Lets examine the momentum of Wilder's last 2 opponents

[soul_survivor]

I've been calling Ortiz overhyped for years now. His one good performance was Jennings, although I've always held the stoppage to be too early. Then again, Jennings didnt complain so whatever.

Since then, he has looked worse with each and every outing and as I said long ago, has only two punches. Jab then power hand. Rinse repeat.

If Wilder goes rounds with this guy, which he will, we know he isn't worth ****.

I just cant wait for AJ to stop Wilder so all this American black hyping can stop.

[Mr Objecitivity]

Stiverne was 38 years old, was never any good to begin with, and had one poor performance vs Rossy after the Wilder loss.....and was somehow the WBC mandatory!??? Why has Wilder got praise for beating this BUM again?

Ortiz looked good, 3 years ago! he hasn't had a "fight" since Jennings (a B level opponent any way), beat up TT, then fought Allen and Scott (looking terrible), takes a year off and comes back and fights for 200 seconds against some guy that was 2-3 in his last 5 fights and never threw a punch, and somehow this guy is STILL the boogeyman of the division??!!!

How can any one justify these opponents for a world title? why are the WBC sanctioning these fights? it's a disgrace to boxing, the HW division and the WBC belt!

Old, inactive bums and people are praising this as some step-up for Wilder......I can't.....

1 . Sum win /ratios have absolutely nothing to do with head to head match's

2 . Same applies to Wilder .

IM sure Povetkins resume is one of the best on paper ,hes was around in the Klitchko era and has racked up some decent wins overall, im also as sure if Ortiz was on it that Povetkin would have taken an L .

Ortiz is not fighting Povetkins resume just like hes not fighting Wilders ,he HIMSELF is fighting Wilder and it will be by far either ones biggest win .

Povetkin is NOT young so that is speculation ,bc its not possible to determine . Povetkin years ago struggled with Huck , so would have being younger be an advantage ? Thats speculation bc some of his best wins have been after Klitchko .

The eye test is not as speculative bc it is something possible NOW that can be applied to form an educated opinion bc you are comparing the only 2 who are actually fighting .

Unlike mashing up numbers all together of combined wins and losses of who their opponents fought to detemine who has the advantage which is meaningless and unrealistic.

EYE TEST
EX: Malik Scott

Clearly out classed , Clearly knocked down multiple times ,mostly out of fear , and most of all CLEARLY didnt want to be in there so avoided to fight by not fighting all together .

CONCLUSION : The fight hasnt determined anything for or against Ortiz other than Malik was not going to win under any circumstances.



WIN / LOSS METHOD
EX : Will vs Jimmy

Wills opponents have a 250 / 100 wins to loses .

Jimmys opponents have a 280 / 180 wins to loses .


Jimmy has 30 more wins but his opponents have lost alot more .

Will has less wins but his opponents have lost less .

Will and Jimmy are going to fight eachother ,Jimmy has never lost but Will has fought the better opponents . Everyone says Jimmy will win bc hes overall better .

CONCLUSION : Mashing numbers to determine outcomes are flawed .

Resumes may not necessarily contribute to the outcome of a head to head match up. However, resume tells us how proven one boxer is, compared to another. As such, Alexander Povetkin is far more proven against BETTER LEVEL OF OPPOSITION than Deontay Wilder or Luis Ortiz are.

A boxer who is more proven against better level of opposition is the one I make favorite against another boxer who is only proven against lesser level of opposition. Alexander Povetkin is more proven against better level of opposition than Wilder or Ortiz. therefore, I make Povetkin the favorite.

The reason for this is because, until someone shows that they can be successful against opponents at a high enough level using their style, then there exists no proof and therefore no reason to believe that a boxer can be successful using their style against another boxer who has fought far better level of opposition more frequently.

