Why did Jennings perform so much better vs Wlad than Pedvetkin?

[vaborikua2014]

Well the TS did a terrible job bc Klitchko looked better against Jennings by putting on a boxing lesson even with a point deduction as opposed to Povetkin who made it into a really rough fight for Klitchko .

As Ortiz ? I rank him highly H2H so this thread is ****** bc Klitchko would STILL dominate everyone not named Joshua !

Yup just like he dominated Fury 2 1/2 years ago.

[Mr Objecitivity]

You're argument is false!

For example:

Who is the better fighter between Eddie Chambers and Samuel Peter? Well, it's obviously Eddie Chambers because he beat Samuel Peter head to head.

But who performed better against Wladimir Klitschko? Obviously Samuel Peter, because Samuel Peter dropped Wladimir Klitschko thrice in the first fight and Wladimir Klitschko needed 2 fights (22 rounds in total) to finally KO Samuel Peter. Whereas Wladimir Klitschko didn't lose a single round against Eddie Chambers, suffered no knockdowns and managed to KO Chambers in one fight in just the 12th round.

Do you see how flawed your logic is? Having a better performance against one common opponent doesn't prove one is better than the other boxer. It's a small sample size. Just like how a boxer who has a 100% record with only one fight, isn't necessarily a more powerful puncher than someone who has 20 fights and has a lower KO percentage.

Both Povetkin and Bryant Jennings have one other common opponent in Mike Perez. So if Bryant Jennings is the better fighter, then why did he perform worse against Mike Perez than Povetkin? Since according to your logic, he shouldn't have.

Your entire argument falls apart here!

[Cutthroat]

It should be obvious but i'll explain it to you...

Wlad cheated against Povetkin by clinching the life out of him and leaning all his body weight on him when he got close. That was no boxing match.

Whereas with Jennings he kept it completely clean and gave him a boxing lesson.

Lasting longer against a fighter doesn't automatically make you the better fighter. Tony Tucker beat Buster Douglas but lost to Mike Tyson. And we all know what Douglas did to Tyson. Tucker got dominated by Lewis, but McCall knocked Lewis out and was beaten by Tucker. So yeah, what you're doing doesn't make any sense.

Pulev and Povetkin are clearly better fighters than Jennings and would clearly beat him if they were to fight.

Wlad was fouling constantly vs Jennings, he didn't get a point deduction until the 10th round. 116-111 on 2 judges scorecards is not a boxing lesson, it was a competitive fight. 119-104 however is a boxing lesson.

Jennings worked Wlad's body at will, he got in and out and avoided all of Wlad's power shots. Pedvetkin on the other hand showed 0 body work and kept rushing in over and over again, he's a very 1 dimensional brawler.

Marco Huck arguably beat Pedvetkin in his very 1st fight at HW, the same Huck that drew with Afolabi immediately afterwards, arguably losing to Afolabi before. The same Huck that got TKO'd by Cunningham years before as well, and after Pedvetkin getting stopped by Glowacki, Usyk, and out boxed by Briedis.

This logic makes 0 sense. How the hell does a guy who arguably lost to Marco Huck be regarded as an elite fighter?

[Cutthroat]

You're argument is false!

For example:

Who is the better fighter between Eddie Chambers and Samuel Peter? Well, it's obviously Eddie Chambers because he beat Samuel Peter head to head.

But who performed better against Wladimir Klitschko? Obviously Samuel Peter, because Samuel Peter dropped Wladimir Klitschko thrice in the first fight and Wladimir Klitschko needed 2 fights (22 rounds in total) to finally KO Samuel Peter. Whereas Wladimir Klitschko didn't lose a single round against Eddie Chambers, suffered no knockdowns and managed to KO Chambers in one fight in just the 12th round.

Do you see how flawed your logic is? Having a better performance against one common opponent doesn't prove one is better than the other boxer. It's a small sample size. Just like how a boxer who has a 100% record with only one fight, isn't necessarily a more powerful puncher than someone who has 20 fights and has a lower KO percentage.

Both Povetkin and Bryant Jennings have one other common opponent in Mike Perez. So if Bryant Jennings is the better fighter, then why did he perform worse against Mike Perez than Povetkin? Since according to your logic, he shouldn't have.

Your entire argument falls apart here!

Peter fought Wlad in '05, Wlad was only under Steward's tutelage for 1 year, there is a clear difference in styles between early Wlad & older Wlad which Steward had molded.

By '09 Peter was a shot fighter having been brutalized by the other Klit bro, Chambers still barely beat him by MD.

Robert Garcia said in an interview Perez showed up to their gym drunk (admitted alcoholic) a few weeks until the Pedvetkin fight. Garcia did not want to train him because he said Perez would make them look bad, still he picked him up and his theory was correct. Pedvetkin has yet to KO anyone else in the 1st round aside of maybe 1 other guy.

[dan_cov]

And why would Jennings get any credit, who has he beat? That bum Spilka? Don't make me laugh.

At the very best, Jennings is decent and no more. To prove you're a good fighter you have to beat a good fighter. And he clearly hasn't done that.

Undefeated Szpilka and Perez, Fedosov is solid. He gave Wladimir a tough fight (A much younger, better version than AJ fought) he gave Ortiz a test when nobody would even dare acknowledge he existed.
He gets zero credit yet who has Hughie Fury beat? Whose Dillian Shyte beat? Who have either of these duckers beat? They get credit yet don't have his resume have failed drug tests and ducked the hell out of guys Jennings dared to fight.
Why can't a good honest pro like Jennings get some credit? World beater? No but he's a solid fighter not afraid to challenge himself unlike most who get far more credit for what?

