-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonesJrMayweather+Mosley
this no different than hop snatching and throwing down the cuban flag before he faced tito (did that make him racist?), or when he on air claim that he was going to kill all of roy jones dogs (did anyone call PETA?) bhop is just trying to get the fight, enticing Joe to sign and then after the fight win or lose bhop will explain and apologize if he offended anyone....bhop knows that if joe gets pressured by people around him like "Hey joe go show him, a white boy can beat him" then hop gets what he wants and I think it might work..
Tito is Puerto Rican not Cuban ;)
All those things mentioned were all douche bag things to do and say... Bernard Hopkins is a classless Jerk. I rather see Floyd fling around money and see he is the greatest than a Ignorant prik like Hopkins say assanine things... And they say Mayweather is an asshole
thanks for that...yeah that's what i meant....what the ell was i thinking.... ::**
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Quote:
Originally Posted by drgonzo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing
Well thats obvious Bilbo of course im am going to take it personal when someone disrespect's my race. Why would i take it personal some guy calling another guy a kunt ?? i thinks its lunacy that you think i should take it personal if Hopkins made personal attack against Calzaghe. Of course its different when someone disrespect's your race maybe you don't mind it but i do and i take it personal.
Ya know I'm one of those whacky big picture, none of this mess really matters so there's no reason to get your panties in a bunch over anything (and I mean anything) kinda people, so when you take it personal when someone disrespect's your race I just don't understand. You should try not becoming emotional involved, it tends to hinder your ability to think clearly and that unfortunately bleeds into the conversation. And to be honest, the jews complained less about the holocaust than white's do about being called, a 'white boy' lol. You have white pasty skin, it sucks I know but get over yourself and don't be suprised when I call you whitey. The color of your skin means absolutely S***, and so does Hopkins' comment. But man do I really wanna see this fight... Hmm maybe I should actually thank B-Hop for the buildup, I can stir on this for a few months and really enjoy the S*** when it comes around :D
so when you take it personal when someone disrespect's your race I just don't understand.
You don't understand why someone gets annoyed, over someone disrespecting there race umm ok.
You should try not becoming emotional involved, it tends to hinder your ability to think clearly and that unfortunately bleeds into the conversation.
It hasn't effected my ability to think clearly im having a friendly debate with Bilbo. We have different opinions on the matter thats all.
And to be honest, the jews complained less about the holocaust than white's do about being called, a 'white boy' lol.
::**
You have white pasty skin, it sucks I know but get over yourself
Your giving me a lecture than come out with that statement ::**
Who the hell are you anyway ?? and who the hell do you think you are coming out with that statement ?? maybe your the one that needs to get over yourself.
don't be suprised when I call you whitey.
Don't be surprised when i call you an idiot.
You miss my point friend
Hopkins did something (intentional in my opinion) to make people want to see the fight, but your misplaced pride in your race blinds you of seeing it. When you took the comments I made to heart (the poking fun at you) once again you came at me with the same emotion driven garbage that you were commenting on B-Hop with. When did you start thinking the color of your skin counted for something, the fucks wrong with you lol. Does it bother you more or less that I'm white and I call you whitey? At a very young age someone probably once said to you 'sticks and stones'. You should try to mowe that over seeing as it was an important lesson you failed to learn. And to be honest, when you become so offended over something as microscopic as this it makes me wonder, how racist are you really? ;D
Try removing the stick from your ass and let everyone else be uptight for you. It's quite a thing when you take a step back and observe all the sheeples, makes the sport that much more entertaining
BTW, Hopkins' is fucked :doggy:
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
im looking foward to this fight and believe calzaghe will be victorious.
to those that say hopkins is a racist= yes he is. and if calzaghe had of said that he would of been crucified by the black and white community. but lets keep in mind that a black man can get away with it and a white man cant because white people wernt enslaved for hundreds of years.
in saying that i hope that cracka whoops that black ignorant ass to shreds. 8)
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here. B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Contest
^ wind-up merchant
Indeed thats why im not going to bother to reply, but ill give him his 15th SC.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here. B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
kessler is not better than tito,oscar, and certainly not rjj...even though hop was bigger than tito and oscar, those three alone trump calzaghe's entire resume in terms of chances of losing. No wait at the time he fought oscar yeah kessler was better by comparison. so then tito and roy trump joe's resume...
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonesJrMayweather+Mosley
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here. B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
kessler is not better than tito,oscar, and certainly not rjj...even though hop was bigger than tito and oscar, those three alone trump calzaghe's entire resume in terms of chances of losing. No wait at the time he fought oscar yeah kessler was better by comparison. so then tito and roy trump joe's resume...
That's why I said Kess is better than ALMOST all of B Hop's opp.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here.
Hahaha!!! I know you think I am overly sensitive, but my paticular point is, whats good for one should be good for the other... To try to bring race into is just plain tasteless and classless and goes to show money cant buy those things..