If you want to use a method to determine who would win between Alexander Povetkin and Luis Ortiz that is the least speculative, something that is even less speculative than the supposed 'eye test' you're referring to, then you can go by the only head to head match / matches they had against each other and Alexander Povetkin has already defeated Luis Ortiz whilst the contrary hasn't occurred yet. Thus, further reason again why Povetkin should be the favorite.

So there already exists 2 favorable and advantageous reasons why Povetkin should be favorite against Ortiz:

1) Povetkin has already defeated Ortiz whilst Ortiz has not.

2) Povetkin has proven himself successful and effective against better level of opposition more frequently.

And if you're going to criticize Alexander Povetkin for his performance against a previously UN-KO'ed opponent in Andriy Rudenko, then how does it make sense to also not equally criticize Luis Ortiz for his equally good / bad performance against Malik Scott? Otherwise, you just expose yourself being bias.

As for Deontay Wilder, he has never fought anybody with the style of Povetkin and survived. The only time he did was in the amateurs against Evgeny Romanov who he got knocked out by in 3 rounds.

Alexander Povetkin has had over 300 pro + amateur bouts and has only once seen the canvas legitimately against arguably the most powerful puncher of all time in Wladimir Klitschko. On the other hand, the same can't be said for Wilder who has been dropped and stopped by opponents far inferior to Povetkin.

Luis Ortiz has a better chance of beating Povetkin but to say he would 'play with him' is something I find utterly ridiculous. Ortiz might be able to beat him now, but it won't be a walk in the park. Povetkin is highly experienced with a deep boxing pedigree.

[juggernaut666]

Resumes may not necessarily contribute to the outcome of a head to head match up. However, resume tells us how proven one boxer is, compared to another. As such, Alexander Povetkin is far more proven against BETTER LEVEL OF OPPOSITION than Deontay Wilder or Luis Ortiz are.

A boxer who is more proven against better level of opposition is the one I make favorite against another boxer who is only proven against lesser level of opposition. Alexander Povetkin is more proven against better level of opposition than Wilder or Ortiz. therefore, I make Povetkin the favorite.

The reason for this is because, until someone shows that they can be successful against opponents at a high enough level using their style, then there exists no proof and therefore no reason to believe that a boxer can be successful using their style against another boxer who has fought far better level of opposition more frequently.

If you want to use a method to determine who would win between Alexander Povetkin and Luis Ortiz that is the least speculative, something that is even less speculative than the supposed 'eye test' you're referring to, then you can go by the only head to head match / matches they had against each other and Alexander Povetkin has already defeated Luis Ortiz whilst the contrary hasn't occurred yet. Thus, further reason again why Povetkin should be the favorite.

So there already exists 2 favorable and advantageous reasons why Povetkin should be favorite against Ortiz:

1) Povetkin has already defeated Ortiz whilst Ortiz has not.

2) Povetkin has proven himself successful and effective against better level of opposition more frequently.

And if you're going to criticize Alexander Povetkin for his performance against a previously UN-KO'ed opponent in Andriy Rudenko, then how does it make sense to also not equally criticize Luis Ortiz for his equally good / bad performance against Malik Scott? Otherwise, you just expose yourself being bias.

As for Deontay Wilder, he has never fought anybody with the style of Povetkin and survived. The only time he did was in the amateurs against Evgeny Romanov who he got knocked out by in 3 rounds.

Alexander Povetkin has had over 300 pro + amateur bouts and has only once seen the canvas legitimately against arguably the most powerful puncher of all time in Wladimir Klitschko. On the other hand, the same can't be said for Wilder who has been dropped and stopped by opponents far inferior to Povetkin.

Luis Ortiz has a better chance of beating Povetkin but to say he would 'play with him' is something I find utterly ridiculous. Ortiz might be able to beat him now, but it won't be a walk in the park. Povetkin is highly experienced with a deep boxing pedigree.

Povetkin would be no more or less a proven harder opponent for Ortiz than Wilder .

I would say less bc Wilder has better movements than Povetkin and his 6'7 body can avoid being close range and he himself has a 84 inch reach . I also see a major flaw in Povetkin that signals a punch is coming , a tall fighter with fast reflexes is simply going to have to just take a step back to get out of range .

