Zurdo wants Gvozdyk or Beterbiev next.

I'm not saying he's nervous, I'm saying I get the same nervousness I do watching him as I do Groves and Joshua. The only puncher he's really faced with Stevenson, and it was a shell of Stevenson. His performances against Chilemba shows he's world class and has all the skills, but Beterbiev is just a different monster than Stevenson and isn't 40+. But like I said, the fight will never happen. These LHW EE just never face each other for some reason.

 

Power is the last to go doesn't mean it applies to every situation. Stevenson's power was not impressive AT ALL against Jack who was moving up from 168. He clearly was not the same puncher that he was in the Dawson days. Well, dude was 40+ so it's not hard to say he was definitely faded and in decline unless you want to give Joshua full credit for being Wlad and claim he wasn't really faded. And even being 40+ he gave Gvozdyk a hell of a fight, I'd pick a 5 years young Stevenson to beat that Gvozdyk.

 

It was really obvious to me when he fought Jack, a guy moving up from 168. He looked like utter dog ****, he looked worse than Wlad against Jennings. Of course not as bad as Wlad did against Fury, but again that was more a style issue. The Wlad that fought Povetkin would have ended up looking like that too. Jack wasn't a style issue for Stevenson, if anything he was there to be hit, and a prime Stevenson would have knocked him the **** out.

Again, this is what I hate about people on this forum. Consistency. So what if he held the belt? Everyone knows he lost against Jack, I myself had Jack winning WAY before the Gvozdyk fight was signed. Holding a prestigious belt means jack **** and you know it. The Wlad and Stevenson fights were extremely similar. It's like you people just want to pick and choose when a fighter is shot even though it's ****ing obvious, to credit a fighter you like. Did I give Joshua a lot of credit for beating Wlad? Nope, I was one of the first to say the win has question marks since Wlad was 40+ and looked like **** against Jennings.

"Let's not pretend he was anywhere near a shot fighter."

He was a shot 6 round fighter, who got his ass whooped by Jack. Sorry. He gave a good account of himself because of Gvozdyk's bizarre tactics. I predicted Gvozdyk would beat Stevenson pretty easily because of the Jack fight, but whatever gameplan he and Atlas had was odd. Either that or Stevenson's style was just bad for Gvozdyk.

 

Sure, Jack was better than a lot of Stevenson's recent opponents, but he was notwithstanding the bombs he took against Stevenson 5 years prior. Not saying Jack is glass jawed, but Stevenson was more explosive and powerful 5 years back. Unless you're going to try and claim a 40+ year old hits harder and is more explosive than he was 5 years ago.

Anyways, if you can find one post of me crediting a fighter for beating a 40+ year old like it was some kind of top win, I'll fall back due to lack of consistency. The only wins that are plausible for major credit against a 40+ year olds in the past 5 years is Bhop. Even Pac is shot to bits, way less shot than Adonis was, but if Crawford or Spence beat him, do you think I would be crediting them like you are crediting Gvozdyk for beating a far more shot Stevenson? I've been on record COUNTLESS times saying Nonito is shot and Inoue deserves very little credit for beating him. We've known each other for years, so you know I'm Japanese and you know I'm a huge Inoue dickrider. I'd say Nonito and Stevenson are roughly the same amounts of shot. Did Stevenson have a chance to knockout Gvozdyk? Hell yeah, he almost did. Does Nonito have a chance of knocking Inoue out? Of course, but just because they have power left doesn't mean they're not shot.

I know you see my reasoning is valid and my consistency on this issue. Sure, I've been inconsistent on some issues with Wilder, etc, to **** some posters off, but this is one topic I've been non-trolly about and consistent throughout my years posting here. It really annoys me when people just pick and choose when a fighter is shot, and are incredibly inconsistent due to personal preferences.

 

I'd say his decline was the first Fonfara fight. Do I think he was completely shot then? Nope. I don't even know why we're debating this, this isn't even a subject to debate. THE DUDE WAS 40+ YEARS OLD LMAO. C'mon man. There's no ****ing way you'd say Wilder or Stevenson beating a EE Stevenson at 40+ that was coming off a controversial decision was a top win and trying to convince me that fighter wasn't shot.

Do you want to stay on topic? Dude was 40+ end of, looked like absolute dog **** against Jack, was fighting once a year and was rusty. The most objective evidence to Stevenson's downfall is his age lmao. Not step up in opposition. He absolutely crushed and destroyed Dawson and Bellew. Are you saying Jack is levels above Dawson and Bellew?