Like stated above if Joe said said he would never lose to know N****** or a Blackman it would cause a global outrage. ;) I take it tongue and cheek myself but its amazing the double standard thats exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
:coolclick:
I agree Bhop is a snoozer who's anemic punch count and rule breaking is unbearable to watch and is actually a mockery of the lightheavy division, if wasnt affiliated with GBP would have dissapeared to obscurity by now
Calzaghe will beat him quite easily be suprised if Nard wins more than 2-3 rounds, and that Kessler statement made me laugh during the confrontation.... Kessler would desicion him quite easily as well
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here.
Hahaha!!! I know you think I am overly sensitive, but my paticular point is, whats good for one should be good for the other... To try to bring race into is just plain tasteless and classless and goes to show money cant buy those things..
Like stated above if Joe said said he would never lose to know N****** or a Blackman it would cause a global outrage. ;) I take it tongue and cheek myself but its amazing the double standard thats exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
:coolclick:
I agree Bhop is a snoozer who's anemic punch count and rule breaking is unbearable to watch and is actually a mockery of the lightheavy division, if wasnt affiliated with GBP would have dissapeared to obscurity by now
Calzaghe will beat him quite easily be suprised if Nard wins more than 2-3 rounds, and that Kessler statement made me laugh during the confrontation.... Kessler would desicion him quite easily as well
CC back my man. And dude,I wasn't referring to you in particular when I said things went OTT(I was actully referring to Bilbo and his usual going off topic,talking about random statistics etc.) ;D
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here.
Hahaha!!! I know you think I am overly sensitive, but my paticular point is, whats good for one should be good for the other... To try to bring race into is just plain tasteless and classless and goes to show money cant buy those things..
Like stated above if Joe said said he would never lose to know N****** or a Blackman it would cause a global outrage. ;) I take it tongue and cheek myself but its amazing the double standard thats exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
:coolclick:
I agree Bhop is a snoozer who's anemic punch count and rule breaking is unbearable to watch and is actually a mockery of the lightheavy division, if wasnt affiliated with GBP would have dissapeared to obscurity by now
Calzaghe will beat him quite easily be suprised if Nard wins more than 2-3 rounds, and that Kessler statement made me laugh during the confrontation.... Kessler would desicion him quite easily as well
CC back my man. And dude,I wasn't referring to you in particular when I said things went OTT(I was actully referring to Bilbo and his usual going off topic,talking about random statistics etc.) ;D
I'm just trying to explain the difference between a white man commentating on a black man's colour versus a black man commenting on a white's man colour.
JT Rock immediately interperets Hopkins saying he will not lose to a white man as a statement of black racial superiority over whites. He (JT Rock) only holds this view though because in the past white's actually practised racial superiority over whites and so he assumes that any statement of colour is automatically an exclamation of superiority.
However blacks have never practised racial superiority over whites so Hopkins statement that he will never lose to a white man does not presume racial superiority whatsoever, that's JT Rock ASSUMPTION.
Look at it this way, if a convicted pedophile tells you that he thinks your daughter or little sister is gorgeous you will likely be highly alarmed to say the least.
But if your Nan or doctor tells you, you would just feel proud.
Why the difference? Because of the known pasts and predicted intention's of the people giving the comments.
So, when considering racial relations, if a white man (part of a race that practised EXTENSIVE and BARBARIC racial superiority over black's) says he will not lose to a black man, it will likely be deemed an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority.
However when a black man (part of a race that was BRUTALLY SUBJECATED and ENSLAVED by white's) says he will not lose to a white man he is not making an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority but rather making a statement of defiance in saying he will not be beaten by a member of the race that historically subjecated his race.
It's a completely different statement of intention altogether.
It's no different to the relationship between a rapist and a past victim. If after repeatedly raping his victim the rapist was finally ordered to stop and anti raping laws were brought in, the future behaviour of the rapist toward the victim would be subject to a greater criticism than the victims future behaviour toward the rapist.
Furthermore any negative statements made by the rapist toward the victim would be regarded as possible threats of repeat behaviour whereas any negative statements made by the victim toward the rapist would hardly be seen as statements of rape intention but rather a sign of longheld resentment and bitterness.
As a Philadelphia street kid, criminal and prisoner Hopkins would have long felt the superior glare of the white man and his statement that he would not lose to a white man was clearly evidence of that resentment still present within him.
Now you can argue that his comments were not needed and in bad taste but you cannot seriously make a claim that they are racist without making that ASSUMPTION yourself based on white's past treatment of black's.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Hey bilbo, you do know that the Moors enslaved whites right? Happened for hundreds of years. very profitable for them.
anyhoo. Most black athletes that I grew up around considered white athletes physically inferior. Weaker. ( I am Mexican, had many a conversation about this when I was young)
so when hopkins said I would never let a white boy beat me, he said it cause he honestly feels that the black athlete is superior to the white one and he aint about to lose to him.
in a nut shell it is racist.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
You should be a defense attorney Bilbo ::**
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Confuse the jury to a not guilty verdict....
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Plain & simple, that was racist and b hop should be ashamed of himself - still want him to win as a long time fan
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad_Dog
Hey bilbo, you do know that the Moors enslaved whites right? Happened for hundreds of years. very profitable for them.
anyhoo. Most black athletes that I grew up around considered white athletes physically inferior. Weaker. ( I am Mexican, had many a conversation about this when I was young)
so when hopkins said I would never let a white boy beat me, he said it cause he honestly feels that the black athlete is superior to the white one and he aint about to lose to him.
in a nut shell it is racist.