I actually favor Wilder over Ortiz bc of this reason but even a Ortiz loss to Wilder has no bearing on an Ortiz vs Povetkin match .

Theres no fight to suggest that Povetkin is going to improve at this point anyway bc Povetkin is inconsistant throughout his career . You just dont go by wins and losses ,you go by performance .

Jennings is as good as any Povetkin win in recent years , theres no fight to suggest Ortiz has declined unlike Povetkin .


Povetkin has NEVER defeated Ortiz .

And would have as much relevanceas Razor Ruddock defeating Lennox Lewis ! lol


"As for Deontay Wilder, he has never fought anybody with the style of Povetkin and survived. The only time he did was in the amateurs against Evgeny Romanov who he got knocked out by in 3 rounds. "

This would be a more difficult fight to determine style wise however looking at Povetkins last fight ,its clear he has a harder time punching up . Comparing the two recent performance ,i wouldn't put Povetkin as the favorite , Wilder is a unknown factor and last true relevant win was 2014 against Takam.

Thats FOUR years ago ,his other fights have actually proven the opposite with Rudenko, Wach and Hammer .

Comparing either Ortiz or Wilder to Povetkin .....


His only dominant wins from the 2015 point are .....

1 . Perez . Not actually a big HW / Now Cruiserweight .

2 .Duhaupas who actually went into the fight with no preparation that day Povetkin s opponent pulled out .

Im not really seeing the great level you are reffering to of winning high performance fights .


In reality you actually have to go on his BEST win which is Takam a little over 3 years ago and Ortiz who defeated Jennings a little over 2 years ago .


Again this means little bc we are comparing only Povetkin and Ortiz . Ortiz who has rarely lost rnds has 2 inches of height, NINE inches of reach and himself has amatuer experience .

The one major thing you are ignoring is Povetkin has only fought one true power puncher in his 34 fights and that was Klitchko .

This is important bc he is giving up about or almost 20 pounds to Ortiz and he CAN punch and is very accurate .

Adding all the actual intangables that apply , i dont see Povetkin being favorite here with Ortiz .

[Mr Objecitivity]

Povetkin would be no more or less a proven harder opponent for Ortiz than Wilder .

I would say less bc Wilder has better movements than Povetkin and his 6'7 body can avoid being close range and he himself has a 84 inch reach . I also see a major flaw in Povetkin that signals a punch is coming , a tall fighter with fast reflexes is simply going to have to just take a step back to get out of range .

I actually favor Wilder over Ortiz bc of this reason but even a Ortiz loss to Wilder has no bearing on an Ortiz vs Povetkin match .

Theres no fight to suggest that Povetkin is going to improve at this point anyway bc Povetkin is inconsistant throughout his career . You just dont go by wins and losses ,you go by performance .

Jennings is as good as any Povetkin win in recent years , theres no fight to suggest Ortiz has declined unlike Povetkin .


Povetkin has NEVER defeated Ortiz .

And would have as much relevanceas Razor Ruddock defeating Lennox Lewis ! lol


"As for Deontay Wilder, he has never fought anybody with the style of Povetkin and survived. The only time he did was in the amateurs against Evgeny Romanov who he got knocked out by in 3 rounds. "

This would be a more difficult fight to determine style wise however looking at Povetkins last fight ,its clear he has a harder time punching up . Comparing the two recent performance ,i wouldn't put Povetkin as the favorite , Wilder is a unknown factor and last true relevant win was 2014 against Takam.

Thats FOUR years ago ,his other fights have actually proven the opposite with Rudenko, Wach and Hammer .

Comparing either Ortiz or Wilder to Povetkin .....


His only dominant wins from the 2015 point are .....

1 . Perez . Not actually a big HW / Now Cruiserweight .

2 .Duhaupas who actually went into the fight with no preparation that day Povetkin s opponent pulled out .

