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

[daggum]

It is a fair point... One has to look at the film. Wilder shows explosive tendencies that catch his opponents. Also, a lot teeters on the image one has of Ortiz. Ortiz was a highly skilled boxer puncher, and had an undefeated record prior to facing Wilder. As far as evaluating Fury? His performance against Klitsko was textbook... You can literally count the techniques he applies in the ring with respect to movement, timing, footwork, etc.

Wilder is no fluke, it does take an effort to deconstruct the nonsense that posters like Daggum blovate... If one decides that "Ortiz was old and a fluke" and that AJ "fought better competition than the rest" one can call Wilder a fluke... But the problem is this reasoning is incorrect.

you put ortiz was old in quotes as if he wasnt nearly 40 when wilder fought him? and yes he was a solid fighter but the reason you and other constantly bring him up is because its the only saving grace wilder has, and i hate to break it to you but look at ortiz's resume, it doesnt hold a candle to guys like parker, whyte, ruiz, etc...all guys joshua beat and yet you keep coming back to ortiz as if beating him tru-mps multiple very good wins, it doesnt and the only person that would say that is in extreme fan mode.

you put joshua fought better competition in quotes as if he didnt? he beat 8 top 10 ranked(ring) opponents. wilder beat 2. wilder has no one great like wlad on his resume, oh wlad was old...wait a second ortiz wasnt? oh that beating fury gave him really took a lot out of wlad lol.

he wasnt a fluke, he was a fraud. he was a mediocre fighter that was marketed as some top level guy and he artificially extended his career with a bunch of easy fights. he lost over and over when he fought the best fighters: fury, parker, zhang. all those guys are way better than ortiz unless you want to make the argument ortiz is better, please do so because that would be a comedy i would love to enjoy. please explain how ortiz is better than them using their resumes. i know you can say hes the most skilled fighter ever but then again if hes so skilled how did a bum like wilder knock him out...twice! how did he lose to ruiz? how did he nearly lose to charles martin? oh because he beat jennings? oh and is jennings now suddenly going to become great too? wow this is getting complicated

[daggum]

Top ten out of 100 top losers great!!! According to your alphabet soup some slouches are top slouches, others better. Lol. Again, medoicre opponents far and wide. Ortiz had skills, Parker has just developed these skills recently.... Ruiz and Parker are not categorically better than Ortiz. Your whole concept of rankings is subjective. It ignores the obvious.

these arent alphabet soup rankings...this is the ring. they dont rank bums like spilzka, duhapas, washington, molina, etc...you know this but of course you are trying to deflect.

you think its subjective to say parker is better than ortiz? thats just absurd. yeah i guess its subjective but i think bj armstrong is better than michael jordan he just never got a chance to prove it! thats how you sound right now and its great. resumes dont lie.

ortiz had skills lmao! i literally just wrote a post saying you would say that! as a joke! hes so skilled but wilder kod him? twice? come on now. ortiz never proved he was a great fighter and there is nothing you can say to deny that. the guys joshua beat have better resumes. what is subjective is you saying ortiz had skills, as if the guys joshua beat didnt? you dont see how are twisting everything into ortiz being great and everyone joshua beat not being great? that doenst hold any water and you know it. its not an argument you can win, you were dealt a bad hand and thats because wilder has a crap resume and didnt come through when he stepped up. you cant twist that.

you keep talking about ortiz over and over lol. just like i said because its the only thing you have but that well has run dry, eventually you have to come up with some substance to prove ortiz is great, i dont see anything??? oh the skills! the most skilled fighter of the last 10 years??? is that what you are saying? sounds...subjective to me

[billeau2]

you put ortiz was old in quotes as if he wasnt nearly 40 when wilder fought him? and yes he was a solid fighter but the reason you and other constantly bring him up is because its the only saving grace wilder has, and i hate to break it to you but look at ortiz's resume, it doesnt hold a candle to guys like parker, whyte, ruiz, etc...all guys joshua beat and yet you keep coming back to ortiz as if beating him *****s multiple very good wins, it doesnt and the only person that would say that is in extreme fan mode.

you put joshua fought better competition in quotes as if he didnt? he beat 8 top 10 ranked(ring) opponents. wilder beat 2. wilder has no one great like wlad on his resume, oh wlad was old...wait a second ortiz wasnt? oh that beating fury gave him really took a lot out of wlad lol.

he wasnt a fluke, he was a fraud. he was a mediocre fighter that was marketed as some top level guy and he artificially extended his career with a bunch of easy fights. he lost over and over when he fought the best fighters: fury, parker, zhang. all those guys are way better than ortiz unless you want to make the argument ortiz is better, please do so because that would be a comedy i would love to enjoy. please explain how ortiz is better than them using their resumes. i know you can say hes the most skilled fighter ever but then again if hes so skilled how did a bum like wilder knock him out...twice! how did he lose to ruiz? how did he nearly lose to charles martin? oh because he beat jennings? oh and is jennings now suddenly going to become great too? wow this is getting complicated

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!

[TelMex]

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

[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!