Which was the better win?

Joshua did beat Parker more easily than Wilder beat Ortiz actually.

 

On performance, I would go with Wilder, because he hurt, dropped Ortiz, and stopped him in the later rounds. I wasn't a fan of the bodybuilders style of win, not really a fan of UD decisions. I don't know who was the better win on paper. Ortiz will probably retire now, I want to see how Parker does against the likes of Povetkin, and Wilder before I can assess how good he was.

 

Ortiz beats Parker so better performance from Wilder.

 

You were hiding your bias well until you used the phrase 'bodybuilder'.....

Especially when that 'bodybuilder' is a better boxer than Wilder.

 

Depends upon what you define as better.

Joshua's win was far more dominant, he never looked like losing, it was a better performance.

Wilder's win was far more entertaining and dramatic as a fan it was a better fight.

Joshua's win unified the titles, which is a better fight than just another defence and so better for his legacy.

Wilder's win did more for his credibility as he hadn't fought anyone good up to this point so better for his reputation.

Joshua's win was far more important for the sport of boxing as it brought us one step closer to an undisputed champion, so was a better match for boxing in general.

 

Wasn't it Holyfield who claimed that Wilder is the better fighter because 'Every fight to Wilder is difficult'.

That doesn't seem like a compliment to me.

 

Both wins are excellent. There's not an awful lot separating them.

So I've gone for Joshua Vs Parker because Parker was unbeaten and prime where as Ortiz was unbeaten and probably past prime.

Both superb A level victories.

In fact id love a Parker Vs Ortiz bout.

 

This, hard to choose IMO.

 

Are you confusing performance and win?
Performance of course it was AJ, Wilder gets outboxed every time til he gets KO

But as for the better “win”, considering wilder was basically out on his feet with half the round to go and dig deep to get the KO, I’d say that was a big statement in his career and therefore a better “win”. Not performance, win

 

So Wilder's win was better because he's a worse fighter?

 

This isn't a simple question to answer.
Joshua IMO fought the better fighter in Parker,
however he struggled mightily in his win, which
despite official scorecards suggesting it, his win
was not decisive.

Wilder got bounced around the entire fight, and was
made to look amateurish by Ortiz but at the end of the
day he took the judges out of it and closed the show.
Both Joshua and Wilder (the two defacto standard bearers
of the division), looked less than standard bearer-esque in
their performances. At the end of the day, I think Wilder's win
was better, there was no question of the outcome, there is no
"if this was etc....", he stopped Ortiz brutally (after struggling).
The end.

Incidentally I'd normally go with a boxer winning a comprehensive
decision over someone getting beat pillar to post and coming back
and knocking out an opponent as a better win (ie. Fury vs Wlad >>>>> Joshua vs Wlad).
However this aint it. Whereas Fury dominated Wlad for 12,
never at any point in time did Joshua dominate Parker, he really
made it out by the skin of teeth.

 

More Exciting and intense is my choice. Boxers who fought their hearts out.
Wilder - Ortiz

 

The win was better because he overcame a tough ask? Similar to how AJ did v Wlad

The performance was awful as usual until his late rounds

 

There’s so much twisted non-logic in that explanation, you’d give Arlen Specter a run for his money!

I’m off for a lie down!!

 

I don't understand your reasoning to be honest.

I don't buy that a win is 'better' because your performance was 'worse'.