TAKAM - CAN he BEAT JOSHUA??

This.

 

A custom shoehorn under each hand rap and I make him favourite.

 

Hell no

 

Takam has to be the most overrated HW on this board, we'll see on Saturday he's a tier below the likes of Whyte and Breazeale. Joshua is going to annihilate him.

 

Tha may be the case for some, but not from me. I think Takam is a good, solid fighter, and if Joshua blows him away then it'll say more for his amazing development than it would for Takam's "overratedness", who's already proven himself against other top level guys so I'm not sure how we're supposed to rate him otherwise. It'll also finally put the nail in the coffin of my belief that a Parker Joshua fight would be competitive

 

See post above.

 

Takam has proven himself against top level guys? He's beaten nobody, and lost every time he's stepped up.

 

Lost in competitive fights against top level fighters. If Joshua has an easy night with him then it'll prove him a clear level above the rest.

 

He gave Povetkin and Parker competitive fights (before losing), but what have those guys done? Neither have proved themselves to be operating at 'top level'. Povetkin hasn't faced a live body since Wlad ragdolled him, and Parkers been life and death with fringe contenders like Ruiz and Hughie Fury. Joshua will do what he wants with Takam, he poses zero threat.

 

When I think about this fight, it brings to mind Wladimir Klitschko vs. Jean-Marc Mormeck.

 

I don't see what Whyte and Breazeale have done to suggest they are any better than Takam.

Whyte went life and death with an out of shape, faded Chisora and landed 1 good shot against Joshua. Breazeale proved to be a good punch bag against Joshua lasting 7 rounds, beat an unproven Ugonoh and got lucky vs Mansour.

Takam has shown he can be competitive with top level guys like Povetkin and Parker. If anything Takam is the more proven fighter. Would Whyte do as well as Takam did against Povetkin and Parker, I don't believe so. I'd favour Takam over Ugonoh and Mansour who gave Breazeale trouble.

Takam won't win, but he at least has shown previously he can be competitive at the top end of the division which I don't think Whyte of Breazeale have done. Whyte landed one good punch against a green and reckless Joshua and beat a gate keeper in Chisora and some don't think he even beat Chisora, while Breazeale the one time he stepped up to the top level vs Joshua was soundly thrashed.

 

Lol I don't think it's that bad. Mormeck was a cruiser who through most of his career was 40lbs lighter than Takam and Mormeck was past prime and nearly 40 years of age. Takam is a natural heavyweight if a smallish heavyweight and at 36 is closer to prime than Mormeck was. Mormeck was also pretty inactive before facing Wlad only fighting 3 times in 4 years since losing to Haye. Takam has fought twice this year already.

 

Takam was incredibly competitive against Povetkin and Parker, both of whom are top five heavies. The only time Whyte and Breazeale have stepped up to that level of opposition they essentially played the part of Joshua's personal heavy bag. Whyte arguably lost to a shopworn Chisora and Breazeale lost every single round against 42 year old Mansour before the old man accidentally bit off his own tongue. Between the pair of them they have one good win; against a chinny, unproven Ugonoh.

Takam may not have a top ten resume because barring the Perez robbery he's only fought A class opposition (and lost) or C class opposition that nobody remembers, but he's definitely a top ten fighter H2H IMO. I think he soundly beats Whyte and Breazeale.

Charr KO7, Takam KO10, Perez TKO1, Wach TKO12 and Duhaupas KO6 is an impressive streak of wins for a guy looking for a title shot. Yeah Parker's had some tough fights but I also rate Ruiz as a H2H top ten HW right now and Fury would have made anybody look bad that night because he flat out refused to engage.

 

If Joshua blows Takam out early it will send a statement to the rest of the division as Takam has been sort of a measuring stick for top HWs the last few years.