BoxRec

marvelous marv wrote:Parker has the skills to beat AJ. Hearn is in no rush to make that fight. AJ is robotic and might have stamina issues.

AJ is NOT robotic.. Parker is robotic.. Kessler was robotic.. Jermain Taylor was robotic.. Foreman was robotic.. Breazeale is robotic.. Glazkov is robotic.. Willard, Carnera, Simon, Buddy Baer, and Bruno were robotic.. Lewis was even a bit robotic at times when he got lazy mentally.

Joshua doesn't repeat himself.. doesn't give you the same 1-2 rhythm.. doesn't stick out the same jab.. The guys he's faced so far look like neophytes

foxdog1923 wrote:

Kalan wrote:

foxdog1923 wrote:No one's ducking Joshua. Just incase you didn't know the truth. Truth is, he's probably the most called out fighter.

He's good but the fact is Klitschko, Haye etc..are calling him out.

This is what's so interesting... Joshua is such big box-office he'll get the fights he needs... Guys are calling him out. If Joshua can dispose of Parker, Fury, Haye, Klitschko, Wilder, Povetkin, and Ortiz in that order. He'll be 24-0 with the best resume in the History of the Heavyweight Division. He's capable of doing this because there's no holes in his game.

Louis's jab was very counterable... Ali's defensive was extremely leaky... Johnson would get fat like for the Willard fight... Holmes lacked KO power as did Tunney... Dempsey, Tyson, Liston, Foreman, Jeffries, Lewis etc. lacked top grade boxing skills and were all pretty hittable... Wladimir has no body attack... Vitali had chronically injured legs from kickboxing. He moved like an automaton... Haye can box and punch, but he's a little guy who can't hang... Holyfield was another cruiserweight... Ortiz is an old man, or will be in another year or 2 when AJ needs to fight him... Joshua is the first Heavyweight I've seen who seems to have an airtight style... He has no major holes in his skillset and already owns a World Title in his prime ... Once he clears these 7 beatable Heavyweights out it's clear sailing for 5 to 8 more years.

But hang on. You said Ortiz would beat Joshua!

Possibly if he fought him next... But have no fear, Parker, Fury, Haye, Klitschko, Wilder, and Povetkin will be cleared out first... Joshua will be well seasoned when he meets Ortiz, no earlier than 2018.

I can't even read the entire BS post by you (Kalan) anymore. I guess I just think back about the comment that you sat ringside in the 50's watching how terrible SRR was. Then, I remember you are just another troll that is full of BS. You even manage to make a few logical comments, then it turns into the diarrhea that comes out of your mouth. You, asdfjkl and Bnov are the cream of the crop on this forum as far as trolls go.

bigman1968 wrote:Calling out...how old are people here?

Managers, promoters, TV and sanctioning ABCs arrange the fights, taking into consideration one thing only - return on investment.

All those ignorant slobs, boxer, do whatever their manager tells them, when he tells them. It's in their contracts

The boxers are investment projects (most of them, Russian's are sometimes political instruments)

interesting point. i think it is largely
true but from a certain level onwards
fighters do have a say, at least some.

mayweather, de la hoya, haye come
to mind, who i would figure were very
much in charge of their fights. and of
course the k's.

man wrote:

bigman1968 wrote:Calling out...how old are people here?

Managers, promoters, TV and sanctioning ABCs arrange the fights, taking into consideration one thing only - return on investment.

All those ignorant slobs, boxer, do whatever their manager tells them, when he tells them. It's in their contracts

The boxers are investment projects (most of them, Russian's are sometimes political instruments)

interesting point. i think it is largely
true but from a certain level onwards
fighters do have a say, at least some.

mayweather, de la hoya, haye come
to mind, who i would figure were very
much in charge of their fights. and of
course the k's.

It's known that some boxers become promoters, de la Hoya (Golden Boy), Klichkos(K2K), Salita....

But most of them not sharp enough for that

BitPlayer wrote:

lefty wrote:

marvelous marv wrote:Parker has the skills to beat AJ. Hearn is in no rush to make that fight. AJ is robotic and might have stamina issues.

Parker is a hype job imo. You watch him get exposed when he steps. Don't get me wrong, he did well scraping by against Takam but the top dogs of the division will be a different story.

He's got time to improve, but I don't think he has the attributes to ever be on top. But claiming AJ is on top now is pretty ridiculous considering he hasn't fought someone half as good as Takam.

Plus Parker clearly won. Hardly scrapped by.

115-113 was a fair scorecard. Hardly dominant and his supposed power looked non-existent.

What do you think the general hype surrounding Parker is, lefty? To me it seems like discussion about the best heavyweights features names like Joshua, Wilder, and Fury much more prominently than it features his, and I question whether he's generally being pegged for great things that would require him to beat people like that if he's not really a hype job.

Moreover, what counts as stepping up to you? Takam was probably one of the ten best fighters in the division, outclassed Thompson with fewer issues than Pulev and Scott had, deserved a win over Perez, and was even with Povetkin going into the ninth round. Of the current crop of contenders and champions, who has clearly beaten a better foe within the last few years? If someone hasn't, does this means they haven't successfully stepped up either?

Parker is a very young HW and has lots of time to get better (of other 'fresh blood' in the division Wilder is 7 years older, Fury is 4 years older, and AJ about 3). That he was able to take such a huge step up and fairly beat Takam is a good sign IMO (remember that early in their careers Wilder and Fury were dropped by soft opposition), but even if he ends up losing to an elite opponent that doesn't make him a hype job to me.

crusader wrote:Takam was a solid top ten guy IMO.

I think he's better than anyone Joshua, Wilder, and Pulev have beaten, and about on par with Ortiz's best opponent in Jennings. I don't think Parker is quite up there with the division's elite, but he is also still very young and has lots of time left to improve, so for him to already have one of the best recent wins in the division is a good sign, especially when he was making such a huge step up.

Yeah but he basically won a 7-5 decision against a 35 yr old Takam who was naturally quite a bit smaller and Parker's vaunted power looked mediocre at best. I can't remember him significantly hurting Takam once in the fight. This is a guy who was eventually knocked out cold by Povetkin aswell so it makes you wonder if his power is all that.

Regarding the win being better than all the others like Joshua, Wilder and Pulev I agree. I also agree that the win is probably on a par with Ortiz's win over Jennings although the latter was more emphatic.

crusader wrote:What do you think the general hype surrounding Parker is, lefty? To me it seems like discussion about the best heavyweights features names like Joshua, Wilder, and Fury much more prominently than it features his, and I question whether he's generally being pegged for great things that would require him to beat people like that if he's not really a hype job.

Moreover, what counts as stepping up to you? Takam was probably one of the ten best fighters in the division, outclassed Thompson with fewer issues than Pulev and Scott had, deserved a win over Perez, and was even with Povetkin going into the ninth round. Of the current crop of contenders and champions, who has clearly beaten a better foe within the last few years? If someone hasn't, does this means they haven't successfully stepped up either?

Parker is a very young HW and has lots of time to get better (of other 'fresh blood' in the division Wilder is 7 years older, Fury is 4 years older, and AJ about 3). That he was able to take such a huge step up and fairly beat Takam is a good sign IMO (remember that early in their careers Wilder and Fury were dropped by soft opposition), but even if he ends up losing to an elite opponent that doesn't make him a hype job to me.

Did he? I had Thompson winning the first 3 rounds against Pulev and then Kubrat won every round after that.

My hype job comments come based off what I've seen people say about Parker on YouTube (a lot saying he'll smash Joshua when they fight) I'm not even a Joshua fan really but I see Parker getting knocked out in that fight.

I agree though that Takam is a better win than the likes of Wilder and Joshua have as of now.

When has Takam been seriously hurt aside from the Povetkin fight? And it took Pov several rounds of landing big shots before he managed to stop him (he wasn't out cold by the way). Takam was a HUGE step up for Parker and in my JP simply winning a fair decision reflects well on him.

If you're going to discredit Takam like that you should do it for everyone's opponents. Wlad was close to 40, not simply 35, and had looked pretty mediocre in beating Jennings prior to the Fury fight; Stiverne is about as short as Takam, fatter, lazy, got stopped by a journeyman, and was getting soundly outboxed by old Ray Austin a few fights before Wilder (then got dropped by another journeyman in after Wilder); Jennings is quite a small HW, has little power, and was dropped by Bowie Tupou (iced by Parker), so of course Ortiz should've walked through him.....don't even get me started on AJ's opponents.

LOL at YouTube. Casuals say so much stupid poo there and I don't really consider the commentary to be representative of views within boxing circles. I remember watching videos of Tony Harrison and some people were promising that he'd beat GGG.

Parkers fought FAR better opponents than Joshua. You have to know the division to understand that.

Joshua is good but if you're going to call anyone a "hype job" it'll be Joshua.

He's got fight a SOMEBODY. Parker has.

And lefty, do you think Parker has the potential to improve? What did you think of Wilder when Harold Sconiers had him all over the place, or when light hitting Pajkic planted Fury on his ass?

I don't know if Parker will ever be as good as AJ, Fury, Wilder, etc., but IMO it's harsh to already be calling him a hype job, and to be acting like him losing to any of them would prove it.

crusader wrote:When has Takam been seriously hurt aside from the Povetkin fight? And it took Pov several rounds of landing big shots before he managed to stop him (he wasn't out cold by the way). Takam was a HUGE step up for Parker and in my JP simply winning a fair decision reflects well on him.

If you're going to discredit Takam like that you should do it for everyone's opponents. Wlad was close to 40, not simply 35, and had looked pretty mediocre in beating Jennings prior to the Fury fight; Stiverne is about as short as Takam, fatter, lazy, got stopped by a journeyman, and was getting soundly outboxed by old Ray Austin a few fights before Wilder (then got dropped by another journeyman in after Wilder); Jennings is quite a small HW, has little power, and was dropped by Bowie Tupou (iced by Parker), so of course Ortiz should've walked through him.....don't even get me started on AJ's opponents.

LOL at YouTube. Casuals say so much stupid poo there and I don't really consider the commentary to be representative of views within boxing circles. I remember watching videos of Tony Harrison and some people were promising that he'd beat GGG.

A guy who should have lost his last two fights to a journeyman and a gatekeeper.
One of the worst paper champions in heavyweight history
An out of shape boxer, with a shoulder injury, who didn't even look impressive against a shot cruiserweight journyman.

Just so it's said.

Now after all this watch Parker get flattened by Haumono

crusader wrote:When has Takam been seriously hurt aside from the Povetkin fight? And it took Pov several rounds of landing big shots before he managed to stop him (he wasn't out cold by the way). Takam was a HUGE step up for Parker and in my JP simply winning a fair decision reflects well on him.

If you're going to discredit Takam like that you should do it for everyone's opponents. Wlad was close to 40, not simply 35, and had looked pretty mediocre in beating Jennings prior to the Fury fight; Stiverne is about as short as Takam, fatter, lazy, got stopped by a journeyman, and was getting soundly outboxed by old Ray Austin a few fights before Wilder (then got dropped by another journeyman in after Wilder); Jennings is quite a small HW, has little power, and was dropped by Bowie Tupou (iced by Parker), so of course Ortiz should've walked through him.....don't even get me started on AJ's opponents.

LOL at YouTube. Casuals say so much stupid poo there and I don't really consider the commentary to be representative of views within boxing circles. I remember watching videos of Tony Harrison and some people were promising that he'd beat GGG.

Okay, you make valid points as always. What about the Bergman result though? Do you think Joshua or even Wilder for that matter would have taken 8 rounds to stop him? Parker was getting tagged quite a lot in that fight aswell. I mean I'd honesty never even heard of Bergman before he fought Parker. I remember looking through his record after the fight and he'd been knocked out repeatedly and in quicker fashion than Parker had achieved the stoppage by guys who aren't particularly impressive punchers. People talk about Joshua being hurt by Whyte but Parker was buzzed by Nascimento!

Also Parker and Whyte have three common opponents and Whyte has stopped all of them in quicker fashion. I'm not even sure Parker would beat Whyte to be honest. Is Takam a better all around fighter than Whyte? Very possibly although I don't believe he hits as hard. Takam took 5 rounds to stop Michael Spott who pretty much gets stopped by everyone in the 1st round nowadays. Even the dire Christian Hammer stopped him in 1.

