Canello vs Bivol PPV

Hearn told us months ago there was going to be PPV so not new news.

It seems to me to be a lot of moaning from people that don’t pay for DAZN or PPVs anyway!

 

Or maybe Joshua was beaten by a very mediocre boxer who hadn't done anything beforehand nor since. What are the chances of that?

 

All the videos going round of Hearn and Markowski saying PPV is dead are brilliant. Not as good as the one where Hearn claims he never said it though.

 

Ruiz still achieved more than either Wilder or Ortiz ever have and has a far more impressive win his resume than either of them.

 

We're moaning on behalf of our American friends.

 

Or maybe Joshua isn't as good as you think he is. He's only had one "impressive" win himself, and that was against a 41 year old who had already been battered by Puritty, Sanders, Brewster and coming off the back of the Fury loss, 18 months inactivity and fighting away at Wembley against an active and young heavyweight 13 years his junior. Fury's sloppy seconds.

 

AJ has proven himself against top proven HWs with wins over Wlad, Povetkin, Whyte, Parker, Pulev and Takam.

Whilst in comparison who has Wilder beaten? Only notable opponent (he has beaten is Ortiz (that's even if you can call Ortiz notable which is debatable) who went life and death with Charles Martin who doesn't make AJ'S top 7 opponents he has ever beaten.

 

You are ignoring context with the "Wlad" win. Povetkin was old and coming off a knockdown to David Price. Whyte was inexperienced, out of shape and injured himself in the bout. Parker is as average as they come, as toothless as they come and on top of that had a £ referee to deal with. Pulev's best wins are Chisora and Hughie Fury. Takam - you have to be kidding me. Takam...? Haha! I wonder why you left out Breazeale and Molina. Those were two of Joshua's first defences. Are you telling me they are useless opponents? The algorithm must be malfunctioning.

I am not sure why you are asking who Wilder has beaten. I've literally just asked you who Andy Rice Pudding Jr had beaten prior to Joshua, and you couldn't name anybody. Who had James Douglas beaten prior to beating Tyson?

 

Not Canelo. His a superstar. If people buy his ppv on fox they will buy it on DAZN or buy it on a ppv platform like direct TV.

I see the price difference for subscribers and subscribers is in play which they have to do. Espn+ do the same with UFC ppv where subscribers get them cheaper.

 

Espinosa is salty. Dude must he fuming Canelo isn't fighting on showtime in his next two fights.

 

I cant believe you dont realise that the arguments you make are actually connected ppv and ruiz,s lack of cv. In one breath your saying ruiz has beat no one. The reason for that is there was really no money to get him fights against decent opposition. Prior to joshua his only decent opposition was joe parker. Go and read the problems they had funding that fight. That fight was very very lucky to be made in the end.

The funding/investments just not there anymore. They cant get decent fights consistantly because no one will fund it. How hard is that to understand. Theirs just no real value in them fights when they can all make a half decent living fighting guys they can beat waiting for a belt oppertunity or a big money fight.

Thats what we,ve been seeing until recent years and the introduction of ppv to fund it. You cant make them take them fights. You cant force promoters to put them on for a lot of risk and not all that much profit.

Thats not exactly eddie hearns fault. Take eddie out of the equation...the option would still be a slow moving sport...with top ten guys mostly avoiding other top ten guys. Or you can have a fast moving sport....that you need to pretty much fund yourself.

The good news for people like you is...you can get the benefits of the fast moving sport without paying. Incredibly we find you on here complaining...its actually quite comical.

 

The smart ones tried warning you lot that the DAZN subscription model does not work financially so increased prices and PPV was incoming. I remember people saying we were wrong.

This day was always gonna come.

 

They can't fund inflated purses. And what has caused expectations to rise without merit?

You are completely lost.

 

Wlad - Came into he lightest he had been in 7 years.

Povetkin - at the time of AJ fight Povetkin had a better resume than Wilder ever had. Let alone that after the AJ fight Povetkin went on top beat better opponent than Wilder has ever beaten in Hughie and Whyte.

Parker - If Parker average what does that make Wilder considering he has the superior resume? Beat Ruiz, Chisora x 2 Hughie and Takam.

Whyte inexperienced? Whyte had two more pro fights than AJ and they were fighting for British title. Whyte has shown his quality since with his impressive resume.

Pulev's best wins of Chisora and Hughie is better than Wilder two best wins.

Ruiz win against AJ is more impressive than anything Wilder has done. Did Ruiz have a noteworthy win prior to this? No but he gave Parker a very good and close fight in title fight.

Takam ? Yes Takam who was robbed a win against Perez. Perez of who was robbed the draw on the judges score cards against Jennings (who is Ortiz 's only notable win) due to the ref controversially deducted a point from Perez in the last round. Takam who was beating Chisora in a war convincingly untill he got hit with great shot by Chisora when he gassed out. I had Takam despite being decline now winning going into the last round of Joyce fight untill he was prematurely stopped that round.


Why would I mention Molina and Breazeale? They were poor opponents yes. Just like all Wilders defences against Breazeale, Molina, Arreola, Spzilka, Washington and Duhaupas.

 

Mitch, if you're going to insist on calling a record a "résumé", you ought to get it right. Resume is an entirely different word. You know someone has been watching too many Eddie Hearn interviews when they insist on calling a record a "resume".

Your whole "resume" theory falls on its arse when we explain that Rice Pudding Jr had no wins prior to battering Joshua all around the ring and more to the point, taking Joshua's best shots and shrugging them off like they were nothing.

In other words, having not beaten anybody doesn't mean that you can't beat X, Y or Z. Joshua, after all, has beaten nobody except an old, inactive Klitschko, and has proven beatable by mediocre opposition. The Klitschko coming in lighter as an argument in your favour is laughable.

Wilder, despite losing to Fury, who is arguably the best in the division (we will see who is the best once Fury beats Whyte and once Usyk beats Joshua again) showed that he is as tough as anything and carries his power even when hurt and tired. This is a recipe for disaster against a relative nancy like Joshua who can't take a punch. Even an old, past his prime Wilder would still spark out Joshua and for the first time in a long time I would put a bet on it.

Your theory is paradoxical because it posits that one has to have a strong "resume" to be considered capable of beating X, Y or Z. But it falls to pieces because those who have a "strong resume", like Joshua, have a "strong resume" by beating men who don't have "strong resumes". You also completely discard losses as if they do not influence the strength of a "resume".