Who won the war between Whyte, Parker, Chisora?

Whyte obviously

 

Whyte, obviously, but the forum hates Whyte so they will say he came worst off.

He's the best out of the lot of them. A real fighter is Whyte, and a likeable bloke (don't quote me re: failed drug tests, all top level athletes are on the sauce). He battered them both.

 

Parker should be 2-0 here. Next.

 

2 of Whytes wins are close fights that could go either way

 

Whyte but he struggled

Parker has shown fight after fight he lacks the ability to go deep or become a dog fighter, but he does have an immense chin.

 

Whyte on paper but all of his wins were controversial.

Many had Chisora winning the first fight and Chisora was winning the rematch in the 11th but got docked 2 points by the referee for fouls which changed the complexion of the fight. With more favourable officiating Chisora could have easily won one or both fights. But Chisora was older, more worn, had more losses, was not regarded as a serious contender at this point and was a Fury opponent rather than one of AJ's.

Parker had the edge over Whyte early but an unpunished concussive headbutt resulted in a knockdown in the 2nd round which ultimately gave Whyte a close win on the cards, despite coming within an inch of being finished in the 12th. With more favourable officiating the New Zealander Parker could have easily won the fight.

Chisora outlanded Parker by a huge margin and knocked him down; it was the clearest win out of all of these fights but he was robbed on account of being older, more worn, having more losses, not being a former world champion, generally being a nuisance and being a Fury opponent rather than one of AJ's.

This series just goes to show how critical referring and judging can be in determining outcomes when there isn't much to split fighters.

 

Take away the Whyte headbutt-KD

and Parker won the Whyte fight.

 

Just so I’m clear on this but you are saying that the reason Parker beat chisora was down to biased judging and poor refereeing, both of which you are attributing to the fact that Chisora previously lost to Fury where as Parker lost to AJ?

 

Not refereeing in that case but the judging was horrendously biased against Chisora and Chisora being a former Fury opponent no doubt was a factor. These kinds of considerations matter: Fury beat a younger, fresher Chisora with ease (Chisora was regarded as a British level fighter and over the hill before he gave Whyte hell) so 37.5 year old Chisora clearly defeating one of AJ's best opponents looks terrible for AJ's resume. I suspect this was a factor in why Chisora didn't get the decision over Whyte as well.

On a similar note, why wasn't Ruiz-Ortiz made despite all the hype? I think it's a lose-lose for PBC. If Ruiz beats Ortiz this cheapens Wilder's wins over Ortiz (albeit a younger, less worn version but the name is the same) and strengthens AJ's resume but if 42.5 year old Ortiz wins, the much younger and less worn ex-champion Ruiz's stock falls. Better then to put Ruiz in with a probably less dangerous Charles Martin; two former AJ opponents squaring off. If Martin (who is regarded by many as a bum) beats Ruiz it looks bad for AJ's resume as his conqueror has been beaten by a seemingly pathetic opponent, albeit one who AJ beat easily. Conversely, if Ruiz destroys Martin then everything goes according to plan and there is no loss.

 

Whyte clearly.

- Deservedly beat Chisora in their first fight.
- Koed Chisora brutally in the second fight.

- Deservedly won points (even with the KO that shouldn't of stood) and despite the late scare from Parker at the end.

Next would be Parker who I thought Deservedly beat Chisora.

 

I think Whyte has unfinished business with Parker. Whyte vs Parker 2 will probably happen down the road.

Whyte vs Chisora 1 was close and on second viewing i gave it to Whyte landing the cleaner shots.

Parker vs Chisora should have been a draw.

I think the war is unfinished. Whyte has the official wins but didn't come out of those victories looking like the clear victor.

I think the three of them are of similar level.

Chisora and Whyte vs Ruiz Jr would be fireworks. Parker vs Ruiz Jr 2 is also interesting just to gauge where they're at now in their careers ability wise.

 

Whyte

 

I agree with you on the Ruiz-Ortiz situation, but I think that was also dependent on Wilder beating Fury.

Though what you said on Whyte v Chisora 1 feels like a bit of a reach. At that time Joshua had already moved on from Whyte (who he beat in a British title fight), having beaten Martin for the IBF and Breazeale in his first defence.

Joshua was headlining the same card against Molina, which was seen as a formality; the big news was Joshua v Klitschko, which was already lined up. So Whyte losing to Chisora would have little to no impact on Joshua's resume.

Whyte v Chisora 1 was an undercard fight, but also a WBC title eliminator. You could be right, with Whyte being younger, Hearn saw him as a better long term option (with the potential for a Joshua rematch). This was a cross roads fight for Whyte during a rebuild. But I would think Hearn would want the stronger fighter to win, to have the best chance of dethroning Wilder down the line. As the prize was and still is the WBC belt.


Whyte
Parker
Chisora
Fights were close, but I was satisfied by the results. Except I thought Chisora was hard done by with the points deduction v Whyte 2, which forced him to change tact leading to the KO, imho.