Bernard Hopkins

I think Hopkins being in better shape is a solid argument for his quality showing against Pavlik compared with the lacklustre one against Calzaghe.

There's lots of examples of this in boxing..

Ricky Hatton was clearly in far better shape when he beat Lazcano last time than when he got schooled by Floyd. Proof of this is - he landed 63 of 372 punches in 10 rounds against Floyd, whereas through just six rounds against Lazcano, he landed 124 of 342.

This is conclusive proof Hatton's output was far more intense and successful. It has NOTHING to do with the far superior Mayweather stopping Hatton's game. Therefore a fitter Hatton, the one of the Lazcano fight, should have a great chance of reversing the loss to Floyd. Fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

I think Hopkins being in better shape is a solid argument for his quality showing against Pavlik compared with the lacklustre one against Calzaghe.

There's lots of examples of this in boxing..

Ricky Hatton was clearly in far better shape when he beat Lazcano last time than when he got schooled by Floyd. Proof of this is - he landed 63 of 372 punches in 10 rounds against Floyd, whereas through just six rounds against Lazcano, he landed 124 of 342.

This is conclusive proof Hatton's output was far more intense and successful. It has NOTHING to do with the far superior Mayweather stopping Hatton's game. Therefore a fitter Hatton, the one of the Lazcano fight, should have a great chance of reversing the loss to Floyd. Fact.

---

And let's not forget the ass whupping Amir Khan put on Graham Earl. On that night he could have ktfo Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez on the same night imo, he was spectacular.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

I think Hopkins being in better shape is a solid argument for his quality showing against Pavlik compared with the lacklustre one against Calzaghe.

There's lots of examples of this in boxing..

Ricky Hatton was clearly in far better shape when he beat Lazcano last time than when he got schooled by Floyd. Proof of this is - he landed 63 of 372 punches in 10 rounds against Floyd, whereas through just six rounds against Lazcano, he landed 124 of 342.

This is conclusive proof Hatton's output was far more intense and successful. It has NOTHING to do with the far superior, Mayweather, stopping Hatton's game. Therefore a fitter Hatton, the one of the Lazcano fight, should have a great chance of reversing the loss to Floyd. Fact.

---

:lol: .......messy keyboard ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

I think Hopkins being in better shape is a solid argument for his quality showing against Pavlik compared with the lacklustre one against Calzaghe.

There's lots of examples of this in boxing..

Ricky Hatton was clearly in far better shape when he beat Lazcano last time than when he got schooled by Floyd. Proof of this is - he landed 63 of 372 punches in 10 rounds against Floyd, whereas through just six rounds against Lazcano, he landed 124 of 342.

This is conclusive proof Hatton's output was far more intense and successful. It has NOTHING to do with the far superior Mayweather stopping Hatton's game. Therefore a fitter Hatton, the one of the Lazcano fight, should have a great chance of reversing the loss to Floyd. Fact.

---

And let's not forget the ass whupping Amir Khan put on Graham Earl. On that night he could have ktfo Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez on the same night imo, he was spectacular.

---

Unquestionably a fact. Fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli surfs 'Nawlins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

I think Hopkins being in better shape is a solid argument for his quality showing against Pavlik compared with the lacklustre one against Calzaghe.

There's lots of examples of this in boxing..

Ricky Hatton was clearly in far better shape when he beat Lazcano last time than when he got schooled by Floyd. Proof of this is - he landed 63 of 372 punches in 10 rounds against Floyd, whereas through just six rounds against Lazcano, he landed 124 of 342.

This is conclusive proof Hatton's output was far more intense and successful. It has NOTHING to do with the far superior, Mayweather, stopping Hatton's game. Therefore a fitter Hatton, the one of the Lazcano fight, should have a great chance of reversing the loss to Floyd. Fact.

---

:lol: .......messy keyboard ;D

---

I have no idea what that means? :-\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli surfs 'Nawlins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

I think Hopkins being in better shape is a solid argument for his quality showing against Pavlik compared with the lacklustre one against Calzaghe.

