BoxRec

Trevor Bryan said so !

TBH I though the 4 times your money back if Takam wins was a very very fair bet. Because who are the best guys Parker beated? And how much trouble did Parker already have with boxers that are far below Takam's level?

Parker won't get past Joshua.

He might win a title fighting some lump like Fury.

asdfjkl wrote:TBH I though the 4 times your money back if Takam wins was a very very fair bet. Because who are the best guys Parker beated? And how much trouble did Parker already have with boxers that are far below Takam's level?

If a betting agency is willing to GIVE you 4 times your money back if Takam wins then they are NOT backing Takam to win. They feel they wont have to PAY YOU that money they offer so you like the bet and then you go and LOSE your money. Betting agency are not there to GIVE you money, theyre there to TAKE your money. Do you understand now?

Let me explain for you because you don't seem to understand things..

Say you like Joshua and Joshua is fighting the 1000th ranked heavyweight. The betting agency will say you get 4 times your money back if the 1000th ranked fighter wins. Come and bet cos you might win 4 times your money back and take our money. You FINALLY see?

Freedom2013 wrote:Parker won't get past Joshua.

He might win a title fighting some lump like Fury.

Parker too fast for Joshua. AJ to eat the fastest jabs all night and then sleep time.

foxdog1923 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:TBH I though the 4 times your money back if Takam wins was a very very fair bet. Because who are the best guys Parker beated? And how much trouble did Parker already have with boxers that are far below Takam's level?

If a betting agency is willing to GIVE you 4 times your money back if Takam wins then they are NOT backing Takam to win. They feel they wont have to PAY YOU that money they offer so you like the bet and then you go and LOSE your money. Betting agency are not there to GIVE you money, theyre there to TAKE your money. Do you understand now?

Let me explain for you because you don't seem to understand things..

Say you like Joshua and Joshua is fighting the 1000th ranked heavyweight. The betting agency will say you get 4 times your money back if the 1000th ranked fighter wins. Come and bet cos you might win 4 times your money back and take our money. You FINALLY see?

asdfjkl is right and I'm pretty sure he understands: 4-1 on Takam is really generous odds considering how big of a step up this is for Parker. Based on power, speed and youth, Parker could be a big favourite, but Takam has gone 1-1-1 with Perez, Thompson and Povetkin, all of whom are much better than anyone Parker has faced. Takam's experience and toughness may be a step too far for Parker, although I hope not, as I really want to see Parker go far.

jezzamundo wrote:

foxdog1923 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:TBH I though the 4 times your money back if Takam wins was a very very fair bet. Because who are the best guys Parker beated? And how much trouble did Parker already have with boxers that are far below Takam's level?

If a betting agency is willing to GIVE you 4 times your money back if Takam wins then they are NOT backing Takam to win. They feel they wont have to PAY YOU that money they offer so you like the bet and then you go and LOSE your money. Betting agency are not there to GIVE you money, theyre there to TAKE your money. Do you understand now?

Let me explain for you because you don't seem to understand things..

Say you like Joshua and Joshua is fighting the 1000th ranked heavyweight. The betting agency will say you get 4 times your money back if the 1000th ranked fighter wins. Come and bet cos you might win 4 times your money back and take our money. You FINALLY see?

asdfjkl is right and I'm pretty sure he understands: 4-1 on Takam is really generous odds considering how big of a step up this is for Parker. Based on power, speed and youth, Parker could be a big favourite, but Takam has gone 1-1-1 with Perez, Thompson and Povetkin, all of whom are much better than anyone Parker has faced. Takam's experience and toughness may be a step too far for Parker, although I hope not, as I really want to see Parker go far.

The odds suggest that Takam WON'T win so as long as you understand that then it's fine. Super dumb to GIVE out money when your suppose to be making money.

If you know boxing, you'd know some of Parkers past opponents have been more experienced. Any of those three you mentioned fought Mike Tyson? Kali Meehan fought for a world title.