Im not really seeing the great level you are reffering to of winning high performance fights .


In reality you actually have to go on his BEST win which is Takam a little over 3 years ago and Ortiz who defeated Jennings a little over 2 years ago .


Again this means little bc we are comparing only Povetkin and Ortiz . Ortiz who has rarely lost rnds has 2 inches of height, NINE inches of reach and himself has amatuer experience .

The one major thing you are ignoring is Povetkin has only fought one true power puncher in his 34 fights and that was Klitchko .

This is important bc he is giving up about or almost 20 pounds to Ortiz and he CAN punch and is very accurate .

Adding all the actual intangables that apply , i dont see Povetkin being favorite here with Ortiz .

Here are the ACTUAL FACTS:

1) Alexander Povetkin has the better amateur accomplishments than Luis Ortiz because he has won more major champion gold medals and medals in general (Povetkin has an Olympic gold whilst Ortiz does not).

2) Alexander Povetkin has the better professional boxing accomplishments because his resume is statistically proven to be better.

3) Alexander Povetkin has already defeated Luis Ortiz at least once in the amateurs whilst Ortiz hasn't.

Thus, Povetkin has proven more that he can use his style more effectively and successfully at the top level whilst with Ortiz, there's less proof and more guess work / speculation. So you can speculate about 'longer reach and height advantage' all you want but Ortiz has never shown he can be successful with those supposed advantages against an opponent at the caliber of Povetkin. And his proof at the top level is less than Povetkin. Luis Ortiz only defeated Bryant Jennings and that's one of his only top wins where he proved himself at that level whilst Povetkin has defeated many more opponents of that caliber. In the pros and in the amateurs. Thus, Povetkin is more proven at the top level and is more likely to win as a result.

As for Alexander Povetkin being 'inconsistent'. I'd like to know what your definition of 'inconsistent' is. Considering Alexander Povetkin is one of the most accomplished amateur heavyweights of all time. Is probably the greatest Russian heavyweights of all time. And has the second best resume of the last decade in the heavyweight division and has won every single bout, bar one to arguably the greatest heavyweight of all time who still had to foul his way to victory. That to me, is anything but 'inconsistent' and he is more consistent and less inconsistent compared to someone like Evander Holyfield who happens to be the very definition of what constitutes an 'inconsistent' boxer.

Alexander Povetkin's win over Luis Ortiz in the amateurs may have as much relevance as Razor Ruddock beating Lennox Lewis in the amateurs.

OR


it might have as much relevance as:

George Groves beating Degale in the amateurs and pros.

Shane Mosley beating De La Hoya in the amateurs and pros too.

Styles make fights, and fights make styles.

Alexander Pov couldn't miss with the right hand when facing a 30lb lighter and more mobile Ortiz in the amateurs, you think he'd find it harder landing on the bigger and slower one of today? You think Ortiz would be able to eat up all those big right hands like he did in their amateur fight if they were wearing little gloves and no headgear? Alexander Pov dropped Ortiz on his big Cuban batty 30 seconds into their fight. Easy work. :deal

Styles make fights, and fights make styles. It is what it is. :deal

Alexander Pov>>>Luis Ortiz.


And if you want to use the standard of: 'not losing rounds' as evidence of Luis Ortiz's superiority over Alexander Povetkin somehow. Then let's apply the same standard to Alexander Povetkin as well.

Since you're constantly going by recent performances. Let's analyze Povetkin's last 5 bouts:

1) Christian Hammer: Didn't lose a single round and won a shutout unanimous decision.

2) Andriy Rudenko: Again, didn't lose a single round and won a shutout unanimous decision.

3) Johan Duhapas: Won every round until he knocked Duhapas out cold in the 6th round.

4) Mariusz Wach: Only lost the first round and won 11 rounds out of 12.

5) Mike Perez: Knocked Perez out in the first round without losing a single round.