Why is it? Most white people belive that black's are physically superior. That's why we enslaved them in the first place! We originally tried to run our sugar plantations using convicts, orphaned boys and other undesirables but they kept dying in the heat. The black's were physically tougher and could endure the hellish conditions.
Being unable to even acknowladge any differences between races is just absurd, political correctness gone mad imo.
I would say it's a fact that black's are physically more gifted than whites. They are naturally more muscular, it's a genetic trait. I would say on average that white's are more intelligent, certainly when using our current method's of intelligence testing. I've also read that Asian's, especially Japanese and Chinese are more intelligent still.
Asian's are shorter than black's and white's but they also live longer.
How is any of this racist, it's just fact's regarding humanity.
We shouldn't be afraid to even acknowledge differences between us, it's when we try to subjecate and abuse another race that it becomes racist.
Anyway back on topic, Hopkins comments taking on their own didn't infere a physical superiority over white's anyway, he simply said 'I will never lose to a white man'.
The statement on it's own doesn't infere racism or assertions of superioty one way or anther you are merely interpereting it that way.
If Joe Calzaghe was to say I'd never lose to an Englishman' would that be racist? Would he in saying that be asserting an aggressive superiority of Welsh over English? Should we be troubled by those comments?
Whilst such a comment might indeed rile up some English fans and turn it into a healthy bit of nationalistic pride nobody would read anything sinister into it.
I think his comments were the best thing that could have happened to this fight. Few people were really interested before but now we have a grudge fight and if it goes ahead as planned people will be wanting to see what happens.
It was good marketing and Joe himself will benefit from the extra publicity.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
In the end...what Hopkins said was a "racial statement".
I love Hopkins through & through...but he has always had & often expressed "racist tendencies". He always & often brings up his color, slavery, & white favoritism.
No matter what Hopkins says...he's a bit of a racist...he's just normally doesn't practice it. Now I aint tryin' to act like a know Hopkins personally...but I have followed him from start to finish & I have heard & seen him pull out some pretty racist stunts...whether it be against whites, fellow blacks, chinese, or mexicans.
Hopkins is most definently a racist...but he's not really a bigot when it comes to his thoughts.
I honestly believe that Hopkins knows how & when to play the race card.
This time was one of those times. He pulled the card on Dibella, Trinidad, Echols, Oscar, & now Calzaghe.
While this instance...he was very vocal about it...it was still playful & humerous.
Sure Hopkins feels superior to Calzaghe. Sure he's gonna press the issue. Sure he's gonna be loud & proud in front of the press. Sure people are going to over react...but that's the name of the game in boxing...reaction is the key selling point...& if Hopkins really wants this fight...he & Joe both sold it to a tee.
This will be an excellent fight...if it really does materialize...& I am still skeptical.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here.
Hahaha!!! I know you think I am overly sensitive, but my paticular point is, whats good for one should be good for the other... To try to bring race into is just plain tasteless and classless and goes to show money cant buy those things..
Like stated above if Joe said said he would never lose to know N****** or a Blackman it would cause a global outrage.  ;) I take it tongue and cheek myself but its amazing the double standard thats exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching  and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
:coolclick:
I agree Bhop is a snoozer who's anemic punch count and rule breaking is unbearable to watch and is actually a mockery of the lightheavy division, if wasnt affiliated with GBP would have dissapeared to obscurity by now
Calzaghe will beat him quite easily be suprised if Nard wins more than 2-3 rounds, and that Kessler statement made me laugh during the confrontation.... Kessler would desicion him quite easily as well
CC back my man. And dude,I wasn't referring to you in particular when I said things went OTT(I was actully referring to Bilbo and his usual going off topic,talking about random statistics etc.) ;D
I'm just trying to explain the difference between a white man commentating on a black man's colour versus a black man commenting on a white's man colour.
JT Rock immediately interperets Hopkins saying he will not lose to a white man as a statement of black racial superiority over whites. He (JT Rock) only holds this view though because in the past white's actually practised racial superiority over whites and so he assumes that any statement of colour is automatically an exclamation of superiority.
However blacks have never practised racial superiority over whites so Hopkins statement that he will never lose to a white man does not presume racial superiority whatsoever, that's JT Rock ASSUMPTION.
Look at it this way, if a convicted pedophile tells you that he thinks your daughter or little sister is gorgeous you will likely be highly alarmed to say the least.
But if your Nan or doctor tells you, you would just feel proud.
Why the difference? Because of the known pasts and predicted intention's of the people giving the comments.
So, when considering racial relations, if a white man (part of a race that practised EXTENSIVE and BARBARIC racial superiority over black's) says he will not lose to a black man, it will likely be deemed an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority.
However when a black man (part of a race that was BRUTALLY SUBJECATED and ENSLAVED by white's) says he will not lose to a white man he is not making an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority but rather making a statement of defiance in saying he will not be beaten by a member of the race that historically subjecated his race.
It's a completely different statement of intention altogether.