Perez sucks and so does Thompson. Too slow and lame. Someone here posted a record that proved Parker had fought higher ranked fighters than Joshua. I like Joshua too, he's a good champ and a cool guy but I think Parker is coming for him.

You just gotta listen to the other boxers and what they have to say about Parker not what you say cos who are you lol? I just reiterate what the boxers say and they say Parker is good/champion/contender.

foxdog1923 wrote:

Freedom2013 wrote:Parker won't get past Joshua.

He might win a title fighting some lump like Fury.

Parker too fast for Joshua. AJ to eat the fastest jabs all night and then sleep time.

I know Parker hits hard but Joshua more so. I'd be interested to see what Parker does when he gets hit by AJ. I suspect Parker's offence would be reigned in, if not and he decided to just go for it, lights out.

Roars Like Me wrote: I know Parker hits hard but Joshua more so. I'd be interested to see what Parker does when he gets hit by AJ. I suspect Parker's offence would be reigned in, if not and he decided to just go for it, lights out.

I'd be interested to see what AJ does when he gets hit by Parker! We've seen AJ get wobbled by Whyte but we've yet to see that with Parker. AJ fans will be quick to say without really knowing for sure that Whyte is more formidable than any of Parkers past opponents and that's debatable but Whyte did show AJ can be knocked.

To AJs credit he showed great heart to get back up and beat someone who beat him in the amateurs and now had him rocked in the 2nd round I think it was. That is another thing about AJ, you have to knock him out not down, cos he'll get back up and fight. I have seen Parker wear a big left from southpaw Bergman in his last fight and Parker wore it well but that was Bergman, not AJ.

I see no change in both fighters styles should they meet. I see Parker setting up mostly of his speedy jabs. The speed of Parker will be unlike anything AJ has faced before but AJ will be expecting that and most likely adjust

foxdog1923 wrote:

Freedom2013 wrote:Parker won't get past Joshua.

He might win a title fighting some lump like Fury.

Parker too fast for Joshua. AJ to eat the fastest jabs all night and then sleep time.

truth

foxdog1923 wrote:

Roars Like Me wrote: I know Parker hits hard but Joshua more so. I'd be interested to see what Parker does when he gets hit by AJ. I suspect Parker's offence would be reigned in, if not and he decided to just go for it, lights out.

I'd be interested to see what AJ does when he gets hit by Parker! We've seen AJ get wobbled by Whyte but we've yet to see that with Parker. AJ fans will be quick to say without really knowing for sure that Whyte is more formidable than any of Parkers past opponents and that's debatable but Whyte did show AJ can be knocked.

To AJs credit he showed great heart to get back up and beat someone who beat him in the amateurs and now had him rocked in the 2nd round I think it was. That is another thing about AJ, you have to knock him out not down, cos he'll get back up and fight. I have seen Parker wear a big left from southpaw Bergman in his last fight and Parker wore it well but that was Bergman, not AJ.

I see no change in both fighters styles should they meet. I see Parker setting up mostly of his speedy jabs. The speed of Parker will be unlike anything AJ has faced before but AJ will be expecting that and most likely adjust

That's fair enough - I didn't add what would happen if Parker hit AJ so that is still to be seen. As you say though he's been staggered already and yes he came back to win so that's a plus at least. I'm sure Parker has that in him too but he's not really been hit with serious power so he's not had to. Yes he's been hit hard and taken it well but AJ has serious power so a different situation for him to be in.
They say speed kills so maybe who knows.
Whilst I like AJ, he has been compared to Bruno and I just wonder is they are that similar, we'll see as it goes on. He may be just like him - the difference being that he won the title at the start of his career rather than the end.

As for Parker he's decent, strong, quick, not massive but that's ok. Whilst comparing fighters, he has a bit of Tua about him but I hope he actually wins a title.

foxdog1923 wrote:

Roars Like Me wrote: I know Parker hits hard but Joshua more so. I'd be interested to see what Parker does when he gets hit by AJ. I suspect Parker's offence would be reigned in, if not and he decided to just go for it, lights out.