Thus, judging by recent performances. Alexander Povetkin has proven he is just as good at winning rounds as Luis Ortiz. In 5 bouts, he only lost one round. Which is no worse than what Luis Ortiz has shown.

And considering he beat every one of his last 5 opponents whilst losing only ONE freaking round, how the hell can you come to the conclusion that Povetkin has a harder time punching up?

How many power punchers has Luis Ortiz faced until today? Did he face any more power punchers than Povetkin? So why the need to bring up that Povetkin has only faced one power puncher in Wladimir Klitschko?

Of course, there exists no other power puncher like Wladimir Klitschko because he quite possibly is the most powerful puncher in history and the fact that Povetkin managed to survive, is a testament to his punch resistance and toughness whilst Ortiz's own punch resistance and toughness has never been tested in the same manner.

Simply put, Povetkin > Luis Ortiz in every meaningful way.

As for Alexander Povetkin vs Deontay Wilder. Deontay Wilder has not been tested much at the elite level either. Ergo, I again go with the more proven boxer in Alexander Povetkin and favor him to win.

And if you want to claim Mike Perez is a cruiser weight. Then so are Alexander Povetkin and Luis Ortiz (if they lost extra / additional fat from their body). Truth is, Mike Perez might be a cruiser weight now, but he was every bit of a heavyweight back then when he faced Povetkin as Bryant Jennings is currently or any other heavyweight is currently. Mike Perez was previously UN-KO'ed when he faced Alexander Povetkin and he faced many other heavyweights but only Povetkin managed to KO Perez. So the Perez victory is just as good as any single victory Ortiz has had so far in his pro career.

[juggernaut666]

Here are the ACTUAL FACTS:

1) Alexander Povetkin has the better amateur accomplishments than Luis Ortiz because he has won more major champion gold medals and medals in general (Povetkin has an Olympic gold whilst Ortiz does not).

2) Alexander Povetkin has the better professional boxing accomplishments because his resume is statistically proven to be better.

3) Alexander Povetkin has already defeated Luis Ortiz at least once in the amateurs whilst Ortiz hasn't.

Thus, Povetkin has proven more that he can use his style more effectively and successfully at the top level whilst with Ortiz, there's less proof and more guess work / speculation. So you can speculate about 'longer reach and height advantage' all you want but Ortiz has never shown he can be successful with those supposed advantages against an opponent at the caliber of Povetkin. And his proof at the top level is less than Povetkin. Luis Ortiz only defeated Bryant Jennings and that's one of his only top wins where he proved himself at that level whilst Povetkin has defeated many more opponents of that caliber. In the pros and in the amateurs. Thus, Povetkin is more proven at the top level and is more likely to win as a result.

As for Alexander Povetkin being 'inconsistent'. I'd like to know what your definition of 'inconsistent' is. Considering Alexander Povetkin is one of the most accomplished amateur heavyweights of all time. Is probably the greatest Russian heavyweights of all time. And has the second best resume of the last decade in the heavyweight division and has won every single bout, bar one to arguably the greatest heavyweight of all time who still had to foul his way to victory. That to me, is anything but 'inconsistent' and he is more consistent and less inconsistent compared to someone like Evander Holyfield who happens to be the very definition of what constitutes an 'inconsistent' boxer.

Alexander Povetkin's win over Luis Ortiz in the amateurs may have as much relevance as Razor Ruddock beating Lennox Lewis in the amateurs.

OR


it might have as much relevance as:

George Groves beating Degale in the amateurs and pros.

Shane Mosley beating De La Hoya in the amateurs and pros too.

Styles make fights, and fights make styles.

Alexander Pov couldn't miss with the right hand when facing a 30lb lighter and more mobile Ortiz in the amateurs, you think he'd find it harder landing on the bigger and slower one of today? You think Ortiz would be able to eat up all those big right hands like he did in their amateur fight if they were wearing little gloves and no headgear? Alexander Pov dropped Ortiz on his big Cuban batty 30 seconds into their fight. Easy work. :deal

Styles make fights, and fights make styles. It is what it is. :deal

Alexander Pov>>>Luis Ortiz.


