Joshua vs. Ortiz.

Well Hammer is even more static and plodding, and he was able to hit Ortiz at will. And it was straight rights down the pipe that did Ortiz in against Wilder, not wild windmilling.

Very little upsides for Ortiz here.

 

I'd agree with @f1ght3rz on his statement. All four of those guys were top ten or top twenty rated at the time he fought them. Maybe Hammer and Thompson were borderline, but Thompson had been in the top ten only a short while before and was still quite a respected name in the division. Hammer is a tough durable guy who's notched up a few good wins in the past few years and could conceivable be ranked in the top twenty; not sure where he'll be now.

Scott might not be top ten material, but I believe he was borderline top ten at the time Ortiz fought him due to a win over Thompson, who himself was coming off a couple of wins over Odlanier Solis. He wouldn't stay there long, but he was there all the same.

 

The thing is...based on his logic Wlad isn't a Top 10 win for AJ because at the point AJ fought Wlad he wasn't ranked Top 10 anymore because he was inactive before.

Scott, Jennings, Thompson and Hammer were ALL ranked inside the Top 20 at some point. So we should consider them as Top 20 wins. Everything else is bull**** and agenda pushing. Ortiz resume is thin but not as thin as some guys want to make it.

 

Prime Ortiz could have taken Joshua, I think he's shot to bits now. Joshua now comfortably wins.

 

I actually quite rate his win over Scott, who's a tricky customer at the best of times when he's not looking to lay down somewhere. Trouble with Ortiz's resume is that there's no truly standout wins there, just a lot of bottom feeders and a couple of respectable names. It's not an atrocious resume, but it's very underwhelming for a fighter of his supposed calibre. Compare it to Whyte, for instance, and the difference becomes apparent. Ortiz should at least have got Breazeale, Rivas, Andy Ruiz or a couple of names like that on his resume by now, and I can't constantly buy the excuse that he's just avoided by everyone. There appears to be an element of complicity on Ortiz's part as well.

 

Ortiz's resume is better than Whyte's.

 

Who has he beaten?

 

1. Almost beating Wilder for a belt is better than getting your ass kicked by a green Joshua.
2. Destroying Bryant Jennings is better than beating Joseph Parker by headbutt induced knockdown which changed the decision.
3. Dominating Hammer and an older Thompson is about a wash compared to getting a SD and come from behind ko over an aging Chisora*.
4. Malik Scott is better than a shot Lucas Browne
5. Kauffman and Helenius were pretty much nobodies by the time Ortiz and Whyte got them.
6. Both beat Allen

*Nobody takes Chisora seriously outside the UK

 

Almost everything you said is completely wrong.

Losing against Wilder isnt better than losing against Joshua. And Saying Joshua was green when Whyte was even more Green just proves you are full of ****.

Chisora KOd Takam who beat Tony Thompson easily. Bryant Jennings is no where near as good as Parker. Most of your points are just biased nonsense

 

Ortiz performed well against Wilder. That doesn’t hurt his standing. Whyte hasn’t even proven he can compete on the highest level.

Whyte struggled mightily with gatekeeper Chisora twice. Ortiz won every round against gatekeepers Thompson and Hammer. I called it a wash because Chisora was ranked a few spots ahead of them.

Jennings may have been better than Parker. No idea what you’re talking about there.

Boxing doesn’t start and stop at watching Eddie Hearn cards and reading fights off boxrec. There’s nothing biased about what I wrote.

 

I stand by what I said imo they were not top 20 fighters
Thompson was once but not when he fought Ortiz
hammer at this point in his career has turned into a good trialhorse ala kevin Johnson/derek chisora /type fighters but he is no threat to a good young prospects as he has no workrate or power


you say scott was borderline top 10 at the time Ortiz fought him
scott was coming off a draw to glasgov
then he fought perennial trialhorse chisora who was coming off 4 straight losses and chisora kod scott in 7 rounds
and then scott was kod by contender wilder in 1 round
and then beat tony Thompson
and then lost to Ortiz in a poor spectacle when he did not even try to win 20 seconds of 1 round .

 

Scott beat Glazkov. No question about that.

 

so did martin and martin is ranked about 50

 

Glazkov was top ten when Scott beat him. Martin is better than top 50. He showed he was tough against Kownacki.

 

scott never beat him it was scored a draw
not heard of glaskov since he hurt his knee
I looked up martins ranking he is now 28 as you say on the back of the kownacki fight / and the way boxrec computer rankings work where Joshua and kownacki results raise martins ranking