It's no different to the relationship between a rapist and a past victim. If after repeatedly raping his victim the rapist was finally ordered to stop and anti raping laws were brought in, the future behaviour of the rapist toward the victim would be subject to a greater criticism than the victims future behaviour toward the rapist.
Furthermore any negative statements made by the rapist toward the victim would be regarded as possible threats of repeat behaviour whereas any negative statements made by the victim toward the rapist would hardly be seen as statements of rape intention but rather a sign of longheld resentment and bitterness.
As a Philadelphia street kid, criminal and prisoner Hopkins would have long felt the superior glare of the white man and his statement that he would not lose to a white man was clearly evidence of that resentment still present within him.
Now you can argue that his comments were not needed and in bad taste but you cannot seriously make a claim that they are racist without making that ASSUMPTION yourself based on white's past treatment of black's.
interesting artfully contrived baffling Bullshit...........  ::**
                                                            STOP
                                                AND I MEAN
                                                           STOP
Trying to push this grandoise smoke and mirrors history ancedotal. I dont care what happened 50-60-70 years ago............... Means 0 to me.. Its called individual accountability end of!!!!!!!!!!!! this is the year 2007 you know nothing about Hop or I or what we are thinking or feeling deep down inside, we can only rightfully be judged on our words and actions. Which Hopkins history of desecrating another countries flag and calling a caucasian male a "WHITE BOY" and outright said he would never get beat by a "WHITE BOY" NEVER ALLOW IT.. Plus he went on to repeat the phrase at least 3x  Hopkins is a classless tasteless human being that is ignorant as the day is long, if Hop didnt believe that he being a black man is superior over Calzaghe being the white man then he would have never said it, let alone 3 fukin times. Calzaghe cornered him, confronted him, called him out and got the best of him in front of the whole boxing media on the eve of one the most celebrated Boxing events of the past 50 years. Joe owned him and out of frustration and embarassment Hopkins at a loss for words blurted out like a punch drunk Fuktard that he wasnt losing to no "WHITE BOY" and said it at least 3x and you know why? rattled and embarassed and called out on the big stage. Hopkins said how he was truly feeling....
THE END
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
I hope Hopkins beats Calzaghe ;D
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here.
Hahaha!!! I know you think I am overly sensitive, but my paticular point is, whats good for one should be good for the other... To try to bring race into is just plain tasteless and classless and goes to show money cant buy those things..
Like stated above if Joe said said he would never lose to know N****** or a Blackman it would cause a global outrage. ;) I take it tongue and cheek myself but its amazing the double standard thats exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
:coolclick:
I agree Bhop is a snoozer who's anemic punch count and rule breaking is unbearable to watch and is actually a mockery of the lightheavy division, if wasnt affiliated with GBP would have dissapeared to obscurity by now
Calzaghe will beat him quite easily be suprised if Nard wins more than 2-3 rounds, and that Kessler statement made me laugh during the confrontation.... Kessler would desicion him quite easily as well
CC back my man. And dude,I wasn't referring to you in particular when I said things went OTT(I was actully referring to Bilbo and his usual going off topic,talking about random statistics etc.) ;D
I'm just trying to explain the difference between a white man commentating on a black man's colour versus a black man commenting on a white's man colour.
JT Rock immediately interperets Hopkins saying he will not lose to a white man as a statement of black racial superiority over whites. He (JT Rock) only holds this view though because in the past white's actually practised racial superiority over whites and so he assumes that any statement of colour is automatically an exclamation of superiority.
However blacks have never practised racial superiority over whites so Hopkins statement that he will never lose to a white man does not presume racial superiority whatsoever, that's JT Rock ASSUMPTION.
Look at it this way, if a convicted pedophile tells you that he thinks your daughter or little sister is gorgeous you will likely be highly alarmed to say the least.
But if your Nan or doctor tells you, you would just feel proud.
Why the difference? Because of the known pasts and predicted intention's of the people giving the comments.
So, when considering racial relations, if a white man (part of a race that practised EXTENSIVE and BARBARIC racial superiority over black's) says he will not lose to a black man, it will likely be deemed an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority.
However when a black man (part of a race that was BRUTALLY SUBJECATED and ENSLAVED by white's) says he will not lose to a white man he is not making an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority but rather making a statement of defiance in saying he will not be beaten by a member of the race that historically subjecated his race.
It's a completely different statement of intention altogether.
It's no different to the relationship between a rapist and a past victim. If after repeatedly raping his victim the rapist was finally ordered to stop and anti raping laws were brought in, the future behaviour of the rapist toward the victim would be subject to a greater criticism than the victims future behaviour toward the rapist.
Furthermore any negative statements made by the rapist toward the victim would be regarded as possible threats of repeat behaviour whereas any negative statements made by the victim toward the rapist would hardly be seen as statements of rape intention but rather a sign of longheld resentment and bitterness.
As a Philadelphia street kid, criminal and prisoner Hopkins would have long felt the superior glare of the white man and his statement that he would not lose to a white man was clearly evidence of that resentment still present within him.
