Comments Thread For: DiBella: Hearn Wouldn't Make Joshua-Ortiz; Don't Question Wilder

[juggernaut666]

then why did you lie about stiverne? you said he was tbrb #5 when he fought wilder, and to prove it, you posted rankings from eight months after he lost the fight.

3/ 4 / 5 take your pick ****** .....in the BIGGER scheme of things you rated Stiverne over Klitchko bc your odd ball rankings didnt rank Klitchko when AJ fought him !


YOU believe Stiverne WAS number TWO in the WORLD bc the WBC said so ??????

[Sid-Knee]

It's actually Klitschko who was the replacement originally. AJ was fighting in December regardless. Molina was the likely opponent. Klitschko's fight with Fury fell through, so he was going to rush and do the December date that was already scheduled. Only to wind up injured, causing Hearn to go back to his original plan.

I'm not criticizing the Molina defense and didn't criticize it at the time. But you can't say he's a bum when Wilder fights him, and then after Wilder knocks him out, then AJ fights him and he's not a bum. We need some consistency here.

You're a slimy little sucker aren't you?

Molina wasn't the original plan at all. You just made that up like you do a lot of the time because you hate to be proven wrong.

Any evidence to back up your claim?

[Vinnykin]

Didin't Hearn sign Ortiz, and then give him 2 bums to fight to look good, but then Ortiz stunk the joint out in both fights and a fight with Joshua was literally not sellable to the British public.... lol

[N/A]

You're a slimy little sucker aren't you?

Not at all. I just follow the sport for a living, have done so for decades, and frequently speak with many of the parties discussed on this site. So my perspective is going to be different from fans who just read stuff on the internet.

Molina wasn't the original plan at all. You just made that up like you do a lot of the time because you hate to be proven wrong.

Yes he was. He wasn't a definite, but he was the leading candidate of a very very short list. I didn't make that up at all and I'm very happy to admit when I'm wrong. Just the other day someone reminded me that I posted an old attendance record. I immediately admitted I was wrong and apologized. I have no problem being wrong. It just doesn't happen very often because I don't make declarative statements about things I couldn't possibly know like so many here do. But I can make a mistake like anybody else, forget about something, etc. If my information is ever incorrect, I'm very happy to apologize and admit the mistake.

Any evidence to back up your claim?

Well I'm certainly not going to compromise any business relationships if that's what you're asking. When Haymon negotiated the deal to sell the IBF title to Joshua, part of the deal was that his first two defenses would have to be against Haymon fighters. That is how Breazeale and Molina got their title shots.

Before Fury-Klitschko II was canceled, Joshua was scheduled to fight in November against Joseph Parker in a mandatory defense. Which under the terms of the arrangement with Haymon, was allowed. Haymon's second option would carry over until after the Parker defense. When Fury-Klitschko II falls apart, Parker pulls out to pursue a vacant title, delaying Joshua's next defense until December. It is at that point that Haymon's 2nd option is scheduled to be next.

Then Joshua-Klitschko becomes a possibility for December and under the terms of the arrangement with Haymon, if that fight is a unification, it also can skip ahead of Haymon's second option. While Klitschko was publicly blamed for only being willing to fight if the WBA was on the line, what wasn't being reported was that Hearn also needed the WBA on the line in order for that fight to be able to skip ahead of the fight Haymon was owed.

Before Klitsckho is injured, before that fight is delayed, Molina is already saying he's been contacted about coming to the UK.

http://www.skysports.com/boxing/news/12040/10624536/eric-molina-believes-he-is-heading-to-britain-and-is-happy-to-fight-either-david-price-or-anthony-joshua

This is because Hearn has him on stand by if the Klitschko fight doesn't pan out with the WBA, because Molina was already Haymon's opponent of choice before the Klitschko fight became possible.

It's no coincidence that the day Klitschko is injured, Molina is already talking about getting the title shot:

http://www.skysports.com/boxing/news/12040/10632716/eric-molina-hopes-to-be-handed-a-shot-at-ibf-champion-anthony-joshua-this-week

But if you don't know that AJ owed two Haymon fighters title shots in exchange for getting the Charles Martin fight, then you might not know that Molina was in the cards all along. He was not some last second replacement opponent on two weeks notice. He was always going to be the guy if AJ wasn't fighting a mandatory or a unification. It was contractual due to Haymon's options.

[N/A]

3/ 4 / 5 take your pick ******

No no no. You said I was lying about him being #3. You said he was #5. To prove he was #5, you posted rankings from 8 months later and then talked about how ****** I was. But you were the one that didn't know the difference between January and September. So don't try to twist things now. You went on and on trashing me, only for it to turn out that you were 100% wrong and posted false evidence. You should apologize.

YOU believe Stiverne WAS number TWO in the WORLD bc the WBC said so ??????