I'd be interested to see what AJ does when he gets hit by Parker! We've seen AJ get wobbled by Whyte but we've yet to see that with Parker. AJ fans will be quick to say without really knowing for sure that Whyte is more formidable than any of Parkers past opponents and that's debatable but Whyte did show AJ can be knocked.

To AJs credit he showed great heart to get back up and beat someone who beat him in the amateurs and now had him rocked in the 2nd round I think it was. That is another thing about AJ, you have to knock him out not down, cos he'll get back up and fight. I have seen Parker wear a big left from southpaw Bergman in his last fight and Parker wore it well but that was Bergman, not AJ.

I see no change in both fighters styles should they meet. I see Parker setting up mostly of his speedy jabs. The speed of Parker will be unlike anything AJ has faced before but AJ will be expecting that and most likely adjust

Whyte is a bigger puncher then Parker, Whyte stopped the durable Nascimento in 2 rounds were Parker took 7 rounds to stop him, so I don't think AJ will be losing sleep over Parker's power. Parker will be more worried as he hasn't felt the power of anything like what AJ brings. Also AJ didn't go down against Whyte as you wrote in bold.

I do like Parker though he has good speed and movement, this fight against Takam will tell us a lot.

foxdog1923 wrote:

jezzamundo wrote:

foxdog1923 wrote: If a betting agency is willing to GIVE you 4 times your money back if Takam wins then they are NOT backing Takam to win. They feel they wont have to PAY YOU that money they offer so you like the bet and then you go and LOSE your money. Betting agency are not there to GIVE you money, theyre there to TAKE your money. Do you understand now?

Let me explain for you because you don't seem to understand things..

Say you like Joshua and Joshua is fighting the 1000th ranked heavyweight. The betting agency will say you get 4 times your money back if the 1000th ranked fighter wins. Come and bet cos you might win 4 times your money back and take our money. You FINALLY see?

asdfjkl is right and I'm pretty sure he understands: 4-1 on Takam is really generous odds considering how big of a step up this is for Parker. Based on power, speed and youth, Parker could be a big favourite, but Takam has gone 1-1-1 with Perez, Thompson and Povetkin, all of whom are much better than anyone Parker has faced. Takam's experience and toughness may be a step too far for Parker, although I hope not, as I really want to see Parker go far.

The odds suggest that Takam WON'T win so as long as you understand that then it's fine. Super dumb to GIVE out money when your suppose to be making money.

If you know boxing, you'd know some of Parkers past opponents have been more experienced. Any of those three you mentioned fought Mike Tyson? Kali Meehan fought for a world title.

Perez sucks and so does Thompson. Too slow and lame. Someone here posted a record that proved Parker had fought higher ranked fighters than Joshua. I like Joshua too, he's a good champ and a cool guy but I think Parker is coming for him.

You just gotta listen to the other boxers and what they have to say about Parker not what you say cos who are you lol? I just reiterate what the boxers say and they say Parker is good/champion/contender.

I'm pretty sure everyone understands this - if they don't I really have to worry! Putting money on Takam is a risk, no question, but I believe the fight is really much closer to a 50:50 contest due to the experience gap - hence 4-1 is generous odds and worth laying a few down on if you're a gambler (I'm not). Joshua winning the fight would do nothing to change that fact.

Francois Botha and Kali Meehan are far inferior to Perez, Thompson and Povetkin at this stage. Botha was an OK challenger who was outboxing a post prime Tyson before getting starched. Meehan was always a bit chinny, but otherwise a good, big heavyweight who was robbed of a share of the title when he fought Brewster. When they fought Parker, they were aged 44 and 45 respectively. Botha was obese and had lost his last four fights, while Meehan was in good shape, he was clearly well past his best.

