The Humble One Anthony Dosh wants easy Stiverne Fight

He's not special but he's a reasonable challenger.

Joshua is IBF champion but the likes of Charles Martin, Dominic Breazeale and this year's Bermane Stiverne are no better than Dillian Whyte for the British title.

 

I agree with the premise that if you are champion then you should be ready and willing to face the best, but unfortunately, that is not how modern day boxing works. If you are having a go at Joshua for being a titleist and not facing the best opposition available, then you should also be having a pop at 95% of the other titleists.

As for the Tyson remarks; I never really understand why people compare prospects to the greats. Joshua is no Tyson. When Tyson was 20 he had many stylistic advantages over the top HW's at the time. Joshua doesnt, so expecting Joshua to follow a similar career path is foolish. It is even more foolish when you yourself don't even rate him. You think Joshua is overrated and a fraud, yet you want him to try to emulate the progression and early career path of a great HW like Tyson. This makes no logical sense what so ever.

As for what Hearn says; who cares. He is a promoter and I explained what they are for in my previously post. Come on, Pledge. Don't act like you aren't aware that promoters bull**** all the time.

Expecting AJ to fight Fury, Wilder or Povetkin now is stupid. The guy has barely gone past half way in fights and he has many question marks against him. If you are the type of person who thinks AJ gets beat by the top HW's in the world and then you question why he is not facing them, well, you have answered your own question.

 

That's a poor excuse as to why Joshua can't defend his title against able bodied men.

Klitscko also defended his belts against the best. So did Vitali, so is Wilder, so is tyson fury ready to do so.

So this notion that only fighters in the past defended their title against credible opponents is rubbish. Look at the middleweight division with the champs there, the best go up against the best, the same in welter and light heavy.

I'm not even comparing him to tyson as a fighter, just holding up the standards for any titliest to have. I'm not even expecting that animal to jump in the ring with Wilder, fury etc, but he can at least fight his god damn mandatory or a credible opponent. Stiverne is shot to pieces, offers no threat and is in for the retirement fund.

I'm also playing devils advocate because the last 3 years both AJ and hearns have been shooting their mouths off about how they are willing to fight anyone in the division yet they are always selective in the opponents they choose and it's always poorly conditioned inexperienced and over the hill slobs.

You seem to love the lies they are feeding people like you while being sold fights that should be shown inside a shopping mall, for ppv

 

I was not saying that only fighters of the past defended their titles against good opposition. My point was about Joshua's career progression compared to Tyson's early career progression. This was in response to your original post. But, since you made some points, I will address these;

The Klitschko's defended their belts against the best because they were capable of doing it, but only when they were ready. Like most champions, their first title defenses were soft touches. Fury, beat the best HW of this generation so you feel confident putting him in with anyone. Plus, he is fighting Wladimir again because he has to. Lets see who he challengers himself against if he wins the rematch and can then choose his title defenses.

As for Wilder, are you serious? You claim to know your stuff about boxing and then claim Wilder fights the best. Seriously? It took Wilder 32 fights against journeyman and former capable fighters, now past it, to get his title shot and then he makes three of the most maligned title defenses in recent memory before finally agreeing to fight Povetkin.

As for the other divisions you mention and the best fighting the best; MW - yeah, I loved those series of fights between Golovkin, Canelo, Saunders and Jacobs. Hell, even Eubank has had offers to fight GGG and jacobs, but he turned them down because he realised he is not ready and now we have a WW fighting GGG because no one else will. WW - a division famed for fighters not facing off against each other in case they get beat and therefore lose the chance to fight Mayweather or Pacquioa for huge money. It is only recently with the "retirements" of these two that top WW's are just starting to fight each other. LHW - Yeah, I loved the Kovalev v Stevnson fight, too. The only big fight to be made in this division the past couple of years and it doesn't get made. We have had to wait for Ward to move up to now get a big fight.

Seriously, Pledge, when you come out with statements like these (and Khan suffering a prolonged beating from Canelo and Charles Martin being some kind demigod) I really do wonder if you follow the sport at all.

As I said in my earlier post, the plan has been for Joshua and AJ to slip a fight in this year and fight early next year. This is still on course. If Parker and his team had a problem with this then they would kick up a fuss, but they haven't.

As for what Hearn says, like I said earlier, he is a promoter. If you follow the sport then you know to take everything they say with a pinch of salt. This doesn't mean that "I love" being fed lies. It just means that I am a realist who understands the game. Do I like it? No. But, will I have a go at AJ and Hearn for doing what nearly every other fighter and promoter do? No. This is a problem with the sport at large.

Look Pledge, it is obvious that you don't like AJ. Fair enough. But, if you want to make a fair assessment of his career so far and his abilities, then you have to remain objective. You let your emotions get the better of you when talking about certain fighters. Now, before you get all hot headed and reply with one of your, "look here boy" replies, I am not saying i believe all the rubbish that comes out of Hearn's mouth. I don't. But, I am not going to completely go in the other direction and write AJ of as a bum, a fraud, just because he is overhyped or because I don't like him or Hearn. Despite the window dressing and the noise around him, I am able to objectively discern the good and bad points and make a balanced, unbiased, unemotional judgement.

