Comments Thread For: Whyte: Joshua is Afraid To Take Rematch, Won't Risk His Retirement Payday With Wilder

[Monty Fisto]

I have also always thought that a rematch with Ruiz Junior again, is another good fight for Joshua.

In makes a lot of sense for his journey in the game. There is a rivalry there and a theme.

Joshua did beat Ruiz Junior 12-0 easy in the second fight. But if there would be a rematch, the aim should be to beat Ruiz Junior down systematically.

Whyte II, Ruiz Junior III 'These are all good meaningful fights for Joshua'.

They are fights that build momentum for him personally 'Wallin is a fight which means nothing much, it has no story of theme. The match up does not have the theatrical depth of ether Whyte II or Ruiz Junior III'.

Fights like Hrogvic WOULD be a good fight to make if he was a Champion 'But as you know, he has no belts'.

Therefor Joshua and his team can be creative, make fights that have a deeper meaning than just rankings.

Note: Tyson Fury is still trying to make fights, as if he was still a contender 'This is how Fury prefer's to operate, and that is why I personally have always believed that he does not really like being a Champion'.

Fury does not like the requirements which come with being a Champion, even you know that mate 'If you are honest' etc.

The trouble with a third fight against Ruiz is that, although a systematic beatdown would be a great way to finish the story on Ruiz, the best strategy for beating him would be the same the way Joshua did it in the second fight and I doubt anyone wants to see a re-run of that.

[PRINCEKOOL]

The trouble with a third fight against Ruiz is that, although a systematic beatdown would be a great way to finish the story on Ruiz, the best strategy for beating him would be the same the way Joshua did it in the second fight and I doubt anyone wants to see a re-run of that.

Joshua vs Ruiz Junior II, the objective for Joshua? Was just to achieve the win, and get back his titles.

Although it was a efficient win. I don't think it was violent, brutal or conclusive enough 'For Joshua to have truly slayed the dragon'.

Like when Lennox Lewis beat Rahman in their rematch 'Lewis brutally and conclusively achieved sporting vengeance'.

Ruiz Junior is still a world level fighter, but I think he is there for the taking.

Joshua can most likely beat Ruiz Junior, by using similar tactics to the second fight 'But that should not be his aim for the third fight'.

That would have to be a personal decision Joshua takes on how he would want to tactically fight Ruiz Junior etc.

[Monty Fisto]

Joshua vs Ruiz Junior II, the objective for Joshua? Was just to achieve the win, and get back his titles.

Although it was a efficient win. I don't think it was violent, brutal or conclusive enough 'For Joshua to have truly slayed the dragon'.

Like when Lennox Lewis beat Rahman in their rematch 'Lewis brutally and conclusively achieved sporting vengeance'.

Ruiz Junior is still a world level fighter, but I think he is there for the taking.

Joshua can most likely beat Ruiz Junior, by using similar tactics to the second fight 'But that should not be his aim for the third fight'.

That would have to be a personal decision Joshua takes on how he would want to tactically fight Ruiz Junior etc.

I don't disagree with what you're saying, but I just don't see Joshua with his current mindset going down that road. I think if the fight actually happened (which it won't!), he would be too wary of those fast hands and too aware of those short arms that the fast hands are attached to and the safer route would be too appealing.

[PRINCEKOOL]

I don't disagree with what you're saying, but I just don't see Joshua with his current mindset going down that road. I think if the fight actually happened (which it won't!), he would be too wary of those fast hands and too aware of those short arms that the fast hands are attached to and the safer route would be too appealing.

I know, I understand what you are saying.

Joshua has openly stated that? He is going to fight as efficiently and straight forward as possible.

He said this in response to the criticism he received for his Franklin performance.

Regardless, I still think it is a good fight to make 'And another win over Ruiz Junior, would still build momentum' etc.

[JakeTheBoxer]

I would rather see Joshua fighting somebody else. This is a very bad era and we really don`t need pointless rematches.

[bullydean]

It's incredibly easy to do what you just did for any fighter to just pick holes in the resume with worthless criticism.

