No; Fury & Ortiz isn't enough to cancel out Parker, Klitschko, Povetkin, and Whyte. I'd rank those wins in this order: 1) Fury*/Klitschko/Povetkin 3) Parker 4) Ortiz/Whyte *Fury is first-tier assuming he "gets up" for this and looks better than he did vs. Seferi or Pianeta. If he looks the same as he did vs. Wlad, then he might even be a slight notch above the old versions of the EE's. If his form is Seferi/Pianeta quality or worse he drops to at least the second tier alongside Parker, if not 3rd (depending on how bad)
1) Fury*/Klitschko/Povetkin 3) Parker/Ortiz 4) Whyte Without a doubt in my mind Ortiz would KO Parker, H2H King Kong beats him more often than not. Ortiz is far more skilled than he gets credit for.
Yeah, I've never been a big believer in King Kong. The best he ever looked was against Wilder, but that's a circuitous argument IMO. "See, turns out Ortiz is really good after all (and thus a solid scalp for Wilder) because look how good he did (in defeat, mind you) against...Wilder..."
Uh what about Jennings? A guy who gave Wlad a good fight right after a very impressive performance against Pulev. Ortiz destroyed him, something Wlad didn't even get close to doing.
I'm not basing that assessment on his performance against Wilder, but as a whole, his win over Jennings is underrated, as is his wins over Scott and Thompson, sure they were old and past it, but no one has beaten Scott and Thompson that comprehensively outside of Wilder and Chisora, both questionable stoppages and Wlad with Tony. As far as direct comparisons go, look at Oriz's demolition job on Allen, which was brutal, as opposed to Whyte who was backpeddling in the last round against Allen, and compare the performance of Parker and Ortiz against Cojanu. Just based on skillset alone Ortiz is superior to Whyte by a mile.
Haha, that's so funny. No he's actually 39. Until you have proof otherwise, don't use that idiotic conspiracy theory as evidence of anything.