Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
hopkins would UD kessler.
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAYWEATHER P4P#1
This topic is'nt Hopkins vs Kessler i asked who was better now 2008 and basically how this could be an insight into Hopkins vs Calzaghe read what i said again please.
What do you mean better now in 2008 ??
Who is the better fighter Hopkins or Kessler now in 2008 not there achievements there skills and ability will Hopkins be a harder fight than Kessler and so on.
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
id say evan at 40 something Hopkins is far better than Kessler
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
It's an ambiguous question but I think you mean who is more dangerous now? Id say Hopkins,but if they were to fight,I'd choose Kessler on points. His jab and accuracy would be difficult for B Hop first and second,Kessler is just as big and strong,and could outwork Hopkins.
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
It's an ambiguous question but I think you mean who is more dangerous now? Id say Hopkins,but if they were to fight,I'd choose Kessler on points. His jab and accuracy would be difficult for B Hop first and second,Kessler is just as big and strong,and could outwork Hopkins.
Actually i would say Kessler is more dangerous, because Kessler is still young and he will comeback stronger than ever. Kessler will improve which is a scary thought, where as Hopkins is only going to get worse and that showed in his fight with Wright.
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAYWEATHER P4P#1
I was just thinking now Kessler gave Calzaghe a good fight and alot of trouble Calzaghe admitted after the fight in his interview that he was tired in the last few rounds.Now Hopkins has great fitness and strength ive thought at 43 is Hopkins over the hill but now im thinking if he is better than Kessler joe could be in trouble because if this fight ends up in vegas joe is'nt forced to get the nod off the judges.So is Hopkins better than Kessler
What i suppose im getting at is if the 43 year old Hopkins of 2008 is better than Kessler of 2008 Calzaghe could be in trouble Kessler gave Calzaghe a tough fight he admitted he was tired in last few rounds Hopkins is super fit and the fight been in the states could be trouble for Calzaghe.I never mentioned Hopkins fighting Kessler
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
You people are crazy. Hopkins would definitely UD Kessler. It would be ugly and boring, but it wouldn't be controversial.
Why is it crazy to think the younger fresher Kessler can win ?? he certainly has the tools to beat Hopkins.
He does not have the tools to beat Hopkins. That's completely ridiculous. Kessler is solid. He's not great. Hopkins, even at 43, is a top 10 p4p fighter on skill alone. Kessler is way too slow and plodding and would land next to nothing. (Hopkins would also land next to nothing, since he only throws about 100 punches a fight these days, but he would consistently land the cleaner shots -- Kessler is not hard to hit.) This thread is ridiculous. Do you people really think Calzaghe will have an easier time with Hopkins than he did with Kessler? I saw the Calzaghe-Kessler fight as an all-out domination....
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
I think Mikkel has a great future, but HOpkins is still better than him IMO. Hopkins is harder to hit, he makes his opponents very frustrated, he has a lot better movement, and he can fighter anywhere in the ring, in close, off the ropes, from a distance.
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
You people are crazy. Hopkins would definitely UD Kessler. It would be ugly and boring, but it wouldn't be controversial.
Why is it crazy to think the younger fresher Kessler can win ?? he certainly has the tools to beat Hopkins.
He does not have the tools to beat Hopkins. That's completely ridiculous. Kessler is solid. He's not great. Hopkins, even at 43, is a top 10 p4p fighter on skill alone. Kessler is way too slow and plodding and would land next to nothing. (Hopkins would also land next to nothing, since he only throws about 100 punches a fight these days, but he would consistently land the cleaner shots -- Kessler is not hard to hit.) This thread is ridiculous. Do you people really think Calzaghe will have an easier time with Hopkins than he did with Kessler? I saw the Calzaghe-Kessler fight as an all-out domination....
This a great post. And I agree. I got Hopkins beating Kessler. With some difficulties, but it would be a clear-cut win
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
You people are crazy. Hopkins would definitely UD Kessler. It would be ugly and boring, but it wouldn't be controversial.
Why is it crazy to think the younger fresher Kessler can win ?? he certainly has the tools to beat Hopkins.
He does not have the tools to beat Hopkins. That's completely ridiculous. Kessler is solid. He's not great. Hopkins, even at 43, is a top 10 p4p fighter on skill alone. Kessler is way too slow and plodding and would land next to nothing. (Hopkins would also land next to nothing, since he only throws about 100 punches a fight these days, but he would consistently land the cleaner shots -- Kessler is not hard to hit.) This thread is ridiculous. Do you people really think Calzaghe will have an easier time with Hopkins than he did with Kessler? I saw the Calzaghe-Kessler fight as an all-out domination....
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
He does not have the tools to beat Hopkins. That's completely ridiculous.
Kessler has a great jab, he is a superb technical boxer, he has a good variety of punches, etc. Taylor gave Hopkins hell with his jab so why is it so hard to believe Kessler can't beat Hopkins ?? by using his jab to good effect plus using the right tactics ??
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
Hopkins, even at 43, is a top 10 p4p fighter on skill alone. Kessler is way too slow and plodding and would land next to nothing.
