Matt Skelton v Dillian Whyte

This is getting silly now.

He's not 1-1 with Chisora. He's 2-0 with Chisora. He could reasonably be 1-1 with Chisora or 1-0-1 with Chisora or what he is, 2-0 with Chisora. What actually happened was, he fought a close fight with Chirora, rematched him and smashed his face in.

His fight with AJ might have been for that title but it was fought between two novices headed for word level.

But even if we let you have your way on every single one of these big sillies, and they are silly, he still has a better British level record than Skelton, who was really nothing like as good as Whyte.

"Has not faced Hughie Fury" is hysterical btw.

 

No, I didn't, I said he had a great British level record. But, here we are again.

Do you mean to say British national fighter? People from Britain?

That's not generally how British level is used in parlance. British level means "domestic level British fighter level." Alen Babic is a British level fighter.

If you say "British level fighter" to mean "a fighter from Britain" just say "British."

It has absolutely no meaning or relevance though. Fighting loads of British can mean a lot or a little.

SO, to start again.

Skelton's record against domestic level fighters of all nationalities is not very good. Whyte's is much better. This is because Whyte is a better fighter. Even allowing for all your sillies, and they are silly, Whyte's record at this level would remain superior.

His record at world level is superior in every way. Skelton never won such a fight. Whyte won a few.

 

Well, I've expressed my opinions on head-to-head and what the dramatic shortfalls are for Skelton - you did not engage with those at all.

But you have continued to engage me on rankings, legacy, rating etc. SO you will get response related to those topics, that's natural.

No, nobody has said Hughie is a laughing stock. But you are arguing, forcefully, for gaps in Whyte's resume/record, despite your claims to the contrary (unless I have misunderstood).

Jut the idea that Hughie could hold some key to your admitting you're wrong, that if he'd fought Hughie we wouldn't be having this ridiculous conversation struck me as funny. Especially given the fact that Hughie would be the best fighter that Skelton would ever have beaten, probably.

Whyte operates at world level, not European level (note - denotes level of quality of opponent, not the geographic location of fighter's birth). It makes no difference if he met Hughie or not.

There's no evidence Skelton could beat Hughie though. That fight might be close though!

 

Yeah, as I've explained, it caught me funny because you're objecting to some really good fighters - old, not that good, lucky to get the decision etc. Like what difference is it going to make to someone of your mindset if he fights the guys you listed? Zero. It struck me as humorous, I mentioned it, that was four posts and some hours ago, I don't think it really requires any further discussion.

Given that you completely reject any third party rankings procedure as having any bearing on this discussion, there is no way for me to explain to you how completely wrong you are, but for anyone else reading, Hughie has had more chances at beating a ranked fighter than Skelton, but has never beaten one.

He is not in the top ten. Whyte is in the top five. Hughie has never been near a top five.

SO although you could argue that he "operates" at that level, it's only being on the receiving end of operational losses that makes it true. The very definition of British class, in fact, given his record at world level. Which is awful.

This has already been explained to you. Given that his fighting on heavily promoted fights against popular fighters doesn't signify status to you because it represents "good management", this does not work as a persuading factor for you. Third-party rankings do not denote quality according to you, therefore they are useless.

Your definition of "world level" is entirely in your head. You can apply it in any way you wish and change it at a moment's notice to suit yourself. Nothing I say can influence if it is your desire that that not be the case.

In other words, all discussions are futile because no evidentiary system can be used during those discussions to influence you. This was exactly the same when you were saying these things about Fury and Usyk - except there was less evidence for their operating in the world class than there is for Whyte at this time!

Because operating at world level is exclusively about the opponent, and because the value of a given opponent lives expressly in your head either a) you're unlucky enough to be wrong about enough of the fighters Whyte has met to be this wrong about Whyte or b) for whatever reason, you've just made up your mind Whyte is x.

Of course.

Skelton was beaten in his prime by a washed up Danny WIlliams. You keep telling me you're not interested in rankings or legacy or resume then spend hundreds of words running down Whyte's opposition by saying the same thing over and over again.

Skelton's opposition is atrocious in comparison to Whyte's, and you have admitted as much (or something similar). It's embarrassing.

Well Whyte has beaten better fighters than all of the above for me, while Fury has lost to fighters that Whyte has beaten (Parker and Povetkin). So, If they had an actually fight, for this reason, the bookies, for example, would make Whyte a prohibitive favorite.

SO when Fury met Povetkin he was a big, big underdog. When Whyte met Povetkin the second time, even having been badly knocked out, he was still a favourite. That is because the perception of those who make money based on real perceptions - the bookies - see Whyte as operating much nearer world level than Hughie Fury.

Perhaps I've stumbled here upon an objective narrative that will help you to understand the difference between classes as perceived where the bottom line is the bottom line. It's not the same as "evidence he would win" of course, but it should help you understand where vast differences in perceptions of the given fighters exist.

The bookies perceive Whyte as operating closer to world-level than Fury.

In the course of this conversation we have gone from Povetkin being "unknown" according to you in terms of his condition to being "shot". And this is what I mean. You want to paint everything about Whyte in the worst possible light. You describe his record against Chisroa as 1-1, when it isn't. You describe his win against Parker as dubious, and it isn't (just close). Now Povetkin has gone from "unknown" to "shot".

It's the kind of thing I run into when I discuss Wlad with dino, for example, and it isn't healthy, and it's more extreme than your instance that Fury wasn't that good or Usyk wasn't that special.

I think you're sort of twisting my position like you are twisting facts about Whyte, i'm not "acting as if" anything. I'll resate it for you.

He's one of the six most highly regarded heavyweights in the world, and that's almost universal. He's clearly much better than Skelton who is 0-1 at a level commensurate with excellence. And that's it really. I'm not saying anything else.

 

Would you agree that Hughie is not currently ranked by TBRB and Ring Magazine and that Whyte is?

Would you agree that Hughie holds no win over a fighter as good as Parker, Rivas or old Povetkin?

This sounds dangerously like you want to award him some sort of win over Povetkin? Whyte thrashed him; Hughie lost. Those are facts.

Right. Whyte fought the more experience version and won, Hughie fought the less experienced version and lost. Surely you're not trying to claim that Parker was shopworn too for Whyte?

Yeah but if you consistently and persistently harp on the facts that support your position and undermine a fighter that is universally regarded by rankings organisations (not including those who accept money for rankings) in the world as one of the very best, you start to look biased to the point of crazy.

 

That's fine, but you contradicted that position directly in this thread. I'm only basing that remark upon what you said to me, not what you said in 2018 before Povetkin fought Hughie

Yeah, its' the same old story, old fighter, still dangerous, still capable of taking out ranked guys but nobody has actually turned him over yet to finish him. Whyte did that. He receives that credit, no more. Beat a good, older fighter with a wealth of experience who isn't what he was.

Better than anything Skelton or Fury have done though, probably.