Perez is a good boxer who seems to have gone downhill - understandably - since the Mago fight. He was outboxing Takam until his stamina let him down, although credit to Takam for turning it around. Thompson is old, fat and slow, yet was coming off two wins over David Price and a competitive loss to Kubrat Pulev and a win over Solis - which he repeated after losing to Takam. It's worth noting that Takam beat Thompson more clearly than Pulev did. Then there's the fact that Takam was virtually fighting Povetkin to a draw until getting stopped. The guy is a clear, proven top 10 heavyweight, which is more than we can say about Parker at this stage. Just to reiterate - I am hoping Parker get the win, but I think this is a way more competitive fight than the 4-1 odd suggest.

Until Joshua's last two fights, I would agree that Parker has faced the stiffer competition.

\
I think he just might end up being the best. Lots of ability, let's see what happens against Takam .

digzee wrote: Whyte is a bigger puncher then Parker,

That's debatable both punch hard and that's what I say.

Parker to me is a better boxer and that's what's important. He keeps everything nice and tight compared to Whyte who loads up. However when Whyte does load up and swing it's timely and devastating.

digzee wrote: Whyte stopped the durable Nascimento in 2 rounds were Parker took 7 rounds to stop him, so I don't think AJ will be losing sleep over Parker's power.

I can't believe you wrote that cos that's stupid logic and way of thinking when comparing boxers. To me that it honestly doesn't count for much, there's other factors at play here such as condition of the fighters on that particular night, styles etc..

Ok Ill give you an example why it doesn't matter. Parker took 2 rounds to knock out Botha. Mike Tyson took 5 rounds. Evander Holyfield took 8 rounds. Takam took 11 rounds. Now to your logic that means Parker is better than Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield and his upcoming opponent Carlos Takam just because Parker finished Botha in lesser rounds than Tyson and co? That is what you are clearly insinuating.

digzee wrote: Parker will be more worried as he hasn't felt the power of anything like what AJ brings.

They'll both be worried lol. Come on keep it real. Both fighters can knock each other out. It's probably good to be worried rather than not worry about the power of another proven knockout artist.

digzee wrote: Also AJ didn't go down against Whyte as you wrote in bold.

You're right, I stand corrected. I couldn't remember if AJ was wobbled or dropped, I only remember him showing great heart to comeback and finish off Whyte. That was a good fight though, probably the best heavyweight fight I've seen in awhile.

jezzamundo wrote:

foxdog1923 wrote:

jezzamundo wrote:
asdfjkl is right and I'm pretty sure he understands: 4-1 on Takam is really generous odds considering how big of a step up this is for Parker. Based on power, speed and youth, Parker could be a big favourite, but Takam has gone 1-1-1 with Perez, Thompson and Povetkin, all of whom are much better than anyone Parker has faced. Takam's experience and toughness may be a step too far for Parker, although I hope not, as I really want to see Parker go far.

The odds suggest that Takam WON'T win so as long as you understand that then it's fine. Super dumb to GIVE out money when your suppose to be making money.

If you know boxing, you'd know some of Parkers past opponents have been more experienced. Any of those three you mentioned fought Mike Tyson? Kali Meehan fought for a world title.

Perez sucks and so does Thompson. Too slow and lame. Someone here posted a record that proved Parker had fought higher ranked fighters than Joshua. I like Joshua too, he's a good champ and a cool guy but I think Parker is coming for him.

You just gotta listen to the other boxers and what they have to say about Parker not what you say cos who are you lol? I just reiterate what the boxers say and they say Parker is good/champion/contender.

I'm pretty sure everyone understands this - if they don't I really have to worry! Putting money on Takam is a risk, no question, but I believe the fight is really much closer to a 50:50 contest due to the experience gap - hence 4-1 is generous odds and worth laying a few down on if you're a gambler (I'm not). Joshua winning the fight would do nothing to change that fact.