Anyway, I'm not saying Parker is a terrible fighter, I'm just not convinced he's as good as some are saying he is. I mean there's people within this sub who are saying he'll definitively beat Wilder. I mean that's ridiculous and purely based off the fact Wilder seems unwilling to challenge himself (although he was going to fight Povetkin) that's just blind dislike in those cases clouding judgement to say its a sure thing.

crusader wrote:When has Takam been seriously hurt aside from the Povetkin fight? And it took Pov several rounds of landing big shots before he managed to stop him (he wasn't out cold by the way). Takam was a HUGE step up for Parker and in my JP simply winning a fair decision reflects well on him.

If you're going to discredit Takam like that you should do it for everyone's opponents. Wlad was close to 40, not simply 35, and had looked pretty mediocre in beating Jennings prior to the Fury fight; Stiverne is about as short as Takam, fatter, lazy, got stopped by a journeyman, and was getting soundly outboxed by old Ray Austin a few fights before Wilder (then got dropped by another journeyman in after Wilder); Jennings is quite a small HW, has little power, and was dropped by Bowie Tupou (iced by Parker), so of course Ortiz should've walked through him.....don't even get me started on AJ's opponents.

LOL at YouTube. Casuals say so much stupid poo there and I don't really consider the commentary to be representative of views within boxing circles. I remember watching videos of Tony Harrison and some people were promising that he'd beat GGG.

You cannot learn a thing from Povetkin-Takam, it was a fix. Takam stopped defending himself with no reason from the end of 8th.

At this stage of his carreer Takam just serving as stepping stone and collecting paychecks for retirement...

lefty wrote:

crusader wrote:When has Takam been seriously hurt aside from the Povetkin fight? And it took Pov several rounds of landing big shots before he managed to stop him (he wasn't out cold by the way). Takam was a HUGE step up for Parker and in my JP simply winning a fair decision reflects well on him.

If you're going to discredit Takam like that you should do it for everyone's opponents. Wlad was close to 40, not simply 35, and had looked pretty mediocre in beating Jennings prior to the Fury fight; Stiverne is about as short as Takam, fatter, lazy, got stopped by a journeyman, and was getting soundly outboxed by old Ray Austin a few fights before Wilder (then got dropped by another journeyman in after Wilder); Jennings is quite a small HW, has little power, and was dropped by Bowie Tupou (iced by Parker), so of course Ortiz should've walked through him.....don't even get me started on AJ's opponents.

LOL at YouTube. Casuals say so much stupid poo there and I don't really consider the commentary to be representative of views within boxing circles. I remember watching videos of Tony Harrison and some people were promising that he'd beat GGG.

Okay, you make valid points as always. What about the Bergman result though? Do you think Joshua or even Wilder for that matter would have taken 8 rounds to stop him? Parker was getting tagged quite a lot in that fight aswell. I mean I'd honesty never even heard of Bergman before he fought Parker. I remember looking through his record after the fight and he'd been knocked out repeatedly and in quicker fashion than Parker had achieved the stoppage by guys who aren't particularly impressive punchers. People talk about Joshua being hurt by Whyte but Parker was buzzed by Nascimento!

Also Parker and Whyte have three common opponents and Whyte has stopped all of them in quicker fashion. I'm not even sure Parker would beat Whyte to be honest. Is Takam a better all around fighter than Whyte? Very possibly although I don't believe he hits as hard. Takam took 5 rounds to stop Michael Spott who pretty much gets stopped by everyone in the 1st round nowadays. Even the dire Christian Hammer stopped him in 1.

Anyway, I'm not saying Parker is a terrible fighter, I'm just not convinced he's as good as some are saying he is. I mean there's people within this sub who are saying he'll definitively beat Wilder. I mean that's ridiculous and purely based off the fact Wilder seems unwilling to challenge himself (although he was going to fight Povetkin) that's just blind dislike in those cases clouding judgement to say its a sure thing.

In Parker's favor can be said that he is busy, as young fighter should be.

But I'm afraid that lack of punching power will stop him from the real top

lefty wrote:Also Parker and Whyte have three common opponents and Whyte has stopped all of them in quicker fashion. I'm not even sure Parker would beat Whyte to be honest.

