Tweet
You're essentially saying that Whyte is better than Takam because you like his aggressiveness and how he comes over the jab with his right. And you're saying my argument makes no sense? Takam's a proven quantity who's fought and been competitive against other proven quan******. We know he's not a world beater and we know he doesn't totally suck either. Whyte's an unknown. Maybe he's better, maybe he isn't, but no one can say for certain until he ups his level of competition. Price looked amazing until he ran into Thompson. Seth Mitchell had a lot of buzz until Banks took him out. We can look back now and say it was obvious they were busts, but Whyte hardly looks infallible himself (slow, poor conditioning, overcommitting, lacks defensive soundness, arm punching) and he's already been beaten so we know he's not impossible to KO. I'm not writing him off, but I'm certainly not going to make outrageous statements about him being better than a proven top level fighter until he actually gets a win under his belt that justifies that belief.
-
-
That was just an example. There are many other reasons I like him more. In general I just think DW is a better fighter, also bigger. I think he'd win if they fought. I also think AJ would beat Takam, he's also not faced or beaten as highly ranked guys as him. So what?
Tyson Fury had never fought anyone anywhere near Klitschko's caliber, yet still schooled him with absolute ease.
Takam is hardly a "proven top level" fighter anyway. He's proven not to be a top level fighter.
DW popped his shoulder in the second round where he rocked Joshua and took the round. After that, he had one arm.Comment
-
Its far too early for joshua. Unless he takes the wilder route to be a world champion. Takam and martin would be his stiverne, then he can just feast on and defend against bum after bum after bum.Comment
-
Chisora, Takam and Martin. That would be a great year for Joshua.Comment
-
So what? Well, it means he's not proven yet, which is what I've been saying all along. I'm not issuing a judgement on his qualities as a fighter, since that would be little more than a guess, and I make it a rule not to big someone up until they have a few decent wins under their belt. If you think Whyte's a better fighter than Takam that's your call. It's certainly not out of the realms of possibility that a big hard hitting guy like that could make waves in the future. But he needs to get the results first.
Who are his biggest names? AJ, then who? Minto? Nascimento? Costa Junior? Takam's got Povetkin, Perez and Thompson on his resume, who whatever you might think of them are a mile better than anyone Whyte's ever beaten.
Like I said, I'm not claiming Whyte can't ever be a big dog in the division, just that he hasn't proven it yet, as Tyson hadn't prior to fighting Wlad. If Whyte beats Deontay Wilder tomorrow then it's a different matter obviously.
Fury was considered a joke before he beat Wlad. Now anyone with a brain recognises him as the number one fighter on the planet. That's entirely down to the fact that he actually beat Wlad in the ring.
Top level as in top ten, not champion calibre obviously. He's around the level of Stiverne and Jennings, guys like that. I'd favour him to be competitive against a good number of current top ten fighters based on previous results
I know, which is why I'm not writing him off on that one loss alone. But I was honestly never impressed with him before that, and predicted that AJ would wipe him out based on stylistic factors alone. Now that he's actually done so we can categorically say that AJ is the superior fighter. And to be honest, given how the first round was going, I don't see there being any real reason for a rematch.Comment
Comment