Re: Vindication is sweet.
Im not devaluing what Hopkins did by anymeans, but most of Nards defining victories have been fighting guys that were out of the natural weight class.
Trinidad
Delahoya
Wright
Pavlik
I no one held a gun to the guys heads when they signed the contract but I wouldnt dash kelly to pieces over this seeing he jumped 10 pounds and is still the #1 middle in the world.. I feel that destructive aura might lose some luster like Cotto and guys will fight him differently, but I wouldnt say Kelly was exposed seeing that isint even his weight class.. lets see Nard get down to 160 again and then have a rematch, I feel the outcome would be a bit different.
Kudos to Nard regardless of the weight he has some great names on his resume and could very well make an argument for best fighter of this generation
Re: Vindication is sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
I won't throw this in guys faces too much about Pavlik because he proved me wrong, he has a great chin. However, Hopkins was absolutely amazing, I felt he beat Calzaghe, not every round like this fight, but I felt he won that fight in a close one, but one thing I noticed when I was watching Calzaghe fights then Pavlik fights is that Cazlaghe fights like he has chip on his shoudler, if you hit him, he will do everything in his power to dominate you. I didn't feel that from Pavlik in his second fight against Taylor, and I didn't think, coming in to the fight he would have that type of attitude which would be needed to wear Hopkins down like Calzaghe did.
Originally this is how I thought the fight would always go, but because of other people on here who are knowlegable I thought it could be a close fight that Pavlik could win because of his normally much higher punch count, but Hopkins took him to school. Once again Pavlik had a good style against Taylor, but Hopkins had a very bad style for Pavlik, I think Kelly would do a lot better against Calzaghe, Roy Jones Jr, etc, etc because they aren't slick like B-Hop.
All in all I am very proud of B-Hop he is one of my top 5 fav's ever, and I feel that this performance along with the rest of them puts him in the top 30 all time, beating Winky Wright, Trinidad, Calzaghe, Pavlik, Taylor, Tarver all at 40+ IMO is something nobody else will or could ever do. The reason I think he is so special is I thought Winky would dominate him, then Calzaghe, then I smartened up for his fight against Pavlik, and he did things I wouldn't have expected in my wildest dreams.
Well I'm glad you feel finally 'vindicated' the villification you suffered for believing in a Hopkins win was something none of us would have liked to have suffered.
I like how you contradict yourself in the very same paragraph stating that you knew the fight would go this way, until us lesser posters managed to discourage your genuis but then you say he did things beyond your wildest dreams.
I actually genuinely believe your wildest dreams probably do involve boxers as well seeing as you spend all your waking hours watching your 100 fights a week.
It's a privilage for us all to have such a boxing historian and expert on our humble little site :rolleyes:
Re: Vindication is sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JT Rock
Im not devaluing what Hopkins did by anymeans, but most of Nards defining victories have been fighting guys that were out of the natural weight class.
Trinidad
Delahoya
Wright
Pavlik
I no one held a gun to the guys heads when they signed the contract but I wouldnt dash kelly to pieces over this seeing he jumped 10 pounds and is still the #1 middle in the world.. I feel that destructive aura might lose some luster like Cotto and guys will fight him differently, but I wouldnt say Kelly was exposed seeing that isint even his weight class.. lets see Nard get down to 160 again and then have a rematch, I feel the outcome would be a bit different.
Kudos to Nard regardless of the weight he has some great names on his resume and could very well make an argument for best fighter of this generation
You can't really criticise Bernard for Kelly being too small when it was clear in the ring that Pavlik was actually the bigger man. He made Hopkins look small in there. Both are huge middleweights.
Re: Vindication is sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JT Rock
Im not devaluing what Hopkins did by anymeans, but most of Nards defining victories have been fighting guys that were out of the natural weight class.
Trinidad
Delahoya
Wright
Pavlik
I no one held a gun to the guys heads when they signed the contract but I wouldnt dash kelly to pieces over this seeing he jumped 10 pounds and is still the #1 middle in the world.. I feel that destructive aura might lose some luster like Cotto and guys will fight him differently, but I wouldnt say Kelly was exposed seeing that isint even his weight class.. lets see Nard get down to 160 again and then have a rematch, I feel the outcome would be a bit different.
Kudos to Nard regardless of the weight he has some great names on his resume and could very well make an argument for best fighter of this generation
You can't really criticise Bernard for Kelly being too small when it was clear in the ring that Pavlik was actually the bigger man. He made Hopkins look small in there. Both are huge middleweights.
I agree to an extent but being physically bigger and effective and comfortable at the weight are different things
Re: Vindication is sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JT Rock
Im not devaluing what Hopkins did by anymeans, but most of Nards defining victories have been fighting guys that were out of the natural weight class.
Trinidad
Delahoya
Wright
Pavlik
I no one held a gun to the guys heads when they signed the contract but I wouldnt dash kelly to pieces over this seeing he jumped 10 pounds and is still the #1 middle in the world.. I feel that destructive aura might lose some luster like Cotto and guys will fight him differently, but I wouldnt say Kelly was exposed seeing that isint even his weight class.. lets see Nard get down to 160 again and then have a rematch, I feel the outcome would be a bit different.
Kudos to Nard regardless of the weight he has some great names on his resume and could very well make an argument for best fighter of this generation
You can't really criticise Bernard for Kelly being too small when it was clear in the ring that Pavlik was actually the bigger man. He made Hopkins look small in there. Both are huge middleweights.
I agree to an extent but being physically bigger and effective and comfortable at the weight are different things
Yeah Bernard is smart he was always going to bring Kelly up to him rather than go down there. But this is nothing like Oscar and Tito imo who are naturally smaller guys. Naturally Kelly is bigger than B Hop.
Besides when you are giving up 17 years in age you can hardly be accused of having an advantage becuase of the fight being fought at a higher weight.
B Hop's win over Pavlik was immense possibly the greatest performance of his whole career.
To my knowledge no other fighter in the history of boxing has done what he did last night, win every round against the universally recognised champ, at over 40 years of age.
It's one of the greatest ever boxing acomplishments.
Re: Vindication is sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
You can't really criticise Bernard for Kelly being too small when it was clear in the ring that Pavlik was actually the bigger man. He made Hopkins look small in there. Both are huge middleweights.
I agree to an extent but being physically bigger and effective and comfortable at the weight are different things
Yeah Bernard is smart he was always going to bring Kelly up to him rather than go down there. But this is nothing like Oscar and Tito imo who are naturally smaller guys. Naturally Kelly is bigger than B Hop.
Besides when you are giving up 17 years in age you can hardly be accused of having an advantage becuase of the fight being fought at a higher weight.
B Hop's win over Pavlik was immense possibly the greatest performance of his whole career.
To my knowledge no other fighter in the history of boxing has done what he did last night, win every round against the universally recognised champ, at over 40 years of age.
It's one of the greatest ever boxing acomplishments.
Like I stated it was fantastic.. Im a fan of Pavlik but wouldnt say im a fanatic of his like I am with mayweather/ lacy/ holyfield but I agree it was an outstanding acheivment. but Im not throwing dirt on pavlik because I feel like he is a 160lb fighter and is more effective at that weight
Re: Positives for Pavlik.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Markusdarkus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Except that Joe didn't beat him.
Please go away you petty moron Calzaghe won!
As for a plus he has his 160lb belts the rest is bad he looked slow, sloppy, ploddy and chinny.
Give me a break, not landing punches doesn't win fights.
Re: Vindication is sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JT Rock
I agree to an extent but being physically bigger and effective and comfortable at the weight are different things
Yeah Bernard is smart he was always going to bring Kelly up to him rather than go down there. But this is nothing like Oscar and Tito imo who are naturally smaller guys. Naturally Kelly is bigger than B Hop.
Besides when you are giving up 17 years in age you can hardly be accused of having an advantage becuase of the fight being fought at a higher weight.
B Hop's win over Pavlik was immense possibly the greatest performance of his whole career.
To my knowledge no other fighter in the history of boxing has done what he did last night, win every round against the universally recognised champ, at over 40 years of age.
It's one of the greatest ever boxing acomplishments.
Like I stated it was fantastic.. Im a fan of Pavlik but wouldnt say im a fanatic of his like I am with mayweather/ lacy/ holyfield but I agree it was an outstanding acheivment. but Im not throwing dirt on pavlik because I feel like he is a 160lb fighter and is more effective at that weight
I'm still a big Pavlik fan, he's exciting and young enough to recover from this. B Hop himself lost early in his career, including his first pro fight.
I'm really pleased for Hopkins though, it's been a long time for people to really give him respect. He's one of the greatest of all time imo, almost 60 fights and only once could you say he was clearly beaten, and that on points. He's one of the true legends who would have been a great in any era.
Pavlik will hopefully bounce back and still be in some entertaining fights. I'm sure he will.
Re: Positives for Pavlik.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Markusdarkus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Except that Joe didn't beat him.
Please go away you petty moron Calzaghe won!
As for a plus he has his 160lb belts the rest is bad he looked slow, sloppy, ploddy and chinny.
Give me a break, not landing punches doesn't win fights.
Not throwing them doesn't either.
Re: Positives for Pavlik.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Markusdarkus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Except that Joe didn't beat him.
Please go away you petty moron Calzaghe won!
As for a plus he has his 160lb belts the rest is bad he looked slow, sloppy, ploddy and chinny.
Give me a break, not landing punches doesn't win fights.
Agreed Joe Calzaghe may of got credited with more punches on compubox, than he really did land IMO. But he still swamped Bernard Hopkins in activity, and took the fight to Bernard Hopkins and judges normally like the busier guy who takes the fight to his opponent.
I thought Bernard Hopkins won based on cleaner more effective punches. I did think alot of Joe Calzaghe's scoring punches wern't effective. But i only had Bernard Hopkins winning by 1 point based on the KD, so that means it was a very close fight and i had no problem with Joe Calzaghe winning. Although it would have been special had Bernard Hopkins had a win over Joe Calzaghe then Kelly Pavlik wow.
Re: Vindication is sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JT Rock
Im not devaluing what Hopkins did by anymeans, but most of Nards defining victories have been fighting guys that were out of the natural weight class.
Trinidad
Delahoya
Wright
Pavlik
I no one held a gun to the guys heads when they signed the contract but I wouldnt dash kelly to pieces over this seeing he jumped 10 pounds and is still the #1 middle in the world.. I feel that destructive aura might lose some luster like Cotto and guys will fight him differently, but I wouldnt say Kelly was exposed seeing that isint even his weight class.. lets see Nard get down to 160 again and then have a rematch, I feel the outcome would be a bit different.
Kudos to Nard regardless of the weight he has some great names on his resume and could very well make an argument for best fighter of this generation
Did Bernard screw up when he went up to LHW? He seemed fine with a 15 pound transition at 41 years old. Roy didn't have trouble moving up from SMW to LHW which is 7 pounds difference. If you a skilled fighter, fighting a guy like Bernard Hopkins who doesn't impose his strength on you, then you have no excuses with weight, especially considering Pavlik tried to stay as similar to his middleweight self as possible.
Re: Vindication is sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
I won't throw this in guys faces too much about Pavlik because he proved me wrong, he has a great chin. However, Hopkins was absolutely amazing, I felt he beat Calzaghe, not every round like this fight, but I felt he won that fight in a close one, but one thing I noticed when I was watching Calzaghe fights then Pavlik fights is that Cazlaghe fights like he has chip on his shoudler, if you hit him, he will do everything in his power to dominate you. I didn't feel that from Pavlik in his second fight against Taylor, and I didn't think, coming in to the fight he would have that type of attitude which would be needed to wear Hopkins down like Calzaghe did.
Originally this is how I thought the fight would always go, but because of other people on here who are knowlegable I thought it could be a close fight that Pavlik could win because of his normally much higher punch count, but Hopkins took him to school. Once again Pavlik had a good style against Taylor, but Hopkins had a very bad style for Pavlik, I think Kelly would do a lot better against Calzaghe, Roy Jones Jr, etc, etc because they aren't slick like B-Hop.
All in all I am very proud of B-Hop he is one of my top 5 fav's ever, and I feel that this performance along with the rest of them puts him in the top 30 all time, beating Winky Wright, Trinidad, Calzaghe, Pavlik, Taylor, Tarver all at 40+ IMO is something nobody else will or could ever do. The reason I think he is so special is I thought Winky would dominate him, then Calzaghe, then I smartened up for his fight against Pavlik, and he did things I wouldn't have expected in my wildest dreams.
Well I'm glad you feel finally 'vindicated' the villification you suffered for believing in a Hopkins win was something none of us would have liked to have suffered.
I like how you contradict yourself in the very same paragraph stating that you knew the fight would go this way, until us lesser posters managed to discourage your genuis but then you say he did things beyond your wildest dreams.
I actually genuinely believe your wildest dreams probably do involve boxers as well seeing as you spend all your waking hours watching your 100 fights a week.
It's a privilage for us all to have such a boxing historian and expert on our humble little site :rolleyes:
Your a dumbass lol, If you watch a lot of amateur fights its easy to see a lot of fights. I don't count exactly 100, but its around there. Because I LOVE the sport. You are a charlatan. As for the vindication, I am vindicated because I was right, and many, many people on here were wrong. Also where in the paragraph that you are quoting did I say that the people who's opinions made me think Pavlik might do better were regarded as lesser people? When a person critics what somebody else says, it actually helps if they have said it.
At least I am on a BOXING forum to debate boxing. You admitted in the hidden forum that you don't come this part of the site that much anymore. When it is the main place to discuss boxing. I am wasting my time watching fights? At least its watching boxing, not gossoping like the woman you are.