There's lots of examples of this in boxing..

Ricky Hatton was clearly in far better shape when he beat Lazcano last time than when he got schooled by Floyd. Proof of this is - he landed 63 of 372 punches in 10 rounds against Floyd, whereas through just six rounds against Lazcano, he landed 124 of 342.

This is conclusive proof Hatton's output was far more intense and successful. It has NOTHING to do with the far superior, Mayweather, stopping Hatton's game. Therefore a fitter Hatton, the one of the Lazcano fight, should have a great chance of reversing the loss to Floyd. Fact.

---

:lol: .......messy keyboard ;D

---

I have no idea what that means? :-\

---

I took it to mean he found your post so funny he spunked all over his computer :-\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli surfs 'Nawlins

:lol: .......messy keyboard ;D

---

I have no idea what that means? :-\

---

I took it to mean he found your post so funny he spunked all over his computer :-\

---

I hope that's true.. i'm honored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Kelly Pavlik walked forward in straight lines, not throwing punches. With slow footwork no head movement and kept telegraphing his punches. Joe Calzaghe threw many more punches with much more variety and kept the pressure on, he also used angles so he wasn't an easy target to hit while pressuring.

I thought Bernard Hopkins also won the Joe Calzaghe fight by 1 point, i had it 6-6 but with the knockdown in the first round giving Bernard Hopkins the edge. But Bernard Hopkins didn't fight as good against Joe Calzaghe, because Joe Calzaghe kept the pressure on and didn't allow Bernard Hopkins, have time to rest like Kelly Pavlik did.

---

Exactly.

Even people that think Hopkins beat Calzaghe all have it a close fight.

Hopkins simply exposed Pavlik for the limited fighter he is. He never looked to have a single thing over Calzaghe apart from punch power.

---

Are you talking about Hopkins or Pavlik because Hopkins has way better technique, skill, defense, chin, etc, etc, etc then Calzaghe. He is the superior fighter. He has foughten better competition and he beat Calzaghe, close or not he's 43 and Calzaghe barely was able to hang with him becuase of his age. Put the 36 year old bernard who fought Trinidad in there and Calzaghe would have been schooled. It was easy to see that besides he lack of output that Bernard was another level of fighter compared to joe.

---

I asked this same question to somebody else today but I'll repeat it here.

If B Hop has fought better competition than Joe name me ONE fighter who B Hop has beat that you think Joe wouldn't have been able to beat?

Kessler and Eubank are tougher opponents than De La Hoya, Trinidad, Pavlik and Tarver imo. They may not have the HOF credentials of an Oscar or a Tito but they were tougher fights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli surfs 'Nawlins

:lol: .......messy keyboard ;D

---

I have no idea what that means? :-\

---

I took it to mean he found your post so funny he spunked all over his computer :-\

---

Nah,thats for the hidden Boards :bucktooth: only coffee through the nose at the moment. Along similiar lines but was it spunked or Came Bilb's,I'm just not that versatile.

Even though he wasn't landing anything really consequential Calzaghe's style wouldn't let Hopkins get as comfortable as he'd like to be. He wouldn't let him rest, didn't care if he looked ugly doing it, and made it a more physical fight than Pavlik.

Although I feel that Hopkins is the greater fighter overall Calzaghe's style would have always been more problematic for Hopkins than Pavlik's. Pavlik's style was always kind of made for Hopkins, the straight lines, you just can't beat Hopkins if you need to be set to punch like that, especially if you're not very fast. It was just a question of if he could pull it off at 43.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Hopkins didn't fight like that against Calzaghe because he couldn't.

Calzaghe is a MILLION times better than Pavlik.

---

Not only is Calzaghe better than Pavlik... but also, styles make fights.