And if you want to use the standard of: 'not losing rounds' as evidence of Luis Ortiz's superiority over Alexander Povetkin somehow. Then let's apply the same standard to Alexander Povetkin as well.

Since you're constantly going by recent performances. Let's analyze Povetkin's last 5 bouts:

1) Christian Hammer: Didn't lose a single round and won a shutout unanimous decision.

2) Andriy Rudenko: Again, didn't lose a single round and won a shutout unanimous decision.

3) Johan Duhapas: Won every round until he knocked Duhapas out cold in the 6th round.

4) Mariusz Wach: Only lost the first round and won 11 rounds out of 12.

5) Mike Perez: Knocked Perez out in the first round without losing a single round.


Thus, judging by recent performances. Alexander Povetkin has proven he is just as good at winning rounds as Luis Ortiz. In 5 bouts, he only lost one round. Which is no worse than what Luis Ortiz has shown.

And considering he beat every one of his last 5 opponents whilst losing only ONE freaking round, how the hell can you come to the conclusion that Povetkin has a harder time punching up?

How many power punchers has Luis Ortiz faced until today? Did he face any more power punchers than Povetkin? So why the need to bring up that Povetkin has only faced one power puncher in Wladimir Klitschko?

Of course, there exists no other power puncher like Wladimir Klitschko because he quite possibly is the most powerful puncher in history and the fact that Povetkin managed to survive, is a testament to his punch resistance and toughness whilst Ortiz's own punch resistance and toughness has never been tested in the same manner.

Simply put, Povetkin > Luis Ortiz in every meaningful way.

As for Alexander Povetkin vs Deontay Wilder. Deontay Wilder has not been tested much at the elite level either. Ergo, I again go with the more proven boxer in Alexander Povetkin and favor him to win.

And if you want to claim Mike Perez is a cruiser weight. Then so are Alexander Povetkin and Luis Ortiz (if they lost extra / additional fat from their body). Truth is, Mike Perez might be a cruiser weight now, but he was every bit of a heavyweight back then when he faced Povetkin as Bryant Jennings is currently or any other heavyweight is currently. Mike Perez was previously UN-KO'ed when he faced Alexander Povetkin and he faced many other heavyweights but only Povetkin managed to KO Perez. So the Perez victory is just as good as any single victory Ortiz has had so far in his pro career.

I was waiting untill the Ortiz fight was over to not say anything on this thread .....well there you go , now you know ! This is clearly going to be a continued pretzel twist no matter what ex . i give to the actual match ....

Your also telling me the thick , older Ortiz could be a cruiser weight like the 5"10 Perez ? O.K im done here !

[juggernaut666]

I can name over 5 that are more deserving and active/not 38. GTFO you casual.

If you think Ortiz is any good you haven't been paying attention, he has never fought any one and has looked like sheat for 3 years.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Oh BOY!!!!!!

[Kezzer]

Ignoring all the responses.

Stiverne - completely agree he should have been no where near a shot. Infact he proved it by turning up completely unfit / lack of training for a world title shot. Who does that? Clearly only came back for a payday.

Ortiz , I agree with your logic on how he was inactive , had been poor recently, etc. However this wasn’t a mandatory fight, it was a voluntary - and I think it’s a much fairer defence than majority of other voluntary’s wilder has fought.

[daggum]

deontay "the 38 year old killer" wilder

[daggum]

obese old men beware! what a resume!

[satiev1]

What are you basing this on? A fight vs Jennings? you make bold predictions about Ortiz on your eye-test alone, he has never proven himself to be any where near Povetkin's level.

Ortiz looked good 3 years ago, now 3 years later, after fighting TT, Allen and Scott and looking like sheat, then taking a year off and coming back and fighting 200 seconds against my dad, you claim he is the No3 HW in the world!?

You're a lunatic

Povetkin will put ortiz in a coma.