Re: AJ's first defence
Posted: 19 Apr 2016, 05:57
Stiverne has the ability to take him in to the later rounds and test his stamina. I would only see a knock out wins against Molina and Breazeale.
AJ is lucky that you are not his managerasdfjkl wrote:Tony1244 wrote:asdfjkl wrote: AJ and Fury are the top of the world, no doubt about that. Klitschko is probably the only guy from Eastern Europe who has a chance against him. Somehow Sherman Williams or Wach might have a chance to take him into the later rounds.
Wach and Sherman Williams have that Tex Cobb and even Chauncey Welliver ability to hang in there and go rounds. Hope I haven't reawakened Welliver's fan.
No, I think he should fight the winner of Parker Takam, since it's his mandatory anyway. He shouldn't be another timewaster like Wilder for example. After that he can focus on uniting belts, so win against that Australion who got caught on some kind of illegal substance, or his opponend from eastern Europe, whoever got the belt. Then maybe Ortiz, because he deserves a shot and then unite all the belts with Fury.
Well to be fair it would be a joke to give him 6 months off after the Martin fight. He's basically done the work equivalent of me running down to the shop for a bottle of milk. May as well crack on with the learning process!stayinshape wrote:I like Joshuas Team and their fast-making-fights in one year attitude....
Reminds me of Tyson in the 80's with 15 Fights/Year...
Of course...Joshuas Fight style... i-need-4-round-than-take-my-shower-as-winner... and no marks in his face ist another thing why fightplaning goes fast...![]()
I would prefer Stiverne, too....granite-chin is most important against Joshua..i hope Stiverne learned a lot how to handle very long arms since wilder days..and i hope when he fights Joshua, he will bring good fight-weight...these around 240 lbs are too much...i think around 230 lbs will be better for him.
I agree with you about Tyson but.... AJ ?! how does beating the worst world champion in boxing history( for a belt that had lost all its value ) put you on top of the world exactly ?asdfjkl wrote: AJ and Fury are the top of the world
people simply seem to forget that AJbigman1968 wrote:AJ is lucky that you are not his managerasdfjkl wrote:Tony1244 wrote:
Wach and Sherman Williams have that Tex Cobb and even Chauncey Welliver ability to hang in there and go rounds. Hope I haven't reawakened Welliver's fan.
No, I think he should fight the winner of Parker Takam, since it's his mandatory anyway. He shouldn't be another timewaster like Wilder for example. After that he can focus on uniting belts, so win against that Australion who got caught on some kind of illegal substance, or his opponend from eastern Europe, whoever got the belt. Then maybe Ortiz, because he deserves a shot and then unite all the belts with Fury.
Loma has 6, Beterbiev has 9.man wrote:people simply seem to forget that AJbigman1968 wrote:AJ is lucky that you are not his managerasdfjkl wrote:
No, I think he should fight the winner of Parker Takam, since it's his mandatory anyway. He shouldn't be another timewaster like Wilder for example. After that he can focus on uniting belts, so win against that Australion who got caught on some kind of illegal substance, or his opponend from eastern Europe, whoever got the belt. Then maybe Ortiz, because he deserves a shot and then unite all the belts with Fury.
has 16 profights.
Well, because that defeat had nothing to do with my impression about him. AJ beated every single opponend out there on KO or TKO faster as any of them has ever been before in their life.CiganoBoxer wrote:I agree with you about Tyson but.... AJ ?! how does beating the worst world champion in boxing history( for a belt that had lost all its value ) put you on top of the world exactly ?asdfjkl wrote: AJ and Fury are the top of the world
But they have the greater amateur background than what AJsikorolev wrote:Loma has 6, Beterbiev has 9.man wrote:people simply seem to forget that AJbigman1968 wrote:
AJ is lucky that you are not his manager
has 16 profights.
IN MY OPINION mate its who you beat an not the way you have beaten some C- opponents that puts you "on top of the world"asdfjkl wrote:Well, because that defeat had nothing to do with my impression about him. AJ beated every single opponend out there on KO or TKO faster as any of them has ever been before in their life.CiganoBoxer wrote:I agree with you about Tyson but.... AJ ?! how does beating the worst world champion in boxing history( for a belt that had lost all its value ) put you on top of the world exactly ?asdfjkl wrote: AJ and Fury are the top of the world
Call me three guys you expect to win against AJ? For me, the only one who got a chance is Tyson Fury. Not Povetkin, not Wilder, not Parker, not anyone Klitschko defeated already...
Yes, I agree.CiganoBoxer wrote:IN MY OPINION mate its who you beat an not the way you have beaten some C- opponents that puts you "on top of the world"![]()
AJ for me is still a prospect,regardless of knocking out a load of nobodys, until he starts beating guys world ranked in the top 15 then for me he should be regarded as a prospect .
To be fair, Martin was ranked 8 by BoxRec, so I probably wouldn't even take rankings into account too much...CiganoBoxer wrote:IN MY OPINION mate its who you beat an not the way you have beaten some C- opponents that puts you "on top of the world"![]()
AJ for me is still a prospect,regardless of knocking out a load of nobodys, until he starts beating guys world ranked in the top 15 then for me he should be regarded as a prospect .
Well this is my point exactly mate , you got people that think after who he has faced he should be ranked near or at the topHorse wrote:Yes, I agree.CiganoBoxer wrote:IN MY OPINION mate its who you beat an not the way you have beaten some C- opponents that puts you "on top of the world"![]()
AJ for me is still a prospect,regardless of knocking out a load of nobodys, until he starts beating guys world ranked in the top 15 then for me he should be regarded as a prospect .