 

Wilder defended his belt against szpilka, a very tough unbeaten young hungry tricky southpaw. Then he was ready to go to Russia to fight polevkin in his backyard but was cancelled . I'm not talking about how many fights he had before becoming champ, I'm talking about what fights these guys hunted for once they became champ.

As for the other names;

Canelo has fought Mayweather, cotto, lara, kirkland, trout

Saunders has fought Eubank, Andy Lee

Kovalev, went to england to fight Cleverly who was undefeated champ, defended it against, hopkins, pascal chilemba and now ward. He's also called out that pimp stevenson for years

Danny Garcia defended his title against a roided Morales, a reborn Judah, a undefeated Myttysee and a tricky seasoned Herrera. Tough son of a *****es who had something to prove

What credible live young opponent that is established has AJ fought or even tried to fight?

My point is that once you become champ and charge ppvs then you should be fighting looking only to fight the best, otherwise you are a fraud.

I will say this about any fight, it's not about exclusively beign about AJ , but you seem to want to get emotional and take it as a personal insult that I dared to question AJ's opponents and his desire to back up his words of wanting to fight the best.

What is fighting a shot to bits stiverne going to achieve? He had his durable fight with Breazeale, how many more lames is he going to fight on ppv before you accept that he should at least fight his god damn mandatory?

 

This is it. And this is why I wonder if the Parker fight will happen within the mandatory period.

While people are swallowing things like ...

Kevin "went 12 rounds with Klitschko" Johnson,
Dillian "dropped him in the amateurs" Whyte,
Charles "legit world champ" Martin
Dominic "same unbeaten record" Breazeale

... and think they make for huge championship PPV fights, then I don't see Eddie putting AJ in with a live body. Not when you've got Bermane "12 rounds with Wilder" Stiverne... and not to mention the likes of Price and Chisora where they can sell the British angle.

Even if you think AJ beats Parker, and whether you think it's a 60-40, 70-30, or even 80-20 or more. It doesn't matter when they can sell PPV against plenty more fighters who have less than 1% chance of winning.

I'll bet there will be some kind of gentleman's agreement with Parker's camp to let the fight 'marinate' for another year at least.

 

good

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but hardly anyone was saying Szpilka was a young, hungry, tricky fighter before he fought Wilder. He was seen as another soft touch for Wilder.

As for the others, they took on these challenges when they were ready. They had had gut check fights; they had their heart, chins and mental fortitude tested. Joshua hasn't. Joshua has the potential to have a good career in the sport. He also has the potential to be another Audley or Price. It shouldn't be forgotten, also, that the fighters you have mentioned have all had questionable title defenses before.

You can say you aren't talking about fights Joshua, or those others mentioned, had before becoming champion, but these are important. All fights and training that goes into them are all part of the learning curve of a fighter. Joshua is still taking the fights he is taking because he is less experienced and has been less tested than those other fighters you mentioned at the points In their careers at which they took those fights. Yes, like you have said, Joshua is a titleist so he should face the best. But, like I have already said, unfortunately modern day boxing does not work like that. If you take Joshua's title away and just look at the opponents (regardless of what ever belt is on the line), then his resume stacks up against a lot of other top fighters in their first 17 fights. Does he have the toughest record ever for a fighters first 17 fights? No. Far from it. But, he is also far from the worst. A lot of people were giving him stick for his resume pre-Martin. Now they are using the, "He is a champion and should fight the best", line. This suggests to me that they would give him stick regardless of what belts he owns and that their opinion may be based more on personal feelings towards the guy (they don't like his dubious background, potential PED use, overhype, etc) rather than making an unbiased judgement on his resume. Now, obviously not everyone will feel this for the reasons I stated, but many appear to.

As for me making it personal and feeling insulted, you are being over emotional and reading to much into it. I don't have a problem with you questioning Joshua's record. Why would I? This is a place for debate. That is what I am doing; debating it with you. I say something, you don't agree and counter. I disagree and counter back. Hopefully we can learn something from each other. If not we agree to disagree. That is the point of a debate. I don't come here to argue or get emotionally involved, because, at the end of the day, it is just a boxing forum. I come to here to talk boxing as objectively as I can.

As for the Stiverne fight, we won't know its worth until after the fight. I expect a more motivated Stiverne than we saw against Rossy, but equally, he could be shot to bits. Still, he probably is the best name on Joshua's record. As I said in my first post, a past it Stiverne is potentially better than an unproven, and apparently, injured Whyte, an unproven and gutless Martin and Breazeale who is all heart but no skill.

In regards to Parker, the date has been set - early 2017. Parker and his people seem OK with this. If and until AJ ducks that fight I really don't see the point in giving him stick for it as it is in the future and therefore hasn't happened.

 

Well I can't really argue against those points as they are fair, but the shamelss ppv shows when he's still taking learning fights is a disgrace.

 

I completely agree.

I don't like PPV. I think it has turned the sport into a niche sport. However, if it is to continue then it really should be for big fights. Just because a boxer may be popular, to take advantage of that by fleecing the fans with any old fight is dispicable.

 

His opponents and fights are definitely not ppv worthy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk