Comments Thread For: Deontay Wilder signs for comeback fight versus Curtis Harper

[MulaKO]

If I was a promoter, I wouldn't dare invest money in a Curtis Harper fight after that stunt he pulled with Efe.

There was a reason he did that
Was to protest against the promoter for tr chitty purse he was getting

[PunchyPotorff]

Harper is likely most famous for walking out of the Efe Ajagba fight back in '18... as the bell rang for round 1.
Obviously wilder is taking the easiest 'comeback' fight possible... but he's old and been going downhill for a
while now. He's massively rich unless he pizzed his $$ away... so he should just retire and be done with the sport.

[daggum]

Ortiz has a resume that reflects the same level of competition. And Ortiz did not falter... Watching Ortiz against Wilder he did not look like an old shot fighter... I go by empirical data. Also, Ortiz beat Martin when he was considered a decent heavyweight and fought Ruiz in a close fight. So the notion that there was some overriding difference in competition between who Joshua and who ortiz fought is NONSENSE. And every time you say "rank" it shows your ignorance. Ranking is subjective. What is real are things like: Both men fought Ruiz... Both me fought fighters considered top prospects, from the same pool of fighters, etc.

A fraud? You are an idiot. You take stock in subjective rankings and do not watch actual film showing skills, etc. Wilder has been before being shot, one of the harder punching heavyweights historically. Film confirms this, objective information which anyone can view... Take a gander sir! learn something!

no he doesnt. parker has beaten 3 guys in the top 3(ring) at the time of when he fought them or after in ruiz's case. ortiz has 0 of those wins.

empirical data...aka your eye test and what do you know the guy you are hyping up and defending is the best! do you ever cross reference your eye test data with other data? you do realize its easier to look better when you are fighting worse competition right? thats why we dont use the eye test because it can be deceiving and you have been deceived.

charles martin was not considered a decent heavyweight when he fought ortiz. what are you talking about??? he wasnt even highly thought of when joshua beat him but he certainly was not highly thought of after losing to adam kownacki 4 years before ortiz beat him! kownacki is great too right???

wait now you think ortiz is jsut as good as joshua? i was just comparing ortiz to parker but wow, you have gone to a new level of fandom psychosis. hey why dont you use your empirical eye test data to tell me who is better between ali and ortiz? wait thats different...how? ali has a better resume than ortiz does he not? well so does parker.

ok so the real things to go on are parker beat wilder and ruiz and ortiz lost to both of them...and yet you still think ortiz is better?

your eye test is subjective. thats the most hilarious think about all this. your entire defense of wilder and ortiz is based on what you think of them, and you have to ignore the rankings which were reached based on the fighters fighting each other and a consensus saying this guy is better than the other. its not based on eye tests at all, nor should it be because that would invite bias and subjectivity.

hes not one of the hardest punchers in history. he has a 25% ko ratio against ranked fighter. you do realize when you compare that to other top fighters its terrible right? if we tease that out and had wilder fighting good opponents his entire career, guess what would happen, his ko ratio would fall dramatically, just like it does for everyone who fights good fighters. you keep going on and on about how wilder beat bad fighters and how it matters..it doesnt! thats why hes a fraud!

[champion4ever]

Let us remember that when we slag Malik off, we are returning the blame to Deontay, who hired him after moaning his backside off at Mark Breland, amongst his other excuses.

I agree. I am not making an excuses but it is what is. Wilder became more gunshy and progressively worse under Malik Scott and that was of his own making because he hired him to be his head trainer in the first place.

[crimsonfalcon07]

I agree. I am not making an excuses but it is what is. Wilder became more gunshy and progressively worse under Malik Scott and that was of his own making because he hired him to be his head trainer in the first place.

I'm convinced he hired Scott as a Yes Man. Rather than getting someone who would tell him hard truths and help him actually improve in important ways, he wanted a buddy who would praise him and agree with him. To be fair, most people these days seem to prefer that, and surround themselves with people who agree with all their opinions, however ill-founded those might be. But contrast that with Beterbiev, for instance, who aspires to one day be a good boxer, and is 9 months older than Wilder...

[morph_resurrected]

That is what happens. ******** and punch disfunction... similar mechanisms for action. Wilder could not pull the trigger against the giant Han, whom despite a punch output severely lacking... only had to catch poor Wilder standing in front of him trying to blow his powder...

That whole exchange was just awkward. Now I was at a family gathering at the time, so I was watching on my phone, but idk. Just piss poor footwork. Stumbled on his own sh#t. Got turned around and one punch and that was it wasn’t it?

[billeau2]

no he doesnt. parker has beaten 3 guys in the top 3(ring) at the time of when he fought them or after in ruiz's case. ortiz has 0 of those wins.

empirical data...aka your eye test and what do you know the guy you are hyping up and defending is the best! do you ever cross reference your eye test data with other data? you do realize its easier to look better when you are fighting worse competition right? thats why we dont use the eye test because it can be deceiving and you have been deceived.

charles martin was not considered a decent heavyweight when he fought ortiz. what are you talking about??? he wasnt even highly thought of when joshua beat him but he certainly was not highly thought of after losing to adam kownacki 4 years before ortiz beat him! kownacki is great too right???

wait now you think ortiz is jsut as good as joshua? i was just comparing ortiz to parker but wow, you have gone to a new level of fandom psychosis. hey why dont you use your empirical eye test data to tell me who is better between ali and ortiz? wait thats different...how? ali has a better resume than ortiz does he not? well so does parker.

ok so the real things to go on are parker beat wilder and ruiz and ortiz lost to both of them...and yet you still think ortiz is better?

your eye test is subjective. thats the most hilarious think about all this. your entire defense of wilder and ortiz is based on what you think of them, and you have to ignore the rankings which were reached based on the fighters fighting each other and a consensus saying this guy is better than the other. its not based on eye tests at all, nor should it be because that would invite bias and subjectivity.

hes not one of the hardest punchers in history. he has a 25% ko ratio against ranked fighter. you do realize when you compare that to other top fighters its terrible right? if we tease that out and had wilder fighting good opponents his entire career, guess what would happen, his ko ratio would fall dramatically, just like it does for everyone who fights good fighters. you keep going on and on about how wilder beat bad fighters and how it matters..it doesnt! thats why hes a fraud!

Again who gives a shiat about ring rankings? You a ful!!! They are subjective! Prove me wrong!

I realize levels of competition... Do you realize subjective measures?

Martin and Kowalski are part of the landscape of heavyweights... They do suck but so do the others which is something you do not understand. Parker beat a shot Wilder and only recently came into his own. Ortiz fought Wilder at his best... I explained why I thought Ortiz was ultimately prime for prime probably stronger, depending on how parker performs the rest of his career.

Again "ranked' ranked by whom? One can see Wilder at his best had a really hard punch...

[hitmanjosh]

He has 8 kids with four different women he's not married to. I'm just stating the facts snowflake.

Snow these black balls in your mouth! Oh Mf'errrrrrrr

[billeau2]

In all reality he did fight better opposition but in that respect , they both suck and have kept this heavyweight division on hiatus

That's exactly my point lol.

[daggum]

Again who gives a shiat about ring rankings? You a ful!!! They are subjective! Prove me wrong!

I realize levels of competition... Do you realize subjective measures?

Martin and Kowalski are part of the landscape of heavyweights... They do suck but so do the others which is something you do not understand. Parker beat a shot Wilder and only recently came into his own. Ortiz fought Wilder at his best... I explained why I thought Ortiz was ultimately prime for prime probably stronger, depending on how parker performs the rest of his career.

Again "ranked' ranked by whom? One can see Wilder at his best had a really hard punch...

sorry im not going to fall for your false equivalencies. charles martin and adam kownacki are not on the same level as parker, joyce, dubois, etc...your whole argument hinges on this very point and its utter bollocks. the reason you are making this argument is because you have to out of necessity because you know wilder and ortiz have sh-it resumes compared to most other guys of the era. "they are all the same" is your way of trying to obfuscate the truth that wilder and ortiz just didnt get it done which is why you hilariously flip flop between calling the real fighters of the era exposed when they lose and yet when wilder and ortiz lose they were shot, not exposed. nonsensical jibberish and 100 percent subjective.