Francois Botha and Kali Meehan are far inferior to Perez, Thompson and Povetkin at this stage. Botha was an OK challenger who was outboxing a post prime Tyson before getting starched. Meehan was always a bit chinny, but otherwise a good, big heavyweight who was robbed of a share of the title when he fought Brewster. When they fought Parker, they were aged 44 and 45 respectively. Botha was obese and had lost his last four fights, while Meehan was in good shape, he was clearly well past his best.

Perez is a good boxer who seems to have gone downhill - understandably - since the Mago fight. He was outboxing Takam until his stamina let him down, although credit to Takam for turning it around. Thompson is old, fat and slow, yet was coming off two wins over David Price and a competitive loss to Kubrat Pulev and a win over Solis - which he repeated after losing to Takam. It's worth noting that Takam beat Thompson more clearly than Pulev did. Then there's the fact that Takam was virtually fighting Povetkin to a draw until getting stopped. The guy is a clear, proven top 10 heavyweight, which is more than we can say about Parker at this stage. Just to reiterate - I am hoping Parker get the win, but I think this is a way more competitive fight than the 4-1 odd suggest.

Until Joshua's last two fights, I would agree that Parker has faced the stiffer competition.

Yeah 50/50, I was going to say 60/40 cos of the home ground advantage but that won't matter.

For me Parker is a border line Hype job.

Unless he gets a soft title fight I can't see him being a world champion.

He will probably squeeze past Takam but I give him no chance against Joshua.

foxdog1923 wrote:

digzee wrote: Whyte is a bigger puncher then Parker,

That's debatable both punch hard and that's what I say.

Parker to me is a better boxer and that's what's important. He keeps everything nice and tight compared to Whyte who loads up. However when Whyte does load up and swing it's timely and devastating.

digzee wrote: Whyte stopped the durable Nascimento in 2 rounds were Parker took 7 rounds to stop him, so I don't think AJ will be losing sleep over Parker's power.

I can't believe you wrote that cos that's stupid logic and way of thinking when comparing boxers. To me that it honestly doesn't count for much, there's other factors at play here such as condition of the fighters on that particular night, styles etc..

Ok Ill give you an example why it doesn't matter. Parker took 2 rounds to knock out Botha. Mike Tyson took 5 rounds. Evander Holyfield took 8 rounds. Takam took 11 rounds. Now to your logic that means Parker is better than Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield and his upcoming opponent Carlos Takam just because Parker finished Botha in lesser rounds than Tyson and co? That is what you are clearly insinuating.

digzee wrote: Parker will be more worried as he hasn't felt the power of anything like what AJ brings.

They'll both be worried lol. Come on keep it real. Both fighters can knock each other out. It's probably good to be worried rather than not worry about the power of another proven knockout artist.

digzee wrote: Also AJ didn't go down against Whyte as you wrote in bold.

You're right, I stand corrected. I couldn't remember if AJ was wobbled or dropped, I only remember him showing great heart to comeback and finish off Whyte. That was a good fight though, probably the best heavyweight fight I've seen in awhile.

There was 14 years between Mike Tyson and Parker fighting Frans Botha, there was about one year between the fights of:
Parker Minto(7 rounds)/Whyte Minto (3 rounds)
Parker Luiz Nascimento(7 rounds)/Whyte Luiz Nascimento (2 rounds)
Parker Beato Costa Junior(4 rounds/Whyte Beato Costa Junior (1 round)

If it takes Parker 18 rounds, what Whyte does in 6 rounds then you can easely suggest Whyte hits harder.


And about you saying someone would be nuts to put money on Takam because the bookies are paying that much... *facepalm*

asdfjkl wrote:
And about you saying someone would be nuts to put money on Takam because the bookies are paying that much... *facepalm*

boom I got you right here. Please provide proof of where I said someone would be nuts to put money on Takam. Provide that proof now, if you can't then you talk crap.

See this is what I'm talking about you not understanding why the bookies would make such a bet.

foxdog1923 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:
And about you saying someone would be nuts to put money on Takam because the bookies are paying that much... *facepalm*

boom I got you right here. Please provide proof of where I said someone would be nuts to put money on Takam. Provide that proof now, if you can't then you talk crap.