All the men I listed were ranked within the top ten when Joshua faced them, that automatically make's them credible opposition. Is the age of Wladimir, Povetkin, or Pulev an issue? No because it's a common occurrence in the heavyweight division. Fan's like to be selective in their criticism but the argument about age is applicable to Fury and Wilder's competition.

Furthermore, having power doesn't make someone a good or bad fighter nor does losing a fight. All I ask is a fighter fights credible opposition consistently, which Joshua did. I think opinions based on hindsight or feelings are pointless in a sport where facts are readily available. From my perspective, Joshua took risk's in unifying and taking on credible opposition consistently.

I could use hindsight, narratives, and opinions to discredit the majority of the fighters in the hall of fame.

Being ranked top ten doesn't mean anything in boxing these days lol

Just admit you're riding AJ.

[unknowledgeablepugilist]

Being ranked top ten doesn't mean anything in boxing these days lol

Just admit you're riding AJ.

Cheap insults the sign of an individual with nothing intelligent to say; that's the problem with boxing today. Majority of fans are overly emotional and bias, which effects there critical thinking.

[bullydean]

Cheap insults the sign of an individual with nothing intelligent to say; that's the problem with boxing today. Majority of fans are overly emotional and bias, which effects there critical thinking.

It's not really cheap when you claim AJ's opponents were great simply because they were ranked in the top ten.
Would you consider Fury's tune ups as great contenders for being in the top 20? Wallin was ranked #3 by the WBA (or WBO I forget) when he fought Fury so would you consider him as one of the greatest fighters of this era?

I was objective and listed the reasons why AJ's opponents weren't great or risky.

[unknowledgeablepugilist]

It's not really cheap when you claim AJ's opponents were great simply because they were ranked in the top ten.
Would you consider Fury's tune ups as great contenders for being in the top 20? Wallin was ranked #3 by the WBA (or WBO I forget) when he fought Fury so would you consider him as one of the greatest fighters of this era?

I was objective and listed the reasons why AJ's opponents weren't great or risky.

First off, I don't use sanctioning body rankings because there pay to rank thus not based off merit. I actually use the ring magazine rankings because it's more credible in my eyes.

Secondly, I don't discredit Fury's wins over top ten competition. Wilder, Wladimir, and Whyte are all quality wins. I'm not someone to spout the nonsense of Wilder cannot box or Wladimir was too old because those are opinions based off what? Undeducated ignorance. Fury without a doubt is one of the greatest fighters of this heavyweight era no matter the shenanigans.

Finally, you weren't objective. You listed baseless reasons for why certain fighters aren't credible. For instance, does age indicate the quality of the fighter? No. What you offered were surface level opinions. Being partial is easy because I can recognize Wallin wasn't ranked in the top ten but he's still a good win based off his ability.

[bullydean]

First off, I don't use sanctioning body rankings because there pay to rank thus not based off merit. I actually use the ring magazine rankings because it's more credible in my eyes.

Secondly, I don't discredit Fury's wins over top ten competition. Wilder, Wladimir, and Whyte are all quality wins. I'm not someone to spout the nonsense of Wilder cannot box or Wladimir was too old because those are opinions based off what? Undeducated ignorance. Fury without a doubt is one of the greatest fighters of this heavyweight era no matter the shenanigans.

Finally, you weren't objective. You listed baseless reasons for why certain fighters aren't credible. For instance, does age indicate the quality of the fighter? No. What you offered were surface level opinions. Being partial is easy because I can recognize Wallin wasn't ranked in the top ten but he's still a good win based off his ability.

They weren't baseless. Age is a great indication of an opponents quality because they are usually past their prime and are reduced to gatekeepers.
Pulev and Povetkin were clearly past their best. Vladimir somehow managed to beat time and continued to be in top shape his entire career which is why I agreed that he was a credible opponent.

Wilder can't box which is why his power has bailed him out of every fight he has had.

Would you consider Cunningham a credible opponent for Fury?