Nope. WBC said he was champion. ESPN & Ring Magazine said he was #2. This has been explained to you repeatedly. You're just lying over and over hoping to confuse people. Just like when you posted the false rankings from 8 months later.

[N/A]

Joshua announced he was fighting Klitchko in August 2016 , TWO months AFTER the Breazeale fight .

This is another lie. Fury vs. Klitschko II wasn't even canceled until late September, so how could Joshua vs. Klitschko have been announced in August 2016?

Joshua was planning to fight Parker in November 2016, something that was already known in June.

PROOF: https://www.boxingscene.com/anthony-...parker--106084

So how did Joshua announce a fight with Klitschko in August 2016 when he was already scheduled to fight Parker in November 2016?

Over and over and over, you get trapped in blatant lies.

[Sid-Knee]

Not at all. I just follow the sport for a living, have done so for decades, and frequently speak with many of the parties discussed on this site. So my perspective is going to be different from fans who just read stuff on the internet.




Yes he was. He wasn't a definite, but he was the leading candidate of a very very short list. I didn't make that up at all and I'm very happy to admit when I'm wrong. Just the other day someone reminded me that I posted an old attendance record. I immediately admitted I was wrong and apologized. I have no problem being wrong. It just doesn't happen very often because I don't make declarative statements about things I couldn't possibly know like so many here do. But I can make a mistake like anybody else, forget about something, etc. If my information is ever incorrect, I'm very happy to apologize and admit the mistake.




Well I'm certainly not going to compromise any business relationships if that's what you're asking. When Haymon negotiated the deal to sell the IBF title to Joshua, part of the deal was that his first two defenses would have to be against Haymon fighters. That is how Breazeale and Molina got their title shots.

Before Fury-Klitschko II was canceled, Joshua was scheduled to fight in November against Joseph Parker in a mandatory defense. Which under the terms of the arrangement with Haymon, was allowed. Haymon's second option would carry over until after the Parker defense. When Fury-Klitschko II falls apart, Parker pulls out to pursue a vacant title, delaying Joshua's next defense until December. It is at that point that Haymon's 2nd option is scheduled to be next.

Then Joshua-Klitschko becomes a possibility for December and under the terms of the arrangement with Haymon, if that fight is a unification, it also can skip ahead of Haymon's second option. While Klitschko was publicly blamed for only being willing to fight if the WBA was on the line, what wasn't being reported was that Hearn also needed the WBA on the line in order for that fight to be able to skip ahead of the fight Haymon was owed.

Before Klitsckho is injured, before that fight is delayed, Molina is already saying he's been contacted about coming to the UK.

http://www.skysports.com/boxing/news/12040/10624536/eric-molina-believes-he-is-heading-to-britain-and-is-happy-to-fight-either-david-price-or-anthony-joshua

This is because Hearn has him on stand by if the Klitschko fight doesn't pan out with the WBA, because Molina was already Haymon's opponent of choice before the Klitschko fight became possible.

It's no coincidence that the day Klitschko is injured, Molina is already talking about getting the title shot:

http://www.skysports.com/boxing/news/12040/10632716/eric-molina-hopes-to-be-handed-a-shot-at-ibf-champion-anthony-joshua-this-week

But if you don't know that AJ owed two Haymon fighters title shots in exchange for getting the Charles Martin fight, then you might not know that Molina was in the cards all along. He was not some last second replacement opponent on two weeks notice. He was always going to be the guy if AJ wasn't fighting a mandatory or a unification. It was contractual due to Haymon's options.

If that was part of Hayman's deal, then fair enough. AJ wouldn't have fought him otherwise. To be fair though, it was only his 18th fight and that's pretty much the kind of fight you have at that point in your career.

When Wilder fought him after 30 something fights, there is no excuse. Wilder had much better opponents available to him but chose him like he did all the other stiffs that he faced.

[miked85]

There's No lie here

[Sledgeweather17]

That's what I've been trying to tell you guys. He's damn right. He would have never made that Ortiz fight with Anthony Joshua even with a vacant WBA title at stake. Once again, Joshua took the path to least resistance by fighting Martin. Then Luis was the mandatory challenger for AJ's WBA belt, then he just so happen, to choose the easier opponent, in Kubret Pulev over King Kong Ortiz; However of course that was before Kubret was forced to pull out of that bout due to an injury.

Joshua didn't choose Kubrat Pulev, the IBF mandatory was due before the WBA mandatory.

This is common knowledge, and it's also common sense that he must fight the mandatory that is due first otherwise he ges stripped of his title.

But common sense is not common to all of us it seems, some of us (us as in you) seem not to possess it.

[hitking]

Who has the better resume Joshua or Wilder? Joshua has half the fights Wilder does. Wilder is the one that's fought bums and cherry picked. His first challenge is because his manager Haymon is forcing him.

Who has Wilder not fought that he should have?