See this is what I'm talking about you not understanding why the bookies would make such a bet.

You showed you're confident the bookies will let you lose money all the time. Now I agree they are good, but in this particular match I quite disagree with the bookies. I think Parker is in far bigger risk as the bookies seem to think. Also, it might be a different way of saying it, but it's basically the same story.

asdfjkl wrote:

foxdog1923 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:
And about you saying someone would be nuts to put money on Takam because the bookies are paying that much... *facepalm*

boom I got you right here. Please provide proof of where I said someone would be nuts to put money on Takam. Provide that proof now, if you can't then you talk crap.

See this is what I'm talking about you not understanding why the bookies would make such a bet.

You showed you're confident the bookies will let you lose money all the time. Now I agree they are good, but in this particular match I quite disagree with the bookies. I think Parker is in far bigger risk as the bookies seem to think. Also, it might be a different way of saying it, but it's basically the same story.

Theres nothing wrong with disagreeing with the bookies but I'm just saying they're definitely favoring Parker.

I agree Parker is at HUGE risk with Takam as I've watched a little bit of Takam on YouTube. From what I've seen, Takam has shown more boxing skills than what Parker has on their videos. However Parker will win. He'll just win.

PredatorHayds wrote:For me Parker is a border line Hype job.

Unless he gets a soft title fight I can't see him being a world champion.

He will probably squeeze past Takam but I give him no chance against Joshua.

That's how I feel. I thought he looked pretty mediocre last time out against that (basically journeyman) southpaw.

foxdog1923 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

foxdog1923 wrote: boom I got you right here. Please provide proof of where I said someone would be nuts to put money on Takam. Provide that proof now, if you can't then you talk crap.

See this is what I'm talking about you not understanding why the bookies would make such a bet.

You showed you're confident the bookies will let you lose money all the time. Now I agree they are good, but in this particular match I quite disagree with the bookies. I think Parker is in far bigger risk as the bookies seem to think. Also, it might be a different way of saying it, but it's basically the same story.

Theres nothing wrong with disagreeing with the bookies but I'm just saying they're definitely favoring Parker.

I agree Parker is at HUGE risk with Takam as I've watched a little bit of Takam on YouTube. From what I've seen, Takam has shown more boxing skills than what Parker has on their videos. However Parker will win. He'll just win.

Oke, so first you say that I don't seem to understand what bookies do and now you agree Takam is a big risk?

asdfjkl wrote: Oke, so first you say that I don't seem to understand what bookies do and now you agree Takam is a big risk?

You have poor English comprehension. I said that the bookies are favoring Parker to win and that's why they are offering to pay punters 4 times their money back IF Takam wins. I never said my personal opinion about Takam until now.

I even said in my earlier posts that I think the bookies are unfair to Takam and that it should be 50/50 or 60/40 to Parker. The odds shouldnt heavily favour Parker. Go read my earlier post.

When you read my posts you think that it's always favoring Parker. I'm a big fan of Parker but I don't get carried away. You got to stop reading my posts like I only like Parker.

foxdog1923 wrote:

asdfjkl wrote: Oke, so first you say that I don't seem to understand what bookies do and now you agree Takam is a big risk?

You have poor English comprehension. I said that the bookies are favoring Parker to win and that's why they are offering to pay punters 4 times their money back IF Takam wins. I never said my personal opinion about Takam until now.

I even said in my earlier posts that I think the bookies are unfair to Takam and that it should be 50/50 or 60/40 to Parker. The odds shouldnt heavily favour Parker. Go read my earlier post.

When you read my posts you think that it's always favoring Parker. I'm a big fan of Parker but I don't get carried away. You got to stop reading my posts like I only like Parker.

Then why do you quote me, explaining something everybody already understand while even agreeing with me yourself??

Your quote makes no sense in that case lol.