Now you can argue that his comments were not needed and in bad taste but you cannot seriously make a claim that they are racist without making that ASSUMPTION yourself based on white's past treatment of black's.
interesting artfully contrived baffling Bullshit........... ::**
STOP
AND I MEAN
STOP
Trying to push this grandoise smoke and mirrors history ancedotal. I dont care what happened 50-60-70 years ago............... Means
0 to me.. Its called individual accountability end of!!!!!!!!!!!! this is the year 2007 you know nothing about Hop or I or what we are thinking or feeling deep down inside, we can only rightfully be judged on our words and actions. Which Hopkins history of desecrating another countries flag and calling a caucasian male a "WHITE BOY" and outright said he would never get beat by a "WHITE BOY" NEVER ALLOW IT.. Plus he went on to repeat the phrase at least 3x Hopkins is a classless tasteless human being that is ignorant as the day is long, if Hop didnt believe that he being a black man is superior over Calzaghe being the white man then he would have never said it, let alone 3 fukin times. Calzaghe cornered him, confronted him, called him out and got the best of him in front of the whole boxing media on the eve of one the most celebrated Boxing events of the past 50 years. Joe owned him and out of frustration and embarassment Hopkins at a loss for words blurted out like a punch drunk Fuktard that he wasnt losing to no "WHITE BOY" and said it at least 3x and you know why? rattled and embarassed and called out on the big stage. Hopkins said how he was truly feeling....
THE END
Joe owned B Hop? ???
Watch the vid again Hopkins COMPLETELY dominated the war of words. He had Joe stuttering and lost for words. He got him to back down his statement that Taylor beat him and and completely shouted him down.
I thought B Hop was in awesome form. He looked menacing, he looked mean, he still had his predatory instincts and in my (humble 0f course) opinion won that little verbal spat hands down 8)
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here.
Hahaha!!! I know you think I am overly sensitive, but my paticular point is, whats good for one should be good for the other... To try to bring race into is just plain tasteless and classless and goes to show money cant buy those things..
Like stated above if Joe said said he would never lose to know N****** or a Blackman it would cause a global outrage. ;) I take it tongue and cheek myself but its amazing the double standard thats exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
:coolclick:
I agree Bhop is a snoozer who's anemic punch count and rule breaking is unbearable to watch and is actually a mockery of the lightheavy division, if wasnt affiliated with GBP would have dissapeared to obscurity by now
Calzaghe will beat him quite easily be suprised if Nard wins more than 2-3 rounds, and that Kessler statement made me laugh during the confrontation.... Kessler would desicion him quite easily as well
CC back my man. And dude,I wasn't referring to you in particular when I said things went OTT(I was actully referring to Bilbo and his usual going off topic,talking about random statistics etc.) ;D
I'm just trying to explain the difference between a white man commentating on a black man's colour versus a black man commenting on a white's man colour.
JT Rock immediately interperets Hopkins saying he will not lose to a white man as a statement of black racial superiority over whites. He (JT Rock) only holds this view though because in the past white's actually practised racial superiority over whites and so he assumes that any statement of colour is automatically an exclamation of superiority.
However blacks have never practised racial superiority over whites so Hopkins statement that he will never lose to a white man does not presume racial superiority whatsoever, that's JT Rock ASSUMPTION.
Look at it this way, if a convicted pedophile tells you that he thinks your daughter or little sister is gorgeous you will likely be highly alarmed to say the least.
But if your Nan or doctor tells you, you would just feel proud.
Why the difference? Because of the known pasts and predicted intention's of the people giving the comments.
So, when considering racial relations, if a white man (part of a race that practised EXTENSIVE and BARBARIC racial superiority over black's) says he will not lose to a black man, it will likely be deemed an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority.
However when a black man (part of a race that was BRUTALLY SUBJECATED and ENSLAVED by white's) says he will not lose to a white man he is not making an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority but rather making a statement of defiance in saying he will not be beaten by a member of the race that historically subjecated his race.
It's a completely different statement of intention altogether.
It's no different to the relationship between a rapist and a past victim. If after repeatedly raping his victim the rapist was finally ordered to stop and anti raping laws were brought in, the future behaviour of the rapist toward the victim would be subject to a greater criticism than the victims future behaviour toward the rapist.
Furthermore any negative statements made by the rapist toward the victim would be regarded as possible threats of repeat behaviour whereas any negative statements made by the victim toward the rapist would hardly be seen as statements of rape intention but rather a sign of longheld resentment and bitterness.
As a Philadelphia street kid, criminal and prisoner Hopkins would have long felt the superior glare of the white man and his statement that he would not lose to a white man was clearly evidence of that resentment still present within him.
Now you can argue that his comments were not needed and in bad taste but you cannot seriously make a claim that they are racist without making that ASSUMPTION yourself based on white's past treatment of black's.
interesting artfully contrived baffling Bullshit........... ::**
STOP
AND I MEAN
STOP
Trying to push this grandoise smoke and mirrors history ancedotal. I dont care what happened 50-60-70 years ago............... Means
0 to me.. Its called individual accountability end of!!!!!!!!!!!! this is the year 2007 you know nothing about Hop or I or what we are thinking or feeling deep down inside, we can only rightfully be judged on our words and actions. Which Hopkins history of desecrating another countries flag and calling a caucasian male a "WHITE BOY" and outright said he would never get beat by a "WHITE BOY" NEVER ALLOW IT.. Plus he went on to repeat the phrase at least 3x Hopkins is a classless tasteless human being that is ignorant as the day is long, if Hop didnt believe that he being a black man is superior over Calzaghe being the white man then he would have never said it, let alone 3 fukin times. Calzaghe cornered him, confronted him, called him out and got the best of him in front of the whole boxing media on the eve of one the most celebrated Boxing events of the past 50 years. Joe owned him and out of frustration and embarassment Hopkins at a loss for words blurted out like a punch drunk Fuktard that he wasnt losing to no "WHITE BOY" and said it at least 3x and you know why? rattled and embarassed and called out on the big stage. Hopkins said how he was truly feeling....