Whyte is about 10-20Ibs heavier, and Parker was 22 when he fought their common opponents, Whyte had also had quite a few more fights in every case. Plus one of the common opponents is the now 41yo Minto, who WHyte fought about a year later, before Gerber knocked him out even faster half a year later, in other words he's been aging. It's basically the same reasoning that told people David Price would be better than Tyson Fury, except Whyte also looks a lot worse in his fights.

Badhusker wrote:I can't even read the entire BS post by you (Kalan) anymore. I guess I just think back about the comment that you sat ringside in the 50's watching how terrible SRR was. Then, I remember you are just another troll that is full of BS. You even manage to make a few logical comments, then it turns into the diarrhea that comes out of your mouth. You, asdfjkl and Bnov are the cream of the crop on this forum as far as trolls go.

Yeah it's best just to ignore his nonsense.

BitPlayer wrote:

lefty wrote:Also Parker and Whyte have three common opponents and Whyte has stopped all of them in quicker fashion. I'm not even sure Parker would beat Whyte to be honest.

Whyte is about 10-20Ibs heavier, and Parker was 22 when he fought their common opponents, Whyte had also had quite a few more fights in every case. Plus one of the common opponents is the now 41yo Minto, who WHyte fought about a year later, before Gerber knocked him out even faster half a year later, in other words he's been aging. It's basically the same reasoning that told people David Price would be better than Tyson Fury, except Whyte also looks a lot worse in his fights.

Well time will tell anyway I guess.

Badhusker wrote:I can't even read the entire BS post by you (Kalan) anymore. I guess I just think back about the comment that you sat ringside in the 50's watching how terrible SRR was. Then, I remember you are just another troll that is full of BS. You even manage to make a few logical comments, then it turns into the diarrhea that comes out of your mouth. You, asdfjkl and Bnov are the cream of the crop on this forum as far as trolls go.

BadSmell... You're just a miserable piece of what people who have diarrhea do in their shorts... Plus you're a lying bastard. I never said I sat ringside in the 50's and watched how terrible SRR was.. He was great.. He was on TV a lot when I was a little kid. My dad was a Boxing fan and so was I.

Kalan wrote:

Badhusker wrote:I can't even read the entire BS post by you (Kalan) anymore. I guess I just think back about the comment that you sat ringside in the 50's watching how terrible SRR was. Then, I remember you are just another troll that is full of BS. You even manage to make a few logical comments, then it turns into the diarrhea that comes out of your mouth. You, asdfjkl and Bnov are the cream of the crop on this forum as far as trolls go.

BadSmell... You're just a miserable piece of what people who have diarrhea do in their shorts... Plus you're a lying bastard. I never said I sat ringside in the 50's and watched how terrible SRR was.. He was great.. He was on TV a lot when I was a little kid. My dad was a Boxing fan and so was I.

But you did claim Charles Martin was better than multiple Hall of Fame Heavyweight champions.

Joshuas best opponents..
- Whyte
- Martin
- Breazeale

Who the fuk are they?..

Did Joshua make these guys more popular?

..whoever clears the field is fine with me.. I just want them ALL to stop looking for all kinds of excuses and do something in the interests of their fans for a change..

BitPlayer wrote:

Kalan wrote:

Badhusker wrote:I can't even read the entire BS post by you (Kalan) anymore. I guess I just think back about the comment that you sat ringside in the 50's watching how terrible SRR was. Then, I remember you are just another troll that is full of BS. You even manage to make a few logical comments, then it turns into the diarrhea that comes out of your mouth. You, asdfjkl and Bnov are the cream of the crop on this forum as far as trolls go.

BadSmell... You're just a miserable piece of what people who have diarrhea do in their shorts... Plus you're a lying bastard. I never said I sat ringside in the 50's and watched how terrible SRR was.. He was great.. He was on TV a lot when I was a little kid. My dad was a Boxing fan and so was I.

But you did claim Charles Martin was better than multiple Hall of Fame Heavyweight champions.

Doesn't mean I think Martin is real good.. He isn't.. I think Joshua is real good.. Martin is very big, tall, strong southpaw. He was the man with a World Heavyweight Title who was there... AJ took him out very easily and then went on to the next 6'7" X 255 undefeated Football player.