Boxing Perspective: Bernard Hopkins

No Power, But No Doubt: Hopkins Clinches Clearcut Victory

Click for larger image © Mike Cleary BoxingPhotographs.com

From what I have read and heard, most boxing writers and fans scored the recent Bernard Hopkins versus Winky Wright bout in favor of Hopkins (a notable, but not surprising exception is HBO’s Larry Merchant). I scored the fight 116 to 112 for Hopkins. After the fight, some reported the contest was more exciting than expected. Some reported the fight was boring as anticipated. I would have to say that overall I agree with the latter reports: the fight was pretty boring. And I am a Hopkins fan.

This is not to take away respect away from Hopkins. Simply put, he found a way to handily beat one of the best fighters in the world and one who carried a long unbeaten streak. He employed the pre-Castillo Ricky Hatton style of throwing flashy, but powerless combinations then holding. It worked for Ricky Hatton to secure a welterweight title against Luis Collazo and ensure a victory against Juan Urango in his showcase for the planned showdown with Jose Luis Castillo.

People have derided Hatton for that holding and hitting style in his fights against Collazo and Urango. Likewise, many have derided Hopkins for utilizing that style against Wright. But that is what Hopkins needed to do to win the fight. That is what he needed to do to stop Winky’s best offensive weapon: the jab.

When Winky was employing his turtle-shell defensive style, Hopkins was throwing pitter-patter combinations at Winky. Then, he held Winky to make sure there were no counters and to make sure Winky did not have the distance to throw his jab. It was a great strategy in that it took away Winky’s best offensive weapon; plus, all that leaning and rough-housing on the clinch wore down Winky toward the end of the fight (although, in my estimation, not as much as reported; I did not see Hopkins completely dominating rounds 9 through 12).

Although not exciting, sometimes great boxers need to employ this hit-and-hold style to win tough fights. If taken to the extreme and the fighter does this every fight, then nobody would want to watch their fights: think Zahir Raheem and John Ruiz. But once in awhile, great boxers have to use this style to neutralize their difficult opponents.

Flash back to Wladimir Klitschko against Sam Peter. Klitschko had to use the hit-and-hold style to slow down the clubbing, dangerous, and powerful young fighter and earn a difficult decision. Since then, Klitschko has not needed this style to destroy Chris Byrd, Calvin Brock, Ray Austin, and Lamon Brewster. Simply put, these were lesser opponents than Sam Peter. If Wladimir Klitschko faces Peter in a rematch, I imagine we will once again see Klitschko employ a hold-and-hit style.

Back to Hopkins, it is not as if Hopkins has utilized the hit-and-hold style in his career. He no longer is the Executioner, attempting to or willing to take risks to score a knockout. But even in his recent fights, in which he showed less activity, he was not a clincher.

In the Jermain Taylor fights, neither Hopkins nor Taylor was excessively or purposely holding each other. They were just not letting their hands go and were sizing each other up. In the Tarver fight, Hopkins was not clinching either; he was just dominating and punishing Tarver, the bigger man.

That is where I see the problem with Hopkins fight against Winky. Except for the accidental headbutt (which to me looked accidental), where was the punishment Hopkins promised before the fight to deliver against Winky? Being the naturally taller and bigger man, I expected Hopkins, even if he lost, would show power and hurt Wright.

While not the biggest puncher in the world and not having one-punch knockout capability, Hopkins punches in the past have had sting and pop, and have earned the respect of his opponents. In the Taylor fights, especially the first, there were a couple times where Hopkins punches put Taylor in trouble and needing to clinch to hold off Hopkins.

In the Tarver fight, Hopkins punches were stiff (no pitter-patter combinations), and Tarver felt Hopkins power and was worn down physically and mentally. I simply did not see the sting and pop in Hopkins punches in the Winky fight. Part of that can be attributed to Winky’s defense, which pretty-well neutralized Hopkins most powerful weapon, his lead right. Most of Hopkins lead rights were blocked by Winky.

Hopkins’ left hand attack looked particularly weak in the Winky fight. Hopkins, recently not known for his jab, maybe threw and landed one stiff jab the whole fight. The rest were pawing, range-finding type jabs. Of particular concern, Hopkins threw numerous off-target, slow, and looping left hooks to the head. He was lucky not to get countered in missing these left hooks to the head. His best punches in the fight were the left hook to the body and the uppercut, which he has not really used in recent rights.

To beat a fighter like Joe Calzaghe, who Hopkins has called out, Hopkins will need to employ a multi-dimensional offensive attack. Lead rights (which should land against Calzaghe, who is not known for his defense) and pitter-patter combinations will not cut it against the aggressive, active, non-stop, younger Calzaghe. Because Calzaghe is so active, like Winky has been in previous fights, I would expect Hopkins to hold and rough-house Calzaghe as well.

In sum, Bernard Hopkins’ win over Winky Wright was not necessarily pretty to watch, but was masterful in strategy. He pitter-pattered combination and clinched his way to a clear victory over a game, but slower and less-active at a higher weight Winky Wright.

Assuming a Calzaghe win over Mikkel Kessler, I hope the fight between Hopkins and Calzaghe is made. Anytime we have the opportunity to see two top-ten pound-for-pound boxers face each other, that fight should be made. That way we know who is the best and we can accurately gauge boxers’ legacies.

In a Calzaghe fight, we may see some more of Hopkins holding, but hopefully we will get to see some of Hopkins power. Otherwise, Hopkins will merely be “Ol’ Popkins” as Calzaghe has recently labeled him.