Faultier stoppage: Joshua's TKO over Takam or Wilder's TKO over Duhaupas?

So far, you're only argument is:

"It was a dominant performance by Wilder against Duhaupas because I say so". You're yet to substantiate that claim.

And when Wilder has a black eye and is on the back foot for 11 rounds, that TOTALLY and UTTERLY DEBUNKS your opinion based argument about Wilder having a dominant performance.

You're right. I didn't debunk anything because the very fight itself, contradicts your statement. You can't answer simple questions I've asked previously because you've been totally and utterly owned.

The only guy who was going blind was Deontay Wilder when his eye was practically shut from getting hit by Duhaupas's fist. And it's no surprise Wilder fanatics like you were also going blind because your hero was nearly blind and had to be saved by the referee from suffering from damage at the hands of Duhaupas.

 

Who else gave Wilder a black eye without suffering a single knockdown after 11 rounds other than Duhaupas? I'll wait!

My point is, I'm seeing absolutely no evidence to suggest Duhaupas was any more damaged than Wilder was against Duhaupas.

I'm basing it on a black eye because it's rare to see a dark skinned guy like Wilder, having a visible black eye. And when that happens, it proves his opponent must have really damaged him and hit him hard. Which is exactly what Duhaupas did multiple times in multipe rounds. Especially with the jab.

If we can't quantify with any certainty. Then we don't conclude with any certainty that Duhaupas was any more damaged than Wilder. What we can say for certain is Wilder had a black eye and Duhaupas only had minor bleedings from his paler skinned face.


Until you can prove Duhaupas had any of those things (organ failure, concussion and etc.) You have no grounds to say those things. I can claim Duhaupas gave Wilder a black eye, because video evidence exists. So based on evidence provided, Duhaupas arguably inflicted more damage, or at the very least, same amount of damage on Wilder as vice versa.

Ergo, based on that criteria, Duhaupas was in a similar state, if not a better state than Wilder was. We don't go by unknowns. We go by what we know. And what we know, is Duhaupas didn't look any more damaged than Wilder.

 

Yes, you don't want to discuss it because you know deep down your hero's power (along with other things) was severely exposed in that fight as being feather fisted. Since according to your own claim, he landed that many punches. But where was the knockdown, never mind a KO? Considering he is meant to be this devastating puncher. But couldn't achieve a single knockdown with that many punches landed? So you're not doing yourself any favor by claiming Wilder landed that many punches on Duhaupas.

Duhaupas is Wilder's and his fanatics worst nightmare! It kills you inside when his name is mentioned, because you just don't want to accept that Wilder's power is overrated and severely lacking, as Duhaupas proved that night.

But more accurately, Duhaupas was landing MORE DAMAGING PUNCHES every round. Even if Wilder was landing more punches, his punches had less of an effect. Hence why DUHAUPAS WALKED THROUGH (I REPEAT) WALKED THROUGH WILDER's punches for 11 rounds, whilst backing Wilder up because Wilder was exposed as being a feather fist that night.

Wilder was roughing Duhaupas up, even though he was running for his life from one rope / corner to another whilst Duhaupas was walking through Wilder's light / feather fisted punches?

Duhaupas used Wilder's eyes as a punching bag. That would be more accurate!

 

Referee doesn't know for sure who is more damaged either. Since he isn't inside the fighter's body to know PRECISELY how damaged either fighter is.

Nobody knows, not even the doctors, unless they literally perform a deep medical test during the fight (something that never happens DURING a boxing bout).

For all we know, Wilder could've been more damaged. Even though the stoppage was in favor of Wilder. But we go by what we know. And what we do know is Duhaupas inflicted a black eye on Wilder and that nothing is visible or evidence is available to suggest Wilder inflicted more damage on Duhaupas than vice versa.

How many boxers with very dark skin like Wilder, have had a black eye in boxing? Not very often! It's not very common because it's harder for it to show up or be as visible on someone as dark as Wilder. Whereas, it's more visible on a paler skinned boxer. This is common sense!

If someone is literally giving someone as dark skinned as Wilder a very visible black eye, then they must have hit him very hard and inflicted a lot of damage. This is just an undeniable fact!

 

I'll do whatever the hell I wanna do!

 

OKAY! And I don't care about your (baseless) opinion either. And the one who has to first resort to Ad Hominems is the one who has exposed himself / herself to REALLY be incapable of logical thinking + exposed as mentally challenged. That happened to be you and not me!

Nobody agrees with me and I'm becoming a laughing stock of the forum? Okay! But now ask me if I care or give 2 cents!

 

Do whatever you want! Point is, it's not very common to see dark skinned boxers as dark as Wilder, having an extremely visible black eye. It's common sense! The darker the skin, the more damaged the eye has to be to be properly visible and obvious. Which was exactly the case with Wilder's eye.

The UNKNOWNS are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT to me! All that is relevant is what we do KNOW. And what was known, was that Wilder didn't inflict greater visible damage on Duhaupas than vice versa.

I could care less about internal / invisible / unknown damage, unless the boxer himself is asking to forfeit / quit (because of said damages). Let the fighter continue to fight at his own will. He should have the authority to decide whether his life / health is worth the risk. Provided, he's not down on the canvas for 10 seconds. Only then, can the referee INDISPUTABLY stop the fight against that downed boxer.

And I've seen boxers with similar bleeding that Duhaupas had against Wilder, allowed to continue fighting. I've also seen boxers with severe eye damage get stopped. Eye damage is FAR more dangerous, since one can ACTUALLY go blind. Minor bleeding that Duhaupas suffered, is nowhere close to the potential permanent damage that can happen from getting hit in the eye repeatedly.

And Duhaupas giving Wilder a black eye, without suffering a single knockdown in 11 rounds, being able to stand on his feet, being able to make Wilder miss his last 2 punches where Wilder was off balanced and out of position before the premature stoppage, whilst also able to continue coming forward makes it a faulty stoppage by the referee. Question is, was it faultier than Joshua's stoppage win over Takam? I say yes, because Takam had already gone down once, and was significantly behind on the scorecards and wasn't inflicting anywhere near the damage Duhaupas inflicted on Wilder.

Okay! But now ask me if I care or give 2 cents about what you think about me!