Who is better? Joe Joyce or Luis Ortiz

[daggum]

It's so frustrating lol. People are trying to make a case that the competition faced by Joyce is vastly distinct from that face by Ortiz. Then they are not looking at the actual fighters and the actual fights. We see evidence... Ortiz never lost a professional fight until he fought Wilder... It's there lol.

Then they want to say that Joyce's approach, coming in face first unable to make any adjustments, and losing once people figured this out in the division... Which took a while because the division is weak... Has no meaning compared to the fact that Wilder beating Ortiz and losing to Fury is the only thing showing his primacy.

And when all else fails and you cannot prop up the fighters in this week division, you make distinctions between fighters like Jennings and fighters like chisora. Work been like fighters veteran skills but nothing that would show itself in a strong heavyweight division.

why do you keep pretending beating soft competition is something good? you actually think more highly of guys who dont fight good competition. as wilder would say mind-bobbling.

[daggum]

They brought out the gimp God help us lol. Look at when these fights took place. Look at the fights themselves. Joyce did very well for his limited approach. His career even with the losses is better than Ortiz but he's not the stronger fighter. Zhang is not that good. He throws three or four punches around and gases. Parker has just come into his own and was work in progress for most of his younger career. These are just facts.

Ortiz can throw every punch, moves well, and dominated the level of competition he faced until he faced Wilder. Joyce was the beneficiary of a week division and this includes the fighters Ortiz fought as well.. which is why saying Joyce had the better career it's fine. But he's not a stronger fighter than Ortiz. Levels to the game Gimp...

Just beating other fighters, not considering losses, not watching the actual fights, and not analyzing things properly is what casuals do!

and that level was extremely weak. if you want to pretend daniel martz and david allen are top tier guys on the level of dubois and parker then you have no credibility. pretty simple. so are they as good or not? why is beating them as good as beating top guys? if joyce was so bad how did he beat fighters who are way better than wilder? you keep saying how ortiz losing to wilder was a good thing? you keep saying watch the tape well do you watch wilder tape? he su-cks and has no boxing skill and his resume reflects someone who su-cks and has no boxing skill but was propped up with easy fights. joyce beat top level fighters, wilder beat ortiz who is only being propped up for being amazing by you and yet if hes so amazing how did he get ko'd twice by a bumbling stumbling no balance no talent hack who falls over when he throws punches? you making fun of joyce? look at wilders boxing. he never beat anyone good but ortiz who was older than he-ll. get a grip

[billeau2]

Wilder, Ortiz and Frazier were exposed then. When did they last have a decent win after they lost the first time?

Frazier and Wilder lost in one sided fashion. Joyce was actually ahead on my card at the time of stoppage in the first fight but the ref wouldn't allow him to continue because of the eye. Zhang was fast running out of steam too.

I'm not the one talking crap here. You are. And i don't come here that often because it's filled with idiots like you. Why would i want to go through the same situation over and over again where the idiocy is obvious with all the hypocrisy and contradictions? Then there's the refusing the answer basic questions to the comments that they made. They deflect like a looney. Who would want to do that all the time?

Again you're taking a set of circumstances in generalizing them without analyzing the specifics. It won't work lol. You can't do that logically.

No the only thing that is obvious is your agenda and prop up weak fighters and try to make artificial distinctions with respect to the competition faced by other fighters. The fact of the matter is Joyce was able to win because of the division being in the state it is, Ortiz did not falter until he fought one of the hardest punchers of any era. And that has to be considered whether you like it or not.

[Sid-Knee]

So? It was unable to win fights at a certain point. Does it really matter?

Same thing with many fighters including Wilder and Ortiz. But you're not saying they were exposed. You're only saying that for Joyce. That's straight hypocrisy. Then when you add in the fact Joyce has a better resume than Ortiz and Wilder combined, it makes this much more absurd.

It matters to you because you're the one who came out with this idiotic nonsense in the first place. Normal people accept that Joyce is clearly a better fighter than Ortiz. But for some odd reason, you want to protect a complete hype job in Ortiz. Even the the nonsense of Ortiz being ducked was a load of fantasy. But people like you still want to run with that bullshlt for some weird reason. It isn't going to make that bum Wilder look any better. It just makes him and the people doing this, look like the jokes they clearly are. They couldn't do it in reality, so they made up this fantasy world instead. Bizarre.

