Comments Thread For: Deontay Wilder signs for comeback fight versus Curtis Harper

[MulaKO]

If you really take the time to look at whom AJ lost to, fought and beat, compare his relative losses, etc... It is hard to determine "better." Was Ruiz better than Tito Ortiz? Remembering that Ortiz was undefeated when he fought Wilder... And when we consider the losses, it compounds the notion that AJ hit a ceiling, before being beat by the best... Reality is, the general level of opposition at this time in the division is lacking...

With all that said? I agree 100 that we need this division to move forwards, we have some real talent coming up the pike! Moses Ituama, Torres, Bakole... These guys are imo "better" than the last epoche of super sized heavyweights... Usyk brought that epoche to a close!

Reality is, the general level of opposition at this time in the division is lacking...

This ^^^^^^^^ is the right comment and unfortunately we’re stuck with two sub average fighters who their fans willingly or not , cheer for them and even place as goat

Roflmfao

[billeau2]

Reality is, the general level of opposition at this time in the division is lacking...

This ^^^^^^^^ is the right comment and unfortunately we’re stuck with two sub average fighters who their fans willingly or not , cheer for them and even place as goat

Roflmfao

Partially perhaps an age thing... When Tyson was becoming truly lethal, touted as "unbeatable" history gave boxing a wonderful gift: It turns out that around this time you had boxing trainers, pundits, who had been alive to witness the exploits of Dempsey, (even Johnson), up through Louis, Marciano, Liston, Ali, and Tyson. These men had seen several ideations of "unbeatable" heavyweights... This ability to compare based on experience was invaluable and was a wonderful offset to those exclaiming that Mike Tyson was the most murderous heavyweight to grace the division.

The opinions of these men and the proclamation that "Tyson would be beat by a big heavyweight with reach" (Stated just prior to the Douglas fight), made for real knowledge and insight. The best heavyweights? Dempsey followed by Marciano... I know I know lol!

Most boxing fans today do not have any experience or insight. They cannot understand the "problem" when a heavyweight is gassed on the 6th round, cannot throw but a few punches, have no defensive skills, etc. Most fans today have been duped... Boxing has become, for all intensive purposes an amateur sport regarding skill level. And trainers warned of this problem even as early as the mid eighteen hundreds!

[MulaKO]

Partially perhaps an age thing... When Tyson was becoming truly lethal, touted as "unbeatable" history gave boxing a wonderful gift: It turns out that around this time you had boxing trainers, pundits, who had been alive to witness the exploits of Dempsey, (even Johnson), up through Louis, Marciano, Liston, Ali, and Tyson. These men had seen several ideations of "unbeatable" heavyweights... This ability to compare based on experience was invaluable and was a wonderful offset to those exclaiming that Mike Tyson was the most murderous heavyweight to grace the division.

The opinions of these men and the proclamation that "Tyson would be beat by a big heavyweight with reach" (Stated just prior to the Douglas fight), made for real knowledge and insight. The best heavyweights? Dempsey followed by Marciano... I know I know lol!

Most boxing fans today do not have any experience or insight. They cannot understand the "problem" when a heavyweight is gassed on the 6th round, cannot throw but a few punches, have no defensive skills, etc. Most fans today have been duped... Boxing has become, for all intensive purposes an amateur sport regarding skill level. And trainers warned of this problem even as early as the mid eighteen hundreds!

No need to go any further than the nuthuggers who were in a tear of this site screaming that Canelo would go all the way up to heavyweight and challenge Usyk lol
Boxing has become like all other sports with fans hoping on a bandwagon and hugging along
Another problem is these morts as I call them believe everything they read on the internet even when it’s plain and simple lie if you use common sense
Boots fans crying their guy didn’t duck and pointing out that Ortiz ducked Stanionis even though the mofo was fighting for his life

lmao

[daggum]

If you really take the time to look at whom AJ lost to, fought and beat, compare his relative losses, etc... It is hard to determine "better." Was Ruiz better than Tito Ortiz? Remembering that Ortiz was undefeated when he fought Wilder... And when we consider the losses, it compounds the notion that AJ hit a ceiling, before being beat by the best... Reality is, the general level of opposition at this time in the division is lacking...

