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

[JRB123]

When was Hearn supposed to make the fight ******? Joshua won the WBA title and then was on the shelf unable to fight anyone until Klitchko decided to retire. By which point Ortiz had already signed with Haymon.

Ortiz lost his spot as soon as he signed the Wilder fight. Win or lose he would have been no longer mandatory. Ortiz chose the easier fight against Wilder rather than wait for a massive payday against Joshua.

Ask those people why Ortiz hadn't had anything lined up after his win over Tony Thompson when he was supposed to take part in the WBA tournament.

[Kezzer]

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.

I know you love to accuse others of lying all the times - it’s what you do on this site more than anything else. (Would love to know how you think people would believe you get paid to actually spend your time trolling people lol).

But the history is as follows for clarity and you can see why the conversations have differed; bringing non-stories into the conversation are not relevant because they happen all the time. I could probably find a story of David Haye saying he would be the opponent if klitschko fell through if I wanted.

August 2016 - Joshua confirms date of defence. at that time Pulev, Stiverne, Parker and (hughie) fury were all possibilities. Klitschko was also named but still (currently) tied up to fury. When that fight was officially cancelled within days klitschko and Joshua were discussions.

The WBA was requested to be on the line by klitschko but time was held up significantly due to the legal stuff going on with Browne who was next in line for a challenge for the title- however both Joshua and klitschko were openly training to fight for each other. There was a stage however where it looked possible klitschko would fight Browne first then take on Joshua, however ultimately an injury forced the issue anyway.
The WBA confirmed in December (I believe before Joshua’s molina fight) it would now be sanctioned.

In the mean Price and Jennings had become front runners to replace klitschko in the defence. Ultimately it was Molina who offered the best financial deal to Hearn and he got the nod in front of them both.



And for clarity of those who insist Joshua ducked Ortiz.

After the klitschko initial fight Hearn approached both ibf and wba to request allowance for a rematch, both bodies had made mandatory requests - Ortiz and pulev. Initially it appeared to that to do the rematch at least one of the belts would have to be vacated.
The IBF eventually agreed however set a couple of conditions; 1) fight must take place on or before 2nd December 2) pulev must be next fight 3) if klitschko fight doesn’t happen , pulev must be next fight.
The WBA agreed without any such stipulations. Therefore when klitschko pulled out, Hearn was very open in saying Joshua would fight pulev first and then take on Ortiz afterwards.

Since then of course, Ortiz chose to fight wilder (removing himself from mandatory) and ultimately failed a drugs test. Pulev then got injured making way for Takam. Therefore it’s a difficult arguement to make that Joshua ducked ortiz, he would have had to vacate belts to do so, and in reality Ortiz would have been fighting Joshua now had he wanted to be.

[N/A]

If that was part of Hayman's deal, then fair enough. AJ wouldn't have fought him otherwise.

I agree.

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.

I've never had a problem with that fight. I have a problem with someone saying he's a total bum tomato can when Wilder fights him, but not a peep when AJ fights him, even though Wilder knocked him out first.

When Wilder fought him after 30 something fights, there is no excuse.

Really? Because I can think of two very legitimate excuses.

#1 - Wilder started boxing so late in life, and his amateur career was so short, that he needed to be brought along slower before seeking his first title shot.

#2 - Wilder was knocking out so many of his opponents so quickly that he needed more fights just to get rounds under his belt. If you're knocking everybody out in two minutes, you need fifteen fights just to get 10 full rounds under your belt.

So those two factors really should be taken into consideration when judging how many fights Wilder has had. How else was he supposed to get experience?

[N/A]

I know you love to accuse others of lying all the times - it’s what you do on this site more than anything else.

No, I don't love it. I would much prefer that people just not lie. I am constantly exposing people's lies on this site, but don't blame me for pointing out the falsehoods, blame others for posting so much false information.

When Jughead claims Stiverne was #5 when Wilder fought him in January of 2015, and to prove it, he posts the ratings from September 2015, what do you want me to say? He's clearly lying. Am I not supposed to call him on it?

Would love to know how you think people would believe you get paid to actually spend your time trolling people

Couldn't care less whether people believe me. My job is to post the truth. Whether people believe me is up to them. I have never objected to anybody who doubts something I say. What I object to is people definitively declaring something they couldn't possibly know, especially when they're 100% wrong.

August 2016 - Joshua confirms date of defence. at that time Pulev, Stiverne, Parker and (hughie) fury were all possibilities.

First of all, I don't know why you're defending Jughead when he's purposely posting wrong dates to troll the community.

These were Jughead's words:

"Joshua announced he was fighting Klitchko in August 2016"

We both know that's a lie. Whether you're an AJ fan, a Wilder fan, or a Fres Oquendo fan, we both know that's a lie. Don't defend that idiot. He posts blatant lies to **** up the community and we both know that.

As for Pulev, Stiverne and Hughie, they were NEVER in the running. Ever.

Hearn may have said that publicly. But he's a promoter. He says a lot of things. His job is to lie.

But contractually, AJ had to fight a Haymon fighter next unless he was making a mandatory defense or fighting in a unification.

In June 2016, we already know AJ is scheduled to make a mandatory against Parker in November.

If you want to list guys publicly claimed as possibilities -- fine. But if we're talking actual possibilities, your list is false. Who is publicly claimed as possible and who is actually possible are often two very different things in this business.

[JRB123]

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.

Exactly. By the time AJ fought Klitschko, he had the IBF title for a year. He had to obligate the IBF mandatory or get stripped.

It humors me that so many people choose to ignore that.

[slimPickings]

When was Hearn supposed to make the fight ******? Joshua won the WBA title and then was on the shelf unable to fight anyone until Klitchko decided to retire. By which point Ortiz had already signed with Haymon.

Ortiz lost his spot as soon as he signed the Wilder fight. Win or lose he would have been no longer mandatory. Ortiz chose the easier fight against Wilder rather than wait for a massive payday against Joshua.

Yours truly is hardly privy to these behind the scenes matter.
Maybe you are.

I just find it hard to believe that Ortiz will forgo a huge payday against Joshua to take the "easier" fight against Wilder.

You cannot be serious.

[JRB123]

#1 - Wilder started boxing so late in life, and his amateur career was so short, that he needed to be brought along slower before seeking his first title shot.

#2 - Wilder was knocking out so many of his opponents so quickly that he needed more fights just to get rounds under his belt. If you're knocking everybody out in two minutes, you need fifteen fights just to get 10 full rounds under your belt.

So those two factors really should be taken into consideration when judging how many fights Wilder has had. How else was he supposed to get experience?

I disagree.

He started in the amateurs at 19 years old. Not much of a gap from AJ who was 18 when he started.

While his amateur career lasted three years, he shouldn't be fighting guys like Harold Sconiers and Dan Alexander at that point of his pro career. He fought Owen Beck who was on a seven fight losing streak in his 23rd pro fight.

[juggernaut666]

About what?

About what sums it up here !

[N/A]

I disagree.

He started in the amateurs at 19 years old. Not much of a gap from AJ who was 18 when he started.

Congratulations to AJ. Maybe he's the greatest fighter that ever lived. Last I checked, out of 7 billion people on Earth, Finkel was free to bring Wilder along at whatever pace he thought was best for Wilder's development. I'm not aware of any contract stating that out of 7 billion people on Earth, Wilder's development must exactly match the pace of AJ.

But since AJ is so great, and Wilder sucks so much, AJ should fight him, make a ton of money, and take his belt.

[juggernaut666]

I agree.




I've never had a problem with that fight. I have a problem with someone saying he's a total bum tomato can when Wilder fights him, but not a peep when AJ fights him, even though Wilder knocked him out first.




Really? Because I can think of two very legitimate excuses.

#1 - Wilder started boxing so late in life, and his amateur career was so short, that he needed to be brought along slower before seeking his first title shot.

#2 - Wilder was knocking out so many of his opponents so quickly that he needed more fights just to get rounds under his belt. If you're knocking everybody out in two minutes, you need fifteen fights just to get 10 full rounds under your belt.

So those two factors really should be taken into consideration when judging how many fights Wilder has had. How else was he supposed to get experience?

Oh good another winner !

"Wilder was knocking out so many of his opponents so quickly that he needed more fights just to get rounds under his belt. "

Yea the division was so scarce he was left with David Long ,his 20th fight to Nick Firtha his 30th fight !

Yep thats why he wasnt getting rounds in you cracked the code ........