Jennings gave Klitschko issues and beat past it Liakhovich. A pretty thin resume but just a bit better than Takams. Takam gave Povetkin and Chisora a lot of issues before getting wiped out. Thats about it. Takam isn't very good.
Better wins: Chisora. Better fighter, depends how you evaluate such things. I'd say Ortiz at his best had the potential to cause more top fighters problems than Chisora, but he never proved much in the ring, so that's very much speculation. Chisora at least had the balls to fight the best throughout his career even if he came up short more often than not. Ortiz had a serious lack of ambition that may have hidden a deficit somewhere, possibly his chin.
I'd say he has the marginally better wins even if you don't count his robbery losses (Helenius, Whyte 1, Parker 1 to my view). Takam is as good as Jennings, and a TKO win over Scott is superior to a UD over him (though Ortiz probably should have got the TKO win over Scott as well given Scott's body language).
I don't think so. Both Jennings and Takam had a draw against Perez (Jennings officially scraped the win due to a points deduction I believe, while most thought Takam rightfully deserved the nod) and some solid (at the time) mid-tier wins like Szpilka for Jennings and Thompson for Takam. Jennings had that closer than expected loss to Wlad, while Takam gave fighters like Povetkin and Parker a lot of problems. They're very comparable as wins I feel. Parker as well. Plus he beat Tony Thompson whom I'd say was at that time a superior win to Lyakhovich, despite having never held a title.
I like Chisora alot but have felt he has been past his best for many years. I think he was in his prime around the time of the 2nd fight with Fury, which was years ago. He was on a good run up to that fight but had already been in tough fights with Fury, Vitali Klitschko, Haye, Helenius He has still been involved in many big fights since In my opinion Chisora has the greater resume by a fair way Takam, Spilka, undefeated Scott, Williams, Johnson, Gerber, Price Guess it depends on how you view it Chisora has taken on many of the who's who at HW and given a great account of himself
No. Jennings wrongly got win over perez due to controversial point deduction. Whilst Takam got robbed a win against Perez.
Chisora get's grief because of losses with that being said he's fought most of the top fighters and has been robbed at least three times. Chisora was pretty inconsistant in his prime but got more motivated later on and was unlucky in some fights not to get the nod. Ortiz has only fought Jennings who's claim to fame is going the distance with Vlad.....so not great like Wilder is untested against the other top 10 guys. In a head to head I'd give Chisora the edge on points although if the fight was in the US could get robbed.....again.
Chisora hits harder than Martin, and Chisora has tested whiskers. Last year I'd of said Ortiz by UD.... Now I'd say Del-Boy KOs Ortiz, likely later in the fight.
Ortiz is the better fighter but was avoided during much of his prime so doesn’t really have any standout wins. Chisora has the better resume as a result