If you are telling me you have the time to watch more boxing, but you don't then what kind of fan are you? I respect guys like ICB, Preme, Trainer monkey, etc, etc. Because they are here to discuss boxing and do it intelligently. You are just here to win a popularity contest which is far gayer then anything I have done on here.
Re: Positives for Pavlik.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Markusdarkus
Please go away you petty moron Calzaghe won!
As for a plus he has his 160lb belts the rest is bad he looked slow, sloppy, ploddy and chinny.
Give me a break, not landing punches doesn't win fights.
Agreed Joe Calzaghe may of got credited with more punches on compubox, than he really did land IMO. But he still swamped Bernard Hopkins in activity, and took the fight to Bernard Hopkins and judges normally like the busier guy who takes the fight to his opponent.
I thought Bernard Hopkins won based on cleaner more effective punches. I did think alot of Joe Calzaghe's scoring punches wern't effective. But i only had Bernard Hopkins winning by 1 point based on the KD, so that means it was a very close fight and i had no problem with Joe Calzaghe winning. Although it would have been special had Bernard Hopkins had a win over Joe Calzaghe then Kelly Pavlik wow.
I had the same score, I think it was close, but only because Hopkins' stamina couldn't keep up. IMO his style is a nightmare for Joe and always has been. Joe has always done worse against the guys who like to rough it up, and Bernard is the complete backage, and doesn't really have a weakness except a low output.
Re: Vindication is sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Taeth
I won't throw this in guys faces too much about Pavlik because he proved me wrong, he has a great chin. However, Hopkins was absolutely amazing, I felt he beat Calzaghe, not every round like this fight, but I felt he won that fight in a close one, but one thing I noticed when I was watching Calzaghe fights then Pavlik fights is that Cazlaghe fights like he has chip on his shoudler, if you hit him, he will do everything in his power to dominate you. I didn't feel that from Pavlik in his second fight against Taylor, and I didn't think, coming in to the fight he would have that type of attitude which would be needed to wear Hopkins down like Calzaghe did.
Originally this is how I thought the fight would always go, but because of other people on here who are knowlegable I thought it could be a close fight that Pavlik could win because of his normally much higher punch count, but Hopkins took him to school. Once again Pavlik had a good style against Taylor, but Hopkins had a very bad style for Pavlik, I think Kelly would do a lot better against Calzaghe, Roy Jones Jr, etc, etc because they aren't slick like B-Hop.
All in all I am very proud of B-Hop he is one of my top 5 fav's ever, and I feel that this performance along with the rest of them puts him in the top 30 all time, beating Winky Wright, Trinidad, Calzaghe, Pavlik, Taylor, Tarver all at 40+ IMO is something nobody else will or could ever do. The reason I think he is so special is I thought Winky would dominate him, then Calzaghe, then I smartened up for his fight against Pavlik, and he did things I wouldn't have expected in my wildest dreams.
Well I'm glad you feel finally 'vindicated' the villification you suffered for believing in a Hopkins win was something none of us would have liked to have suffered.
I like how you contradict yourself in the very same paragraph stating that you knew the fight would go this way, until us lesser posters managed to discourage your genuis but then you say he did things beyond your wildest dreams.
I actually genuinely believe your wildest dreams probably do involve boxers as well seeing as you spend all your waking hours watching your 100 fights a week.
It's a privilage for us all to have such a boxing historian and expert on our humble little site :rolleyes:
Your a dumbass lol, If you watch a lot of amateur fights its easy to see a lot of fights. I don't count exactly 100, but its around there. Because I LOVE the sport. You are a charlatan. As for the vindication, I am vindicated because I was right, and many, many people on here were wrong. Also where in the paragraph that you are quoting did I say that the people who's opinions made me think Pavlik might do better were regarded as lesser people? When a person critics what somebody else says, it actually helps if they have said it.
At least I am on a BOXING forum to debate boxing. You admitted in the hidden forum that you don't come this part of the site that much anymore. When it is the main place to discuss boxing. I am wasting my time watching fights? At least its watching boxing, not gossoping like the woman you are.
If you are telling me you have the time to watch more boxing, but you don't then what kind of fan are you? I respect guys like ICB, Preme, Trainer monkey, etc, etc. Because they are here to discuss boxing and do it intelligently. You are just here to win a popularity contest which is far gayer then anything I have done on here.
You respect Preme.........that says it all
Re: Vindication is sweet.
At bhops age, you can't honestly expect him to try to cut to 160.
Assuming Hopkins fights and beats t he winner of Roy/Calzaghe.
Then do people stop saying " but bhop this and bhop that".
When he finally get the complete credit that is deserved despite his age?
