Should Povetkin, Ortiz and AJ be treated as Wilder wins?

My point is a clear and logical one....if you can refute it, do so with logic. If you can't then of course you're gonna say stupid stuff like calling for me to be banned. That's the hallmark of defeat. You don't like the message, so the response is to kill the messenger.

Look, both Ortiz and povetkin signed on the dotted line to fight wilder. Wilder was willing to go to RUSSIA, POVETKIN'S HOME TURF!...where povetkin would have all the advantages usually enjoyed by the hometown favorite. what did povetkin do? he tested positive for a banned substance. It's not like wilder was trying to duck him....wilder was willing to go to his country and fight! it was povetkin who basically surrendered saying he can't win without the benefit of an illegal performance enhancing drug.

Ortiz also, signed on the dotted line....all his years as a top Cuban amateur...being recognized as the most technically proficient hw in the world...claiming everybody is avoiding him...STILL he needed to take PEDs. Why? because he knew he had NO CHANCE to beat wilder...so he also surrendered before he got in the ring.

AJ was asked the question point blank and responded point blank saying "i'm not ready to fight wilder at this point"...an admission of surrender and defeat.

These are not my opinions...these are DOCUMENTED FACTS!...right there in front of y'alls eyes! the FACTS lead to one conclusion and one conclusion only. these men admitted they were not able to defeat wilder at this point given their natural abilities. therefore, they should count as defeats against them and wins for wilder.

I don't know how much clearer I can make this.

 

wait, are you blaming wilder for this?...like wt actual f! is wilder supposed to go to Ortiz and povetkin's camp and look over their shoulder and make sure they don't take PEDs? this is the strangest sport where the guy who doesn't cheat gets blamed for the actual cheaters.

 

that's right...play dumb so you don't actually have to use the fkin brain cells in your head and come up with an intelligent response to a logical proposition.

 

OK, so what you're saying is, i'm RIGHT in what I say....but you just don't like to hear it said. at least have the decency to put it in those terms.

 

is it or is it not true that wilder and povetkin signed to fight?

is it or is it not true that wilder agreed to go to Russia to fight povetkin?

is it or is it not true that povetkin tested positive for a banned substance?

is it or is it not true the dirty test caused the fight to be cancelled?

is it or is it not true that the banned substance povetkin was caught taking gives an unnatural advantage, thereby constituting cheating?

is it or is it not true that cheating is an admission of defeat?

is it or is it not true that an admission of defeat is win for the opponent?

does it not follow logically that wilder should get credit, even unofficially for defeating povetkin?

 

so, show my why it's not intelligent...you the expert. school me on where I went wrong.