THE END
Joe owned B Hop? ???
Watch the vid again Hopkins COMPLETELY dominated the war of words. He had Joe stuttering and lost for words. He got him to back down his statement that Taylor beat him and and completely shouted him down.
I thought B Hop was in awesome form. He looked menacing, he looked mean, he still had his predatory instincts and in my (humble 0f course) opinion won that little verbal spat hands down 8)
hopkins may have dominated the war of words but I got the feeling he was backed into a corner in that exchange. when the fight happens though calzaghe will be the one dominating
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here.
Hahaha!!! I know you think I am overly sensitive, but my paticular point is, whats good for one should be good for the other... To try to bring race into is just plain tasteless and classless and goes to show money cant buy those things..
Like stated above if Joe said said he would never lose to know N****** or a Blackman it would cause a global outrage. ;) I take it tongue and cheek myself but its amazing the double standard thats exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)
:coolclick:
I agree Bhop is a snoozer who's anemic punch count and rule breaking is unbearable to watch and is actually a mockery of the lightheavy division, if wasnt affiliated with GBP would have dissapeared to obscurity by now
Calzaghe will beat him quite easily be suprised if Nard wins more than 2-3 rounds, and that Kessler statement made me laugh during the confrontation.... Kessler would desicion him quite easily as well
CC back my man. And dude,I wasn't referring to you in particular when I said things went OTT(I was actully referring to Bilbo and his usual going off topic,talking about random statistics etc.) ;D
I'm just trying to explain the difference between a white man commentating on a black man's colour versus a black man commenting on a white's man colour.
JT Rock immediately interperets Hopkins saying he will not lose to a white man as a statement of black racial superiority over whites. He (JT Rock) only holds this view though because in the past white's actually practised racial superiority over whites and so he assumes that any statement of colour is automatically an exclamation of superiority.
However blacks have never practised racial superiority over whites so Hopkins statement that he will never lose to a white man does not presume racial superiority whatsoever, that's JT Rock ASSUMPTION.
Look at it this way, if a convicted pedophile tells you that he thinks your daughter or little sister is gorgeous you will likely be highly alarmed to say the least.
But if your Nan or doctor tells you, you would just feel proud.
Why the difference? Because of the known pasts and predicted intention's of the people giving the comments.
So, when considering racial relations, if a white man (part of a race that practised EXTENSIVE and BARBARIC racial superiority over black's) says he will not lose to a black man, it will likely be deemed an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority.
However when a black man (part of a race that was BRUTALLY SUBJECATED and ENSLAVED by white's) says he will not lose to a white man he is not making an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority but rather making a statement of defiance in saying he will not be beaten by a member of the race that historically subjecated his race.
It's a completely different statement of intention altogether.
It's no different to the relationship between a rapist and a past victim. If after repeatedly raping his victim the rapist was finally ordered to stop and anti raping laws were brought in, the future behaviour of the rapist toward the victim would be subject to a greater criticism than the victims future behaviour toward the rapist.
Furthermore any negative statements made by the rapist toward the victim would be regarded as possible threats of repeat behaviour whereas any negative statements made by the victim toward the rapist would hardly be seen as statements of rape intention but rather a sign of longheld resentment and bitterness.
As a Philadelphia street kid, criminal and prisoner Hopkins would have long felt the superior glare of the white man and his statement that he would not lose to a white man was clearly evidence of that resentment still present within him.
Now you can argue that his comments were not needed and in bad taste but you cannot seriously make a claim that they are racist without making that ASSUMPTION yourself based on white's past treatment of black's.
interesting artfully contrived baffling Bullshit........... ::**
STOP
AND I MEAN
STOP
Trying to push this grandoise smoke and mirrors history ancedotal. I dont care what happened 50-60-70 years ago............... Means
0 to me.. Its called individual accountability end of!!!!!!!!!!!! this is the year 2007 you know nothing about Hop or I or what we are thinking or feeling deep down inside, we can only rightfully be judged on our words and actions. Which Hopkins history of desecrating another countries flag and calling a caucasian male a "WHITE BOY" and outright said he would never get beat by a "WHITE BOY" NEVER ALLOW IT.. Plus he went on to repeat the phrase at least 3x Hopkins is a classless tasteless human being that is ignorant as the day is long, if Hop didnt believe that he being a black man is superior over Calzaghe being the white man then he would have never said it, let alone 3 fukin times. Calzaghe cornered him, confronted him, called him out and got the best of him in front of the whole boxing media on the eve of one the most celebrated Boxing events of the past 50 years. Joe owned him and out of frustration and embarassment Hopkins at a loss for words blurted out like a punch drunk Fuktard that he wasnt losing to no "WHITE BOY" and said it at least 3x and you know why? rattled and embarassed and called out on the big stage. Hopkins said how he was truly feeling....