[Sid-Knee]

Wlad was fouling constantly vs Jennings, he didn't get a point deduction until the 10th round. 116-111 on 2 judges scorecards is not a boxing lesson, it was a competitive fight. 119-104 however is a boxing lesson.

Jennings worked Wlad's body at will, he got in and out and avoided all of Wlad's power shots. Pedvetkin on the other hand showed 0 body work and kept rushing in over and over again, he's a very 1 dimensional brawler.

Marco Huck arguably beat Pedvetkin in his very 1st fight at HW, the same Huck that drew with Afolabi immediately afterwards, arguably losing to Afolabi before. The same Huck that got TKO'd by Cunningham years before as well, and after Pedvetkin getting stopped by Glowacki, Usyk, and out boxed by Briedis.

This logic makes 0 sense. How the hell does a guy who arguably lost to Marco Huck be regarded as an elite fighter?

Haha, so you believe Jennings is on the same level or better than Povetkin?

I've remembered who you are. You think Wlad is better than Lennox Lewis and fought better fighters. I'll leave you alone because you're clearly a nutter with too much time on your hands.

Bye.

[Sid-Knee]

Undefeated Szpilka and Perez, Fedosov is solid. He gave Wladimir a tough fight (A much younger, better version than AJ fought) he gave Ortiz a test when nobody would even dare acknowledge he existed.
He gets zero credit yet who has Hughie Fury beat? Whose Dillian Shyte beat? Who have either of these duckers beat? They get credit yet don't have his resume have failed drug tests and ducked the hell out of guys Jennings dared to fight.
Why can't a good honest pro like Jennings get some credit? World beater? No but he's a solid fighter not afraid to challenge himself unlike most who get far more credit for what?

Spilka and Fedosov are complete bums. They're not even decent. Perez was a decent fighter until he fought Mago. Since then he's been finished so a win over him isn't even decent any more. Sorry, but Jennings has done absolutely nothing of substance. The 2 best fighters he fought clearly beat him. He isn't world class.

Fury and Whyte would beat the brakes off Jennings. Don't kid yourself. Fury would just give him a boxing lesson and win every round. Jennings would be more suited to Whyte but even then he does nothing more than win a couple of rounds before he's knocked out round about the 8th round.

So if you think that's worthy of credit, then we both have a very different way of judging fighters. Not for me, sorry.

[dan_cov]

Spilka and Fedosov are complete bums. They're not even decent. Perez was a decent fighter until he fought Mago. Since then he's been finished so a win over him isn't even decent any more. Sorry, but Jennings has done absolutely nothing of substance. The 2 best fighters he fought clearly beat him. He isn't world class.

Fury and Whyte would beat the brakes off Jennings. Don't kid yourself. Fury would just give him a boxing lesson and win every round. Jennings would be more suited to Whyte but even then he does nothing more than win a couple of rounds before he's knocked out round about the 8th round.

So if you think that's worthy of credit, then we both have a very different way of judging fighters. Not for me, sorry.

He even agreed to fight Parker instead they went with Whyte because its an easier fight.

Based on what? Whyte couldn't even convincingly beat a completely shot Chisora. They both stepped up to world level and was absolutely pathetic. Jennings fought better fighters and was at least competitive.

Hughie give him a boxing lesson lol I have to laugh when people talk like he's this masterboxer. He couldn't even win every round vs Fred Kassi ffs, looked for a way out and blamed his spotty back.

[Cutthroat]

Haha, so you believe Jennings is on the same level or better than Povetkin?

I've remembered who you are. You think Wlad is better than Lennox Lewis and fought better fighters. I'll leave you alone because you're clearly a nutter with too much time on your hands.

Bye.

Yes. I don't understand why that is hard to believe when Marco Huck in his 1st ever fight at HW arguably beat Pedvetkin proving he was on his level.

What exactly did Pedvetkin do vs Wlad that showed he was a world class fighter? What I saw in that ring was a 1 dimensional fighter with 0 body work rushing in like a bum.

And you've got it wrong, I never said Wlad beats Lewis, head to head I give Lewis the edge.

[Sid-Knee]

He even agreed to fight Parker instead they went with Whyte because its an easier fight.

Based on what? Whyte couldn't even convincingly beat a completely shot Chisora. They both stepped up to world level and was absolutely pathetic. Jennings fought better fighters and was at least competitive.

Hughie give him a boxing lesson lol I have to laugh when people talk like he's this masterboxer. He couldn't even win every round vs Fred Kassi ffs, looked for a way out and blamed his spotty back.

Parker chose Whyte because he's better, has a higher ranking, and it has a lot more money on the table. Saying he chose Whyte because Jennings is a better fighter is nothing but you being dishonest. Whyte is a much bigger fight for Parker. Jennings doesn't even come into it.

You have to admit that Chisora turned back the clock for that one. With all the trash talk from Whyte he lit a fire underneath Chisora. So the fight being close is neither here nor there.

I wouldn't say Hughie is a master boxer, but he is when compared to Jennings. I really wouldn't consider that a close fight on paper. Fury has got better, Jennings hasn't. Fury is only young so time is on his side to get better whereas Jennings is 33 so we've already seen his peak. My money would definitely be on him.