Whyte vs Parker has been signed

Didn't AJ need 11 rounds to beat this guy by <strike>KO</strike> cut?

 

Or Chisora could fight Bellend

 

Would be cruel to put Chisora in with AJ.

 

Impressive knockout from Chisora there, fair play. Didn't expect that.

 

great head butt by Whyte to KD Parker

 

Parker is putting in good work to the body

 

Whyte working the body nicely in the last few minutes

 

Bellend has it 49-45 Whyte

 

I was watching on a crappy stream which just died. How are people scoring it on here? Was hard to tell for me because the quality was so shit.

 

Both looks pretty average, I think Big baby would take them

 

My stream kept going but I've got Whyte ahead

 

Parker is a dog. I don't want to see him ever again

 

Commentators have Whyte well ahead

 

Parker's about to lose via stink

 

what a finish

 

Whyte doesn't look great but he's arguably had an easier time than AJ leaving aside his sloppy ending, which ultimately means Parker wasn't much cop

 

Parker got the reverse Chavez-Taylor

 

Whyte was so fucked. 30 more seconds, if that, and Parker wins.

 

Agreed, bar the last 30 seconds, Whyte was winning this fight much more easily and "impressively" than AJ was.

Parker is not much

 

Bad finish from Whyte but I gotta say, dude can fight. He has skills and some pop. His conditioning is questionable, though.

 

Great to see the ultimate division of the ultimate sport contested so fiercely and...in great spirit: no trash'talk needed to produce two good fights!

 

Didn’t get to see it but from what I’ve read it was a good scrap with some serious drama at times.

Based on this I’d love to see Whyte vs Wilder although I don’t think wilder would risk it.

 

I'm starting to believe that if AJ gets past Povetkin, we will see AJ-Whyte 2 in April.

 

LOL you think???

That's precisely what Hearn has in mind and has always had in mind.

 

Commentary by the way last night was another utter joke confirming that the only class of people in the UK who bullshit more than the Politicians are Team Sky and assorted comedy acts like Tony Bellew and Carl Froch.

The first knockdown was a fucking joke, clear headbutt, should have been ruled a slip and Parker been given more time to recover.

Parker fought horribly and still damn near won.

These fights between these stiffs are terrible. Yet the close nature of them is being used to spin a situation whereby these bumalicious bums are portrayed as really good fighters.

"Joshua couldn't floor Parker, but Whyte did, twice, it shows he is world class"

The correct interpretation is that Parker is shit, Whyte is shit and Joshua is average.

 

Yes, yes, yes, yes to every fucking word. You just coulda just summed up the whole thing with those final two sentences though.

Parker and Whyte are both bums and AJ is a robotic stiff.

Then you got Fury, who's a helluva personality, but not a helluva fighter. And of course, the Alabama Windmill.

Not only is this era not the 70s or 90s... these contenders don't compared to the 80s either.

Just a whole assortment of bums.

 

Finally got round to seeing the highlights, looked a good scrap. Whyte has a good punch arsenal when he's set, and he has good power. The problem is his footwork and balance is so shoddy that he's often not in the right position to deliver. Plus his stamina is poor.

 

Generally speaking, when you have no stamina and no balance, it means you are shit.

If you win, it must mean the other guy is more shit.

Parker had the physical tools to win that fight hands-down but lacked the mentality and lost accordingly.

 

I'm going to avoid getting into an 'era Vs era' debate here because, honestly, I just find it incredibly fucking tedious and it ruins the discussion in every single thread involving the heavyweights. Just wanted to address this particular point, surely every era has been defined by respective performances between common opponents at or near the top of the tree in the division? Of course commentators are going to bring it up.

 

This is NOT an era vs era debate.


I have absolutely no problem with comparative performances.

I do have a problem with the de facto "He's a good fighter" starting point that has been attributed to these guys.

Whyte is a good fighter because he beat Parker and Parker is a good fighter because he went 12 with Joshua, etc etc.

These guys have been afforded great kudos by looking good against each other.

A point to consider is that Carlos Takam, who was comfortably going the distance with AJ before a bullshit stoppage, got absolutely cleaned out by a totally, utterly shot Dereck Chisora last night.

Suddenly, we get to be told that Chisora is a player again, a live dog, because Takam had looked so good vs AJ.

No. Not having it.

These guys make each other look good because they are broadly equally bad.

Instead of being better than one another, they are just less shit than one another.