THE END
Joe owned B Hop? ???
Watch the vid again Hopkins COMPLETELY dominated the war of words. He had Joe stuttering and lost for words. He got him to back down his statement that Taylor beat him and and completely shouted him down.
I thought B Hop was in awesome form. He looked menacing, he looked mean, he still had his predatory instincts and in my (humble 0f course) opinion won that little verbal spat hands down 8)
Totally agree with Bilbo.
Hopkins owned Joe during that entire little rant & Joe appeared very VERY much out of his element standing there face to face "word warring" with the Nard...but then again...they all do against Hopkins.
Totally agree with Hopkins' appearance & demeanor...he cuts a scary figure in person, on paper, & on screen.
He's a bad man! ;D
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
I duno if Hopkins even won the war of the words . He got backed into a corner and he got offennded when Joe said he lost to Taylor twice . Hopkins had no other comeback apart from the race card as usual .
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I duno if Hopkins even won the war of the words . He got backed into a corner and he got offennded when Joe said he lost to Taylor twice . Hopkins had no other comeback apart from the race card as usual .
I like Joe & all...but that aint Joe.
Joe don't act like that & it don't suit him for shit.
He didn't know how to answer or what to say when Hopkins ripped into Kessler being soft opposition. He just fumbled around & grasped for a retort. There was none.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I duno if Hopkins even won the war of the words . He got backed into a corner and he got offennded when Joe said he lost to Taylor twice . Hopkins had no other comeback apart from the race card as usual .
I like Joe & all...but that aint Joe.
Joe don't act like that & it don't suit him for S***.
He didn't know how to answer or what to say when Hopkins ripped into Kessler being soft opposition. He just fumbled around & grasped for a retort. There was none.
joe does his talking in the ring. if and when he fights hopkins he wins.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
I don't really see how anyone could say B Hop won that little debate thing. Who turned their back firsT? Who had to turn their back,think of the race issue and bring that up because he could not think of anything else to say? The debate/argument ended when JC brought up the losses to Taylor.B Hop was dumb founded then. And B Hop looked folish questioning Kessler when he has not fought an opponent an opponent of Kessler's quality for a while. JC won that argument EASILY.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Just imagine, if you will, ..... it's the build up to the eagerly awaited Mayweather-Hatton superfight, everybody is pumped up and excited.
Joe Calzaghe has just signed up for one of the final fights in his stellar career, after 20-odd defences and unifying the super-middles he wants to go out in a blaze of glory by moving up a weight to fight the bigger light-heavyweight champion, the magnificent Bernard Hopkins.
Joe is asked, live on air, what his motivation will be ...... he pauses, considering his words and says "I would never let a black boy beat me. You can print that" He repeats it five times.
Calzaghe's career and legacy would be immediately ruined by that one sentence. It would be front and back page news and would most likely make the TV news as well ...... Calzaghe's previous achievements and career would be absolutely crushed by that one racist comment. He would forever be remembered as a racist. Oh yes, excuses would be made, it would have been a heat of the moment thing, its because he's Welsh, it's the Italian in him etc etc - but make no mistake, that one comment would have irreparably tarnished his career and persons for ever.
But Hopkins has already said that a white boy would never beat him. It is the sign of a weak man to make a big deal out of race, and if Hopkins really thought that he needed to pull out the race card to sell tickets for this fight, then he has little appreciation of his standing within the sport or indeed of the history of ther sport he has graced for so many years.
The only thing that has saved Hopkins from rightful censure and ruin is the political correctness that stains both the US and Britain.
I admire Hopkins for his brilliant achievements and accomplishments inside and outside the ring ....... but my admiration for him as a human being has now sunk to a considerable low.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBSCFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I duno if Hopkins even won the war of the words . He got backed into a corner and he got offennded when Joe said he lost to Taylor twice . Hopkins had no other comeback apart from the race card as usual .
I like Joe & all...but that aint Joe.
Joe don't act like that & it don't suit him for S***.
He didn't know how to answer or what to say when Hopkins ripped into Kessler being soft opposition. He just fumbled around & grasped for a retort. There was none.
joe does his talking in the ring. if and when he fights hopkins he wins.
Joe did mess up at 1 point and stuttered his words but Hopkins saying Kessler aint in his league probably annoyed Joe so thats why he said Taylor beat him twice . Hopkins then got angry and got racist . If Joe said he 'd never lose to a ni**a then there would be outrage but its okay for whites to be insulted ?
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
I don't really see how anyone could say B Hop won that little debate thing. Who turned their back firsT? Who had to turn their back,think of the race issue and bring that up because he could not think of anything else to say? The debate/argument ended when JC brought up the losses to Taylor.B Hop was dumb founded then. And B Hop looked folish questioning Kessler when he has not fought an opponent an opponent of Kessler's quality for a while. JC won that argument EASILY.
