Him and Wilder would be a good fight... Parker’s chances for me, really come down to his Chin and so far he has looked like he has a pretty decent chin. Wilder is going to be a lot easier hit, I would say Parker would have more of a chance closing the distance and getting under wilders jabs than he could tonight against hughie.
Flick jab isn't going to win you a heavyweight belt. If Fury had of at least thrown with an ounce of intent it would have been a different story. I get the feeling people will compare this performance to Fury vs Klit. But Klit was marked up badly after that fight - Fury made him miss and made him pay. Parker looked like he'd been shadow boxing 12 rounds after that fight.
Barry is not excelling his fighter . Wheather its playing it safe or not instilling something that he needs to do in ring? Other words Barry is cetainly questionable at this point...we also have to take into account peter fury was sure not to make his son look bad even in a loss...i say wait till next opponent. Parker should be better though at this stage UNLESS its him and peaked ( i dont believe that).
I see quite a few guys here running with the old ''you got to take the title away from the champ''. So what does that mean? Unfairly bias your score card towards the champ. This is a long held misconception in boxing which was started by commentators who know nothing about scoring fights. Whether it be a 4 rounder, a world title fight or a non title 10 rounder all fights are scored the same. You give each rd to the guy that wins it regardless of who the champion is. In the minds of good judges it's just red corner and blue corner with no bias.
The fight played out as I thought it would, Parker being out boxed, out landed and out classed. Props to Parker though for not tiring. Fury's style isn't high-octane. It's an unpleasant yet effective, stick and move style which I thought he executed well. Parker barely landed a clean shot (one good one in the 12th), if he did, Fury would have been unconscious. Parker, the more marketable fighter, got the nod, oh well.
I wouldn't count those flicking air/arms/gloves jabs as effective. I don't mind fighters boxing on the back foot but Hughie's performance was pretty shameful IMO. He had not intention of winning the fight on any kind of mettle, he tried to steal a world title tonight and luckily the judges saw straight through his tactics.
That was not a legitimate form of fighting IMO. It's one thing to befuddle your opponent with lighter scoring shots but another to run away from your opponent whilst occasionally trying to tap them. I know Hughie is never going to be Shavers but he didn't look like he threw more than 5-6 punches with any real intent over the course of the entire fight. That isn't how you win a title.
This fight wasn't even close .i found it hard to give any credible rnd to Hughie...parker blocked/parried most punches and Hughie POINT fought while landing close to no significant shots.....Anyone who thinks Fury won has to be related to the Furys and are cheer leading. And of the commentating ( which i rarley listen too ) ?..I guess that were in the U.K??? Well they have a very different outlook on boxing bc you actually have to land shots,those two morons who thought fury won??Well theres a HUGE disparity on what they view as effective boxing...SMH
I had Parker taking about 5(at least)-7 clear rounds. The rest were either swing due to neither man doing anything, with maybe 2 being clear Fury rounds.
it means if the rd can go either way, it should go to the champ, who already proved he can win a title from a champ, not to the challenger who may have caught the champ on an off night and still cant win a rd decisively.