Joshua is just a world class prospect who has a belt with "IBF" written on it.
He could turn out to be a very good fighter, but he doesn't even have a European level win yet.
So Wilder is a nobody as well?CiganoBoxer wrote:IN MY OPINION mate its who you beat an not the way you have beaten some C- opponents that puts you "on top of the world"asdfjkl wrote:Well, because that defeat had nothing to do with my impression about him. AJ beated every single opponend out there on KO or TKO faster as any of them has ever been before in their life.CiganoBoxer wrote:I agree with you about Tyson but.... AJ ?! how does beating the worst world champion in boxing history( for a belt that had lost all its value ) put you on top of the world exactly ?
Call me three guys you expect to win against AJ? For me, the only one who got a chance is Tyson Fury. Not Povetkin, not Wilder, not Parker, not anyone Klitschko defeated already...![]()
AJ for me is still a prospect,regardless of knocking out a load of nobodys, until he starts beating guys world ranked in the top 15 then for me he should be regarded as a prospect .
Wilder is a much more proven fighter than Joshua.asdfjkl wrote:So Wilder is a nobody as well?
Agreed mate. Out of the three I'd chose Stiverne. Can understand the logic of a North American opponent given the interest from Showtime and HBO. Breazeale is possibly one for down the road. Not too keen on Molina as don't think he will offer much.Syntax Error wrote:Stiverne - he isn't great, but he's tough & has a 'name'.
He should, in theory, extend Joshua, but it wouldn't surprise me if Joshua flattened him, as AJ does seem to possess bone crunching power.
Why? Joshua fought just as much boxrec top 100 opponends as Wilder and KOed them loads and loads more fast on avarage.Horse wrote:Wilder is a much more proven fighter than Joshua.asdfjkl wrote:So Wilder is a nobody as well?
Why?asdfjkl wrote:Why? Joshua fought just as much boxrec top 100 opponends as Wilder and KOed them loads and loads more fast on avarage.
It's certainly not, perhaps longer, but that's really it, especially if you actually watch the fights, then you'll see the difference:Horse wrote:Why?asdfjkl wrote:Why? Joshua fought just as much boxrec top 100 opponends as Wilder and KOed them loads and loads more fast on avarage.
Because Wilder's record is much, much better.
It's really interesting watching both these matches at the same time and comparing the styles. Joshua seems quite compact, accurate, and is more busy. Wilder is a bit more rangy, arms and legs kinda all over the place, but much better movement. I know it's kinda hard to compare the two fights as I know Gavern was quite short notice for Joshua so probably not that well prepped. The Wilder - Gavern seemed a bit more of a boxing match, but Joshua - Gavern seemed a little bit more like a lamb to the slaughter.
Just note that Wilder took Gavern as stay busy fight before his match with Stiverne (for 30,000$ purse if I remember right), and it is very clear he is trying to do as much rounds as he can to practice-))) Since he didn't do any rounds in his previous fight.asdfjkl wrote:It's certainly not, perhaps longer, but that's really it, especially if you actually watch the fights, then you'll see the difference:Horse wrote:Why?asdfjkl wrote:Why? Joshua fought just as much boxrec top 100 opponends as Wilder and KOed them loads and loads more fast on avarage.
Because Wilder's record is much, much better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPeYplT2qPU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aFDPvhgk_s
Wilder's first 25 fights actually make absolutely no sense, barely anyone is ranked at all.
Gavern himself has called Joshua "the future of the division" and believes he hits harder.Rob3_142 wrote:It's really interesting watching both these matches at the same time and comparing the styles. Joshua seems quite compact, accurate, and is more busy. Wilder is a bit more rangy, arms and legs kinda all over the place, but much better movement. I know it's kinda hard to compare the two fights as I know Gavern was quite short notice for Joshua so probably not that well prepped. The Wilder - Gavern seemed a bit more of a boxing match, but Joshua - Gavern seemed a little bit more like a lamb to the slaughter.
Oh that's it? Wilder is continually and desperately trying to keep Gavern alive to make more rounds? Funny also that the commentaters say the opposite. Wilder must have been really angry when Gavern stopped the fight, luckely he's a good actor and managed to act like happy anyway.bigman1968 wrote:Just note that Wilder took Gavern as stay busy fight before his match with Stiverne (for 30,000$ purse if I remember right), and it is very clear he is trying to do as much rounds as he can to practice-))) Since he didn't do any rounds in his previous fight.asdfjkl wrote:It's certainly not, perhaps longer, but that's really it, especially if you actually watch the fights, then you'll see the difference:Horse wrote:Why?
Because Wilder's record is much, much better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPeYplT2qPU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aFDPvhgk_s
Wilder's first 25 fights actually make absolutely no sense, barely anyone is ranked at all.
Rob3_142 wrote:It's really interesting watching both these matches at the same time and comparing the styles. Joshua seems quite compact, accurate, and is more busy. Wilder is a bit more rangy, arms and legs kinda all over the place, but much better movement. I know it's kinda hard to compare the two fights as I know Gavern was quite short notice for Joshua so probably not that well prepped. The Wilder - Gavern seemed a bit more of a boxing match, but Joshua - Gavern seemed a little bit more like a lamb to the slaughter.