, but it was filled with mathematical symbols and algebraic formulae, and was of no earthly use to someone of my unspectacular intellect in resolving a dispute, so relying on less scientific methods ...
Your argument appears to be in two parts so I shall try to deal with them in turn: Firstly you contend that Charr is as good as, or better than Whyte and that since Charr was knocked out by a good cruiserweight campaigning at heavyweight then it follows that Whyte would go the same way, and therefore the two are pretty equal?
It seems to me that you are using the proposition that Charr > Whyte to reach your conclusion, when that proposition is merely a proposition, and not established fact. You cannot use a proposition in order to prove a conclusion in order to validate that proposition. It is what you call "a circular argument".
Secondly the disputed decision means that Whyte and Chisora are interchangeable so if Chisora once got knocked out by a top cruiser campaigning at heavy then Whyte would too?
That presupposes that Briedis is as good as David Haye was which is by no means a given, and you don't need me to tell you that the phrase "styles make fights" is so self-evident as to be a law rather than a saying. I made the point earlier that Chisora is a very inconsistent fighter who can turn in a very pedestrian performance or he can be a fearsome competitor if he is motivated. Believe me he was motivated against Whyte, they really do not like each other, and his performance was as good as it could ever be, so don't make the mistake of thinking Whyte had the easy ride that say Pulev or Kabayel enjoyed.
I don't think it is in any way fair to say that Briedis would have knocked out Dillian Whyte. It's only Joshua that has achieved that feat and it took him 7 rounds of discomfort to achieve it. Briedis hits hard but not like Joshua. You cannot extrapolate that Briedis is a top cruiser, Haye was a top cruiser who kayoed Chisora, who is on Whyte's level, ergo Briedis knocks out Whyte. It doesn't work like that.
Whyte is an active fighter who consistently takes on tough and/or ranked opposition, beating all of them except AJ. Apart from beating a well past it, overrated even at his peak, Alexandr Ustinov, I really don't see what Charr has done to merit equal respect, and I don't accept that holding the meaningless WBA regular title should affect anyone's opinion one way or the other.
Povetkin may find Price's height and reach problematic, but I will be surprised if he doesn't stop him.
Strawman argument.
cs: Well if it was, it was unintentional not a deliberate ploy.
I didn't claim that Charr > Whyte. Nor did I claim that Whyte and Charr are equal BECAUSE Whyte would be knocked out by Breidis the same way as Charr did. Rather, my point was that I've seen nothing to suggest Whyte is better than Charr in any meaningful way, whether it's based on their records or whether it's based on the eye test of seeing them fight. The only meaningful area where Whyte outperforms Charr is in the punching power department and that's it!
cs: You're entitled to your opinion although you do seem to be in a minority of one. That doesn't mean you're wrong of course.
And based on that, I can see why Breidis could beat Dillian Whyte in a similar way to how he beat Charr, or at least by decision.
cs: The difference is Briedis did beat Charr and by a crushing knockout. You can speculate that he could do that to Whyte, there's no law against it, but the point is it is just speculation. Whyte hasn't been knocked out by a man of under 17 stone so to me it seems a bit unreasonable to consider it - let him commit the crime first before we indict him shall we?
You're not convincing me that the Dereck Chisora that fought Dillian Whyte was better than the version that fought David Haye. No chance whatsoever! Dereck Chisora was older, faded and had more mileage in him when he fought Whyte, as opposed to when he fought Haye.
cs: So now who's using the "straw man argument"? You could also say Chisora was more seasoned, more experienced, but I wasn't making any value-judgment as to which version was better. I'm not suggesting any version of Chisora would have beaten Haye at that time, or ever beaten Tyson Fury either for that matter, but the fired up and determined to beat Dillian Whyte version, was a very different proposition to the Chisora who confronted Pulev of Kabayal for example, so I don't accept that Chisora is as good as Whyte, only that he is capable of being when he is at his very best.
And Breidis is better than Haye in many departments. He is a top cruiser weight and would be Haye's best opponent without a doubt, Point is, offensively skilled and powerful cruiser weights like David Haye and Mairis Breidis can, and have knocked out top 10 heavyweights.
cs: Best opponent at cruiserweight not best opponent. Remind me which top ten heavyweights have been knocked out by Haye and Briedis?
Before Mairis Breidis knocked Manuel Charr out. You could've said the same thing about Charr too. That you don't think it is in any way fair to say that Briedis would have knocked out Manuel Charr out, when Charr lasted 4 rounds against Vitali Klitschko without getting dropped once and when Povetkin required 7 rounds to KO Charr. You could say that it'd be unfair to predict that Breidis would KO Charr quicker and more impressively than either Vitali Klitschko or Alexander Povetkin did. Since both Vitali and Povetkin are natural heavyweights and are proven at heavyweight whilst Breidis is a cruiser weight and not proven at heavyweight. But guess what? Breidis did KO Charr more impressively than Povetkin did and did what Vitali Klitschko couldn't even do to Charr.
cs: Yes one could've said the same thing, and I'm not saying it's impossible for a Briedis to knock out a Whyte, but it hasn't happened yet so it's unreasonable to talk like it has.
So that alone debunks the idea that Breidis lacking the ability to KO someone like Dillian Whyte. Yes, Whyte lasted 7 rounds before getting knocked out by Joshua. But so did Charr against Povetkin. Charr also lasted 7 rounds before getting knocked out by Povetkin. So it's entirely possible for Breidis to KO Whyte more impressively and quicker than Joshua did.
And it's not just about punching power. It's about offensive skills. Mairis Breidis doesn't need to punch as hard as Joshua to KO Whyte more impressively or quicker. Does Breidis punch harder than Povetkin? Since he was able to KO Charr 2 rounds quicker and more brutally compared to Povetkin.
cs: I think you're attributing too much significance into the relative length of time taken by fighters to finish another. It can offer an indication or it can be a complete red-herring, there is no hard and fast rule and comparisons should be taken with a pinch of salt.
Does Alexander Povetkin hit harder than Anthony Joshua? Since Alexander Povetkin knocked Carlos Takam out unconscious in 10 rounds whilst Joshua failed to knock Takam out cleanly and needed a premature referee stoppage?
cs: A case in point (meaning see my last comment)
If Povetkin never fought Carlos Takam before and if Takam was coming off the 10th round TKO loss to Joshua which he had. You could and would probably also argue that Povetkin wouldn't KO Takam cleanly or quicker than Joshua did because Joshua failed to do so and Joshua is a harder puncher than Povetkin. But Povetkin is basically a blown up cruiser weight who knocked out Takam, far more brutally and impressively than the bigger super heavyweight Joshua did. So these things happen!
cs: Of course they do. An aircraft might crash but the chances are that it won't.
Before the fight, many people thought Joshua would KO Carlos Takam quicker and more impressively than Povetkin did, because they assumed Joshua is a more powerful puncher and because Povetkin is smallr and weaker looking compared to Joshua. However, it didn't turn out that way!
Anthony Joshua being bigger or a more powerful puncher, doesn't mean a power punching and skilled cruiser weight like Breidis couldn't KO Joshua's left over more impressively and quicker.
cs: It is entirely conceivable but just because the form book gets it wrong sometimes is no reason to throw it in the trash.