Lets get one thing straight now Kessler is not slow at all he can throw fast combinations very well. Hopkins isn't exactly a speed demon himself. He only throws 15 punches a round, Kessler averages over 50+ punches a round. He also puts his punches together very well to say he would land next to nothing is ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
(Hopkins would also land next to nothing, since he only throws about 100 punches a fight these days, but he would consistently land the cleaner shots -- Kessler is not hard to hit.)
I think you mean 10 punches a round but whatever, so your telling me Hopkins can beat Kessler only throwing 10 punches a round ?? i don't think so somehow. Kessler would be pumping his jab at Hopkins all night no way on earth would Hopkins beat Kessler throwing 10 punches a round.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
This thread is ridiculous. Do you people really think Calzaghe will have an easier time with Hopkins than he did with Kessler? I saw the Calzaghe-Kessler fight as an all-out domination....
I haven't said that at all im actually one of the people that thinks Hopkins vs Calzaghe will be a rough night for Calzaghe. Hopkins can offset Calzaghe's rhythm with clinches and dirty fighting. Having said that i don't think Hopkins will win, just based on the work rate alone it will be very tough for Hopkins to win.
I don't know why you think Kessler has no chance against Hopkins, Calzaghe vs Kessler was no domination at all i had Calzaghe winning by 3 rounds. The way Calzaghe beat Kessler was outworking him, plus using his southpaw jab. Hopkins rarely uses the jab, and really and truthfully he will never be able to out work Kessler. Hopkins can win the fight by using the right tactics i never said he couldn't, but i think its unfair to say Kessler hasn't got the tools to beat Hopkins when he clearly has IMO.
Re: Who is best now Kessler or Hopkins???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
You people are crazy. Hopkins would definitely UD Kessler. It would be ugly and boring, but it wouldn't be controversial.
Why is it crazy to think the younger fresher Kessler can win ?? he certainly has the tools to beat Hopkins.
He does not have the tools to beat Hopkins. That's completely ridiculous. Kessler is solid. He's not great. Hopkins, even at 43, is a top 10 p4p fighter on skill alone. Kessler is way too slow and plodding and would land next to nothing. (Hopkins would also land next to nothing, since he only throws about 100 punches a fight these days, but he would consistently land the cleaner shots -- Kessler is not hard to hit.) This thread is ridiculous. Do you people really think Calzaghe will have an easier time with Hopkins than he did with Kessler? I saw the Calzaghe-Kessler fight as an all-out domination....
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
He does not have the tools to beat Hopkins. That's completely ridiculous.
Kessler has a great jab, he is a superb technical boxer, he has a good variety of punches, etc. Taylor gave Hopkins hell with his jab so why is it so hard to believe Kessler can't beat Hopkins ?? by using his jab to good effect plus using the right tactics ??
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
Hopkins, even at 43, is a top 10 p4p fighter on skill alone. Kessler is way too slow and plodding and would land next to nothing.
Lets get one thing straight now Kessler is not slow at all he can throw fast combinations very well. Hopkins isn't exactly a speed demon himself. He only throws 15 punches a round, Kessler averages over 50+ punches a round. He also puts his punches together very well to say he would land next to nothing is ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
(Hopkins would also land next to nothing, since he only throws about 100 punches a fight these days, but he would consistently land the cleaner shots -- Kessler is not hard to hit.)
I think you mean 10 punches a round but whatever, so your telling me Hopkins can beat Kessler only throwing 10 punches a round ?? i don't think so somehow. Kessler would be pumping his jab at Hopkins all night no way on earth would Hopkins beat Kessler throwing 10 punches a round.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shza
This thread is ridiculous. Do you people really think Calzaghe will have an easier time with Hopkins than he did with Kessler? I saw the Calzaghe-Kessler fight as an all-out domination....
I haven't said that at all im actually one of the people that thinks Hopkins vs Calzaghe will be a rough night for Calzaghe. Hopkins can offset Calzaghe's rhythm with clinches and dirty fighting. Having said that i don't think Hopkins will win, just based on the work rate alone it will be very tough for Hopkins to win.
I don't know why you think Kessler has no chance against Hopkins, Calzaghe vs Kessler was no domination at all i had Calzaghe winning by 3 rounds. The way Calzaghe beat Kessler was outworking him, plus using his southpaw jab. Hopkins rarely uses the jab, and really and truthfully he will never be able to out work Kessler. Hopkins can win the fight by using the right tactics i never said he couldn't, but i think its unfair to say Kessler hasn't got the tools to beat Hopkins when he clearly has IMO.
:coolclick: Ice Cold Boxing... Lovely stuff.
Sorry MAYWEATHER P4P #1, i kinda missed the point of your question....
I think its hard to answer your question as Hopkins last two fights were against guys who did not put on their best performance. (Plus Im quite happy to put it to you that Winky is pretty wasted at 170)
So im not entirely sure how to measure Hopkins up lately.
Also, if i say i think Kessler is far more Dangerous than Hopkins in 2008, im not Necessarily saying he's more of a threat to Calzaghe.