Hopkins didn't turn his back, he got Joe stuttering ans spluttering and backtracking then weighed in with his menacing verbal race assualt and then turned and left leaving Joe mumbling to thin air.
He spoke with authority and menace and left at exactly the right moment having struck the first pre fight blow.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBSCFC
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAME
I duno if Hopkins even won the war of the words . He got backed into a corner and he got offennded when Joe said he lost to Taylor twice . Hopkins had no other comeback apart from the race card as usual .
I like Joe & all...but that aint Joe.
Joe don't act like that & it don't suit him for S***.
He didn't know how to answer or what to say when Hopkins ripped into Kessler being soft opposition. He just fumbled around & grasped for a retort. There was none.
joe does his talking in the ring. if and when he fights hopkins he wins.
Joe did mess up at 1 point and stuttered his words but Hopkins saying Kessler aint in his league probably annoyed Joe so thats why he said Taylor beat him twice . Hopkins then got angry and got racist . If Joe said he 'd never lose to a ni**a then there would be outrage but its okay for whites to be insulted ?
I agree GAME and due to this all my respect for Hopkins has gone and I really want him to get KNFO by Joe badly.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
I don't really see how anyone could say B Hop won that little debate thing. Who turned their back firsT? Who had to turn their back,think of the race issue and bring that up because he could not think of anything else to say? The debate/argument ended when JC brought up the losses to Taylor.B Hop was dumb founded then. And B Hop looked folish questioning Kessler when he has not fought an opponent an opponent of Kessler's quality for a while. JC won that argument EASILY.
Hopkins didn't turn his back, he got Joe stuttering ans spluttering and backtracking then weighed in with his menacing verbal race assualt and then turned and left leaving Joe mumbling to thin air.
He spoke with authority and menace and left at exactly the right moment having struck the first pre fight blow.
right sure did.... Nard is the one rumbling and stumbling.. Joe has eye contact the whole time and stood his ground with good posture... He wasnt weaving around and turning his back like Nard. Joe seemed quite amused by the douche bag
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
I would say it's a fact that black's are physically more gifted than whites. They are naturally more muscular, it's a genetic trait.
Is that why white people never win the world strong man competition?
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
I don't really see how anyone could say B Hop won that little debate thing. Who turned their back firsT? Who had to turn their back,think of the race issue and bring that up because he could not think of anything else to say? The debate/argument ended when JC brought up the losses to Taylor.B Hop was dumb founded then. And B Hop looked folish questioning Kessler when he has not fought an opponent an opponent of Kessler's quality for a while. JC won that argument EASILY.
Hopkins didn't turn his back, he got Joe stuttering ans spluttering and backtracking then weighed in with his menacing verbal race assualt and then turned and left leaving Joe mumbling to thin air.
He spoke with authority and menace and left at exactly the right moment having struck the first pre fight blow.
right sure did.... Nard is the one rumbling and stumbling.. Joe has eye contact the whole time and stood his ground with good posture... He wasnt weaving around and turning his back like Nard. Joe seemed quite amused by the douche bag
II agree with JT,I have absolutely ZERO idea what you are talking about Bil my friend."Menacing,authority"?? ??? ;D ;D :)
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by CountryBoy
Fuk Hopkins
that about sums it up for me Duke ;)
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by USA LOVES THE KLITSCHKOS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
I would say it's a fact that black's are physically more gifted than whites. They are naturally more muscular, it's a genetic trait.
Is that why white people never win the world strong man competition?
lol the strongman competition is for athletes who have either failed to achieve success elsewhere or who have come to the ends of their own sporting or bodybuilding careers.
All the gifted black athletes are earning money in highly paid professional sports
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by USA LOVES THE KLITSCHKOS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
I would say it's a fact that black's are physically more gifted than whites. They are naturally more muscular, it's a genetic trait.
Is that why white people never win the world strong man competition?
lol the strongman competition is for athletes who have either failed to achieve success elsewhere or who have come to the ends of their own sporting or bodybuilding careers.
Thats not true
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Sorry Bilbo but you are kind of pissing me off now. You are discrediting white people all the time when you are white yourself, and making every little excuse for Hopkins comment. And then going completely off the subject about things that happened hundreds of years ago basically implying its white people's fault for Hopkins racist comment. I have black friends and im not a racist at all but your comments are starting to become irritating.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
I remember leading up to the Hopkins-Trinidad fight in one of the press conferences when Hopkins said to Trinidad he would serve him his last supper and then put rice and beans on the table right in front of him, so Hopkins playing the race card is nothing new, I think he simply does what he can to get under an opponent's skin. Not making an excuse because bringing race into sports is never right, but he's done similar things in the past.
-
Re: Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Gamo
I don't really see how anyone could say B Hop won that little debate thing. Who turned their back firsT? Who had to turn their back,think of the race issue and bring that up because he could not think of anything else to say? The debate/argument ended when JC brought up the losses to Taylor.B Hop was dumb founded then. And B Hop looked folish questioning Kessler when he has not fought an opponent an opponent of Kessler's quality for a while. JC won that argument EASILY.
Yeah I know mate. Joe just stood there talking while Hopkins was constantly trying to look pre-occupied while his tiny brain thought up an answer......and look what he came out with :-\
