But he probably would've lost to Stiverne, so I don't see price getting a belt. He probably would've beaten wilders opposition, up until Stiverne.
Maybe he would or maybe after 30 plus fights worth of experience wouldn't. We won't know but once again you are skirting around what I first wrote. If he had have taken that route you are agreeing he possibly wouldn't have lost on the way and would have been a big punching Undefeated title challenger which would have arguably have been a bigger more successful career than losing so early in tough damaging fights and likely earnt more or very well in a world title fight that I would think with Undefeated confidence and 30 odd fight experience may have a good chance of winning So was the tough British route better or worse for his career?
Take your own advice. We don't have a clue what would've happened if he took the same route Wilders did. But I'm confident he would've got smashed by Stiverne so the point is I don't see him ever winning a title. Price was always chinny, he was stopped multiple times in the amateurs
So you are ducking the questions again! The questions being the point of the thread that you claimed you couldn't see the point of, yet actively choose to avoid answering. When someone actively ducks answering, it often tends to say more about what they are thinking than when they directly answer
Your question is meaningless. Your asking whether or not he would've done better had he not fought Thompson and fought easier opponents. Your question is already a hypothetical, how would Price do if he took the Wilders route instead ? We don't know. All I'm certain of is he would've lost to Stiverne, so even if he did better he probably would've never gotten his hands on a world title like Wilder. David Price was always chinny, nothing can change that I have already answered your question about David Price, you have no reading comprehension. To address your original post, fighters match making in order to avoid tough competition eventually get a reality check because they aren't used to high level opponents, so a prestigious national belt is a positive
Many, possibly most questions on this site are hypothetical. You still choose to directly answer many of them When people talk fantasy matches, they are hypothetical but I expect you have answered with your opinion on some of them Question A you telling me you don't answer any hypothetical questions on this forum? No you haven't You said you felt he would lose to Stiverne which was never a question I asked and I believe said you felt he would have lost when stepped up, which is also an answer for a question I didn't ask Question B Please can you copy and paste your direct answer to the question you claimed to have answered Not necessarily so It can be about taking the right fights at the right time as well Consider Fury vacated the British title and not defend it against Undefeated Price. I always favoured Fury to beat Price but he wasn't interested in facing him at that time. After winning the British title Fury fought Firtha which I think could be considered a learning fight or filler fight. So I do think timing can be important in a career. Not many fighters are ready for world level in under 20 fights I don't think. Sure we can all site many examples but they are not the majority So do answer above and show me the direct answer to the questions before this post of yours Thanks
This is literally your question no ? It's quoted and bolded. So yes, I've already answered it. Why you keep denying this, I have no clue. It's weird Price probably would've beaten everyone Wilder defeated, up until Stiverne. I've said this about 3 times now. Reading Comprehension where ?
see above It was about was the route better or worse Which I don't think you want to answer as one route led to a world title and the other was a arguably too much too soon Yes you skirted around the question and just answered the sub parts to suit yourself and ducked the subsequent questions A and B
I answered both. I already told you tough competition for a national title or gatekeeper level competition benefits the best fighters from that region more than taking on cans and getting an easy world title shot. Eventaully you have to fight the best of the sport if you want to be the best. there's no way around it. That's why the coddled get exposed anyway It's merely your opinion that Price could've had a substantially better career by not fighting Thompson. I disagree, Price was always vulnerable and we've seen fighters bounce back from a loss or a bad beating. Price was never that guy
With due respect, I am not sure that you completely understood the question. You either intentionally tried to skirt around answering or didn't understand well enough to answer. That could be as much due to me not explaining it to you well enough No worries
I'm not looking to get into name calling with you because you are frustrated with your own lack of understanding. To go with the first reply to the part of the question you are answering wasn't even an answer to the question you are now responding to See below Your first answer wasn't an answer to the question Then you answered with So you answered that part which was giving you an example about what the thread was about but still not answering like you understood as it wasn't about what Price may do perse but about the route where it led to getting an opportunity for a world title So I proceeded with You didn't want to answer this question. I won't call you a tool but it has taken all this, just for you to see Look below We are not talking about him necessarily winning a world title, it is to do with the route in getting there You have tied yourself up and I really am not going to try and keep explaining it to you You can get the last word in with an insult if it makes you feel better
Your first question: Your second question: They have been answered multiple times already. I told you i dont see Price ever winning a title even if he took on easier oppositon. Stop replying