With all that said? I agree 100 that we need this division to move forwards, we have some real talent coming up the pike! Moses Ituama, Torres, Bakole... These guys are imo "better" than the last epoche of super sized heavyweights... Usyk brought that epoche to a close!

joshua beat 8 top 10 guys. wilder beat 2. guys like wlad, parker, whyte, and ruiz are better than any wilder win. yes ruiz is better than ortiz. he beat joshua, ortiz, and the parker fight was dead even. ortizs only notable win is jennings. not close? we are really taking the time to look at things and its not looking good here for wilder.

the division wasnt lacking and even if it was wilder was lacking in courage to face the top guys which makes him look ever worse! it was a weak division according to you and yet wilder didn't want to fight anyone in a weak division...uh hello. that should tell you he was a fraud right? remember he didnt want wlad, then he didnt want joshua, and on top of that he barely fought anyone else while fighting guys like spilzka, washington, molina, etc...thats tune up level opposition.

[billeau2]

joshua beat 8 top 10 guys. wilder beat 2. guys like wlad, parker, whyte, and ruiz are better than any wilder win. yes ruiz is better than ortiz. he beat joshua, ortiz, and the parker fight was dead even. ortizs only notable win is jennings. not close? we are really taking the time to look at things and its not looking good here for wilder.

the division wasnt lacking and even if it was wilder was lacking in courage to face the top guys which makes him look ever worse! it was a weak division according to you and yet wilder didn't want to fight anyone in a weak division...uh hello.

Top ten out of 100 top losers great!!! According to your alphabet soup some slouches are top slouches, others better. Lol. Again, medoicre opponents far and wide. Ortiz had skills, Parker has just developed these skills recently.... Ruiz and Parker are not categorically better than Ortiz. Your whole concept of rankings is subjective. It ignores the obvious.

[sidefx996]

Yo **** sound a bit racist, fo real!

He has 8 kids with four different women he's not married to. I'm just stating the facts snowflake.

[daggum]

It is a fair point... One has to look at the film. Wilder shows explosive tendencies that catch his opponents. Also, a lot teeters on the image one has of Ortiz. Ortiz was a highly skilled boxer puncher, and had an undefeated record prior to facing Wilder. As far as evaluating Fury? His performance against Klitsko was textbook... You can literally count the techniques he applies in the ring with respect to movement, timing, footwork, etc.

Wilder is no fluke, it does take an effort to deconstruct the nonsense that posters like Daggum blovate... If one decides that "Ortiz was old and a fluke" and that AJ "fought better competition than the rest" one can call Wilder a fluke... But the problem is this reasoning is incorrect.

you put ortiz was old in quotes as if he wasnt nearly 40 when wilder fought him? and yes he was a solid fighter but the reason you and other constantly bring him up is because its the only saving grace wilder has, and i hate to break it to you but look at ortiz's resume, it doesnt hold a candle to guys like parker, whyte, ruiz, etc...all guys joshua beat and yet you keep coming back to ortiz as if beating him tru-mps multiple very good wins, it doesnt and the only person that would say that is in extreme fan mode.

you put joshua fought better competition in quotes as if he didnt? he beat 8 top 10 ranked(ring) opponents. wilder beat 2. wilder has no one great like wlad on his resume, oh wlad was old...wait a second ortiz wasnt? oh that beating fury gave him really took a lot out of wlad lol.

he wasnt a fluke, he was a fraud. he was a mediocre fighter that was marketed as some top level guy and he artificially extended his career with a bunch of easy fights. he lost over and over when he fought the best fighters: fury, parker, zhang. all those guys are way better than ortiz unless you want to make the argument ortiz is better, please do so because that would be a comedy i would love to enjoy. please explain how ortiz is better than them using their resumes. i know you can say hes the most skilled fighter ever but then again if hes so skilled how did a bum like wilder knock him out...twice! how did he lose to ruiz? how did he nearly lose to charles martin? oh because he beat jennings? oh and is jennings now suddenly going to become great too? wow this is getting complicated