Hopkins is a great defensive fighter. Great defensive fighters can beat guys who have one signature punch (like Pavlik's right cross) because a great defender can look for that one punch and completely take it away. Hopkins couldn't nullify Calzaghe's offense, because Calzaghe doesn't have one signature punch. He throws in unorthodox flurries, he's not left or right hand dominant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SweetPea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Hopkins didn't fight like that against Calzaghe because he couldn't.

Calzaghe is a MILLION times better than Pavlik.

---

Not only is Calzaghe better than Pavlik... but also, styles make fights.

Hopkins is a great defensive fighter. Great defensive fighters can beat guys who have one signature punch (like Pavlik's right cross) because a great defender can look for that one punch and completely take it away. Hopkins couldn't nullify Calzaghe's offense, because Calzaghe doesn't have one signature punch. He throws in unorthodox flurries, he's not left or right hand dominant.

---

Well put. You can't go into Hopkin's ring and expect to bring one weapon and win. You are going to have to try different things until you find out what will work. Props to Hopkins for pulling off the win. Guess Pavlik should have stayed in his weight class.

I was one who originally thought Hopkins didn't have a chance (Pav UD) against the pressure, but there was no pressure to be found. Hopkins likes the leisurely stroll of a fight. I can't wait to watch the fight, now.

Did Hopkins cry to the ref again about how unfair the fight was going? Or did he stand up and win like a man?

Poor Abraham has no big payday waiting for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

I think Hopkins being in better shape is a solid argument for his quality showing against Pavlik compared with the lacklustre one against Calzaghe.

There's lots of examples of this in boxing..

Ricky Hatton was clearly in far better shape when he beat Lazcano last time than when he got schooled by Floyd. Proof of this is - he landed 63 of 372 punches in 10 rounds against Floyd, whereas through just six rounds against Lazcano, he landed 124 of 342.

This is conclusive proof Hatton's output was far more intense and successful. It has NOTHING to do with the far superior Mayweather stopping Hatton's game. Therefore a fitter Hatton, the one of the Lazcano fight, should have a great chance of reversing the loss to Floyd. Fact.

---

It is also a FACT that Joe is the worst fighter to have ever laced up the gloves, I'm not talking about worst of the unbeaten champs, he's actually down there with 'mullet boxer'.

His 45-0 run is purely fraudulent since every single fighter he's faced had a severe off day. It is no coincidence either, Enzo practices voodoo and drains the energy of Joe's opponents with his magic tricks the day before each fight, it's all an elaborate sham. In fact, Enzo was so pissed at Jack Loew for his comments about his son that he did the same voodoo shit on Kelly last weekend. He would have done it for the Lockett fight, but he knew that would seem so ridiculous (Pavlik losing to little Gary) that his cover might be blown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bomp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

I think Hopkins being in better shape is a solid argument for his quality showing against Pavlik compared with the lacklustre one against Calzaghe.

There's lots of examples of this in boxing..

Ricky Hatton was clearly in far better shape when he beat Lazcano last time than when he got schooled by Floyd. Proof of this is - he landed 63 of 372 punches in 10 rounds against Floyd, whereas through just six rounds against Lazcano, he landed 124 of 342.

This is conclusive proof Hatton's output was far more intense and successful. It has NOTHING to do with the far superior Mayweather stopping Hatton's game. Therefore a fitter Hatton, the one of the Lazcano fight, should have a great chance of reversing the loss to Floyd. Fact.

---

It is also a FACT that Joe is the worst fighter to have ever laced up the gloves, I'm not talking about worst of the unbeaten champs, he's actually down there with 'mullet boxer'.

His 45-0 run is purely fraudulent since every single fighter he's faced had a severe off day. It is no coincidence either, Enzo practices voodoo and drains the energy of Joe's opponents with his magic tricks the day before each fight, it's all an elaborate sham. In fact, Enzo was so pissed at Jack Loew for his comments about his son that he did the same voodoo shit on Kelly last weekend. He would have done it for the Lockett fight, but he knew that would seem so ridiculous (Pavlik losing to little Gary) that his cover might be blown.

---

Calzaghe DUCKED "mullet boxer." Fact.