And the third judge? Does that not tell you how unreliable they can be? If you think he won 11 rounds surely that card would seem bad to you? Comparing it to Malik Scott that night, they aren't comparable. You don't get points for landing nothing on someone just because you tried (and failed) to chase them. Scott literally offered nothing, while Ortiz landed more than Parker did. Its not impossible to cut a ring off if you're good enough. Parker wasn't. We clearly aren't going to agree so I think it's best it gets left there
I kinda think prime Fury would beat both, but I've always thought AJ would be easier for him than Wilder. To keep things interesting, I voted for him to beat AJ and lose to Wilder, who would lose to AJ.
Is there any real advantage between the 3. Power, technique, speed, ring iq, chin.... All beatable by each other if looking at each qualities
Look, I get that you like the Fury family. Big Tyson is a loveable character. But Hughie didn’t do anything in that fight lol. He got embarrassed in my opinion and looked out of his depths. We don’t need to agree on the scorecards, but you do need to realize you have a dangerous proliferation for the Fury family that makes your opinion very hard to take seriously
Tyson Fury beats them all. Wilder can't deal with a moving target until we actually see him deal with one, so that's him out of the equation. I see Fury embarrassing Wilder like BJS did to Lemieux. Wilder will also not be the tallest guy in the fight or the heaviest guy in the fight. That is huge when you're against a boxer like Fury. He can control Wilder all fight long with the jab. And his movement will cancel out the jab of Wilder, which is what Wilder relies on to setup the right hand. The AJ fight is more dangerous for Fury. He's got less space to work with, he'll be under more pressure, and you'd argue that AJ has the physical strength advantage over Fury. Can he deal with the pressure from AJ? It's hard to tell, AJ will tire Fury out towards the end, and he will have to hold on. If people didn't know, Greg Marriott was hired to do Fury's diet for his comeback. He is taking this dead serious, we may even see Greg figure out a way to get him back to the weight he was against Klitschko. If that happens, with a 3 or 4 warmup fights, Fury will be well and truly back. No fat man fury anymore.
No one can be the best in this scenario. Joshua beats Wilder. Wilder beats Fury. Fury beats Joshua. We are in 2018 and three of the best heavyweights EVER are in this constellation. What a time to be a boxing fan.
Yes, because all the great fighters throughout history who havent been able to cut off a ring must be amatuer bums. Cutting off the ring is a skill against the other guys speed of movement. Its 50/50 in every match lad. Being able to outhustle someone so they cant cut off the ring doesnt get you points in a boxing match unless you take command of the fight, which Fury never even looked like doing. 114-114 just shows me the dangers of boxing away from home or having a corruptable judge on a rival promotion. Lets take a look at how we score a boxing match shall we. Effective aggression - Parker - was the aggressor from the opening bell to the end, and the only effective one - Parker 1-0 Ring Generalship - Parker - Controlled the centre of the ring all night and wasn't backed up once by Fury. Fury barely even threw a proper jab, let alone establish one, or engage all night.- Parker 2-0 Defence - Parker - Parker slipped Furys attempted slaps all night, while Fury was caught on the backfoot by a lunging Parker every round. Parker 3-0 Hard clean punches - Parker - 3 or 4 a round, vs 3-4 all night. Parker 4-0. Clear and easy win for Parker against an elusive opponent who did his best to spoil and survive. The only people I've ever heard claim Fury won this fight is team Fury themselves. I had Parker winning 119 - 109.
Regards your cutting the ring off/bum comment. I've no idea why you've directed that at me as if it's something I've said The thing you're getting confused with is that you believe Joseph Parker took command of the fight. He simply didn't. I'll tell you what scores points in boxing. Punches landed, not how you command it, being the aggressor, nor anything else, just punches landed, be they in your opinion, hard punches, or not, they count. If rounds are even in that sense then maybe you can favour what you like, in your case, clearly the aggressor. But Hughie was just doing enough to win about half of the rounds, by doing something (which Parker couldn't in said rounds), while in other rounds, probably the ones you refer to as him catching Hughie, and Hughie didn't reply enough, Parker won. I had Hughie leading with Parker catching him in the last couple of rounds. I can't recall exactly whether I had it a Draw or Hughie slightly winning, all I do remember is that Parker didn't win in my opinion (I believe the commentary on the night seemed to agree also). Noone is arguing that running away is how you win. You just need to realise that the come forward fighter will only win if he lands when he does so. Parker didn't manage that in as many rounds as he did manage that. If you think team Fury are the only people who think they won the fight then I'd suggest you haven't looked very far. There are plenty who think it, a simple google search will prove it to you if you're so keen. Are you not bored talking about it anyway? It's one of the worst fights I've seen in the past year, both were bad and neither deserved to win, that's why it was close
I have no leanings towards Hughie whatsoever, and that's the truth, he's a boring fighter who's fights I don't generally make a point of watching. So you're way off the boil there. I'm a big Tyson Fury fan, not Team Fury, I'm not sure how that's relevant to this. Even if you were correct, bias is something I despise anyway, so I would absolutely not be calling a result I didn't think true. That'd be pathetic. We don't need to agree on scorecards no, but perhaps it's you who is a huge Parker fan? Was it not you who brought him into this thread when he wasn't even supposed to be part of it (mostly because I don't rate him with the 3 mentioned, partly due to his failure to beat Hughie Fury, a bang average heavyweight at this stage, in my opinion). Parker is good, better than Hughie Fury, but he is on the tier below the three mentioned in the thread title. Hopefully that dispels your ideas of me being a Team Fury fan
Nah there were three or four posts that mentioned him prior to my post, which was a reply to you saying Hughie clearly won Parker-Fury. I do like Parker quite a bit, but I also like Joshua and Fury. Tyson has the best personality of the bunch and his style is significantly more appealing to me than Parker's so I probably would be riding with him over the others if it came down to it. You kind of contradicted yourself in paragraphs 3 and 4 so I don't really know what you're trying to say but my apologies for accusing you of bias. I guess we just really saw different fights.
Also Fury's southpaw stance will take away Wilder's money maker. Just like Szpilka and Ortiz did. If a slowfooted 6''3' guy with an 76'' inch reach manages to outjab 6''7' 83'' inch reach Wilder. Just imagine what a Tyson Fury in shape will do.
No contradiction, I'm just saying, that although I don't think Parker beat Hughie that night, I do obviously believe he is better than Hughie. It happens
I find it funny that the silly Brits act like Tyson Fury is some type of of a legend because he beat a 40 year old Wlad by running from him. That is all his did with his career. What did Anthony Joshua do in his career? Nothing but knockout a 40 year old Wlad in a fight he was almost stopped in. What did Deontay Wilder do? Because up old fat, slow, overrated 50 year old Cuban fighter with high blood pressure. You people get excited over everything. The heavyweight division is still a joke.