Well that remains to be seen doesnt it. So you cant say something and stick an emoticon on the end of it suggesting 'you're right' when the bottom line is, we dont know for sure if youre right. I was just replying to your post I quoted and sticking to THAT question. Somehow I think you veered off to a point you really wanted to make... if so, just say it. Going BACK to the subject of discussion, comparisons will be made post fight of the Takam/Ortiz to the Takam/Parker fight - counts very little though. Look at it MY way, for EXAMPLE, if Takam manages to KO Ortiz I wont be thinking Parker is automatically better than Ortiz. Im a Parker fan but I dont think stupid because no matter what happens with the Takam/Ortiz fight, a bout with Parker and Ortiz remains to be seen.
Takam is a durable guy, but the logical choice here is Ortiz by late stoppage. It isn't going 12 rounds, that's for sure.
Huh? Takam has volume, but lacks the power to trouble Ortiz. That's what will likely be his undoing here - not his output. Don't see how Takam is very overrated. Easily better than any single win on Wilders resume. If he's overrated what does that make Stiverne, Molina, Duhaupas, Szpilka, shot Arreola?
Takam lost against Parker because he was taking every other round off. His work rate was **** and his ring iq is **** as well. Takam doesn't have much of a chance. edit: seems this fight is off, if so a good decision by Takam.