Literally - if you take away the headbutt by Whyte (which was ruled a KD at the time - but was actually a terrible head clash) then Parker wins the fight on points. Most who watch it back know this to be true.
People on here seem to enjoy ripping on Whyte but even as a die hard Chisora fan I think he legitimately beat Chisora in both fights and beat Parker, yes they were close especially the first Chisora fight but a win is a win in my opinion even if it's close.
As a guy who was rooting for Parker in that fight I though he lost. This fascination with the headbutt is up there with "if only Vitali wasn't cut by Lewis." It's become the sole reason for him losing as if there wasn't another 35 mins of that fight but that 1 minute that 1 incident has become the focal point of a grand robbery of some kind. It sucked that Parker took a butt but accidents happen and the idea some think it effected his whole performance I find to be a fairy tale maid up by those looking to put a positive spin on it.
No - it was not just that it affected him for some rounds after. The real issue is that it was SCORED a knockdown. Take that KD off of Whyte's points tally and you get a Parker win on points. Why should he get points for a KD when it was a headbutt? Take it away and Parker wins.
I had Whyte winning vs Parker. In the first chisora fight it could have gone either way and the second fight I thought Chisora was way up on the cards until he scored the KO but we can't hold that against Whyte can we because that argument isn't allowed when we talk about the first Povetkin fight. Whyte isn't a threat to the top 3, but he is tough, game and willing to fight anyone and on his night he has the beating of everyone else outside of the top 3. He doesn't deserve the hate he gets.
Really the official scorecards where a UD for Whyte with 114-111, 113-112, 115-110. If the rd with the knockdown is not scored a 10-8 for Whyte and scored as a 10-9 for Parker you get 113-113, 112-114, 114-112 so it's a draw at best and that's if you actually give the 2nd rd to Parker. It was a close rd, up to the point of the butt, if just one of the first 2 judges gave it to Whyte he wins a split decision or a minority decision.
Parker only has himself to blame that he didn’t beat Whyte. Talent wise he is the best of the 3 in my opinion but the Whyte fight was bizarre. I dont see it that Whyte won that fight, more that Parker lost it with his lack of activity and being a bit timid and allowing himself to get bullied. Very frustrating fight.
Yeah that's how I viewed Whyte/Parker too and in general that's what I feel when I watch Parker. He's clearly the most talented of the 3 he should really be beating them both comfortably based on talent alone. But damn he's so frustrating to watch at times, he's like a Bugatti Veyron but with a 90 year old grandmother at the wheel who refuses to go above 20mph. His big problem is he's never figured out a way to unload without being countered. If you go back to the Ruiz fight it's apparent, every time he unloads he takes return fire and it forced him to get on his bike and simply sporadically unload and instead of learning to counter more or use more head movement on the way in and how to move off to the side after firing he's just become this timid fighter afraid to throw in case he's countered. Hopefully that changes with a new trainer because it would be a shame if he never reaches his potential.
Its irrelevant Take away Parkers gloves and he would have hurt Whyte more.... Not that the above is genuine but there is always something with Parker defenders Some excuse trying to salvage his rep from when he was fighting in NZ knocking out bums Whyte bullied him up until the tenth Parker didnt deserve to win Didnt deserve to beat Del Boy either