[daggum]

Top ten out of 100 top losers great!!! According to your alphabet soup some slouches are top slouches, others better. Lol. Again, medoicre opponents far and wide. Ortiz had skills, Parker has just developed these skills recently.... Ruiz and Parker are not categorically better than Ortiz. Your whole concept of rankings is subjective. It ignores the obvious.

these arent alphabet soup rankings...this is the ring. they dont rank bums like spilzka, duhapas, washington, molina, etc...you know this but of course you are trying to deflect.

you think its subjective to say parker is better than ortiz? thats just absurd. yeah i guess its subjective but i think bj armstrong is better than michael jordan he just never got a chance to prove it! thats how you sound right now and its great. resumes dont lie.

ortiz had skills lmao! i literally just wrote a post saying you would say that! as a joke! hes so skilled but wilder kod him? twice? come on now. ortiz never proved he was a great fighter and there is nothing you can say to deny that. the guys joshua beat have better resumes. what is subjective is you saying ortiz had skills, as if the guys joshua beat didnt? you dont see how are twisting everything into ortiz being great and everyone joshua beat not being great? that doenst hold any water and you know it. its not an argument you can win, you were dealt a bad hand and thats because wilder has a crap resume and didnt come through when he stepped up. you cant twist that.

you keep talking about ortiz over and over lol. just like i said because its the only thing you have but that well has run dry, eventually you have to come up with some substance to prove ortiz is great, i dont see anything??? oh the skills! the most skilled fighter of the last 10 years??? is that what you are saying? sounds...subjective to me

[billeau2]

you put ortiz was old in quotes as if he wasnt nearly 40 when wilder fought him? and yes he was a solid fighter but the reason you and other constantly bring him up is because its the only saving grace wilder has, and i hate to break it to you but look at ortiz's resume, it doesnt hold a candle to guys like parker, whyte, ruiz, etc...all guys joshua beat and yet you keep coming back to ortiz as if beating him *****s multiple very good wins, it doesnt and the only person that would say that is in extreme fan mode.

you put joshua fought better competition in quotes as if he didnt? he beat 8 top 10 ranked(ring) opponents. wilder beat 2. wilder has no one great like wlad on his resume, oh wlad was old...wait a second ortiz wasnt? oh that beating fury gave him really took a lot out of wlad lol.

he wasnt a fluke, he was a fraud. he was a mediocre fighter that was marketed as some top level guy and he artificially extended his career with a bunch of easy fights. he lost over and over when he fought the best fighters: fury, parker, zhang. all those guys are way better than ortiz unless you want to make the argument ortiz is better, please do so because that would be a comedy i would love to enjoy. please explain how ortiz is better than them using their resumes. i know you can say hes the most skilled fighter ever but then again if hes so skilled how did a bum like wilder knock him out...twice! how did he lose to ruiz? how did he nearly lose to charles martin? oh because he beat jennings? oh and is jennings now suddenly going to become great too? wow this is getting complicated

Ortiz has a resume that reflects the same level of competition. And Ortiz did not falter... Watching Ortiz against Wilder he did not look like an old shot fighter... I go by empirical data. Also, Ortiz beat Martin when he was considered a decent heavyweight and fought Ruiz in a close fight. So the notion that there was some overriding difference in competition between who Joshua and who ortiz fought is NONSENSE. And every time you say "rank" it shows your ignorance. Ranking is subjective. What is real are things like: Both men fought Ruiz... Both me fought fighters considered top prospects, from the same pool of fighters, etc.

A fraud? You are an idiot. You take stock in subjective rankings and do not watch actual film showing skills, etc. Wilder has been before being shot, one of the harder punching heavyweights historically. Film confirms this, objective information which anyone can view... Take a gander sir! learn something!

[TelMex]

If I was a promoter, I wouldn't dare invest money in a Curtis Harper fight after that stunt he pulled with Efe.