[Sid-Knee]

In all their posts the one thing that is never discussed is watching the actual fights. It is assumed that because something happened according to some mechanism that it must be the same.

So for example, even though Wilder was shot horribly when he fought Zang, it's the exact same process as when Joyce for Zhang. And then there's no discussion of what follows. Everything to the Euro bumps occurs in a vacuum lol. Then they go and reanimate Sid knee, The worst of the lot lol.

Where are you getting this bizarre idea that people on this thread didn't watch these fights? How much glue are you actually sniffing?

But go on, what actually happened in these fights? Please do tell. I'd happily go over them with you if you want. You obviously seem to think we're missing something here.

[daggum]

Same thing with many fighters including Wilder and Ortiz. But you're not saying they were exposed. You're only saying that for Joyce. That's straight hypocrisy. Then when you add in the fact Joyce has a better resume than Ortiz and Wilder combined, it makes this much more absurd.

It matters to you because you're the one who came out with this idiotic nonsense in the first place. Normal people accept that Joyce is clearly a better fighter than Ortiz. But for some odd reason, you want to protect a complete hype job in Ortiz. Even the the nonsense of Ortiz being ducked was a load of fantasy. But people like you still want to run with that bullshlt for some weird reason. It isn't going to make that bum Wilder look any better. It just makes him and the people doing this, look like the jokes they clearly are. They couldn't do it in reality, so they made up this fantasy world instead. Bizarre.

hes just doing classic fanboy circular logic. wilder was great for beating ortiz, ortiz was great for losing to wilder? makes no sense of course. parker and dubois have both been in with the best and they won some and lost some. ortiz and wilder lost to everyone else not named ortiz and wilder.

[billeau2]

and that level was extremely weak. if you want to pretend daniel martz and david allen are top tier guys on the level of dubois and parker then you have no credibility. pretty simple. so are they as good or not? why is beating them as good as beating top guys?

No argument with the first sentence. Both Dubois and Parker have gelled and become better fighters. They have done so since facing Joyce. That's just a fact. You can choose to ignore it.

We don't really know how good Parker is yet. Dubois did legitimately beat Joshua whom has managed to lose to the best lol. But even Dubois lost to the best, and is yet to face one of the upcoming very talented guys who could potentially change the division, like Martin Bakole.

So making all these distinctions as of yet is meaningless. The fact that Joyce has some scalps certainly means he had a better career but it doesn't mean it's a stronger fighter than Ortiz.

[daggum]

if wilder loses to curtis martin then yes you can say hes shot because he never lost to that level of opponent in the past but wilder losing to parker and zhang doesnt mean hes shot, hes just not as good as them and he never proved he was on that level his entire career. what you are doing is called fantasy projecting based on wilder hype. you are living in an alternate reality where wilder wasnt exposed and where we didnt see him lose over and over to every top guy, problem is in this reality that did happen.

[MulaKO]

If I may dovetail... The discussion wasn't necessarily who had a better career. It was regarding who on a head-to-head basis was a stronger fighter. And people just take his snapshot of each fighter to make that determination.

Ortiz was a very skilled fighter who came in in his Twilight to the professionals with a real bona fide tool box. This is evident from watching him fight.

Joyce is to be commended, he came in late and developed a style that was successful primarily based on the weakness of the division. He beat a very inexperienced dubois, and claimed a few other scalps in the division before the blueprint came out.

So the question becomes would Ortiz have been able to overcome this approach used by Joyce... He'd be the stronger fighter in a match? And that to me should be pretty easy to answer The answer being that Ortiz would win. I have no problem with even saying that Joyce had a better career. That's never been my point. But these Euro bombs get crazy lol they even brought Sid knee back out of the closet!

When that dunce Daggum faltered, they brought out the gimp!

Lmfao
The gimp

[billeau2]

hes just doing classic fanboy circular logic. wilder was great for beating ortiz, ortiz was great for losing to wilder? makes no sense of course. parker and dubois have both been in with the best and they won some and lost some. ortiz and wilder lost to everyone else not named ortiz and wilder.

Not really a fan of Wilder. I do tend to like the Cuban fighters. Wilder has shown proof that he is a devastating puncher. Because that proof has to be ascertained through watching his performance rather than evaluating his record does not negate the fact. It can be verified through his fights with fury. He can also be verified that after those fights he was effectively shot.