I would say move up to cruiserweight steal a title from one of the champions and either retire or have a farewell fight in philly!
Printable View
I would say move up to cruiserweight steal a title from one of the champions and either retire or have a farewell fight in philly!
I can see only retirement really.
Coaching
I heard talk of a possible Shumenov fight but that was a couple of months ago.
Braces for his teeth
Judging from last night's showbox I'd say Bernard has a future in assuring fighters that they won when the got knocked down in the last round and were very lucky to get the decision ;D
Aside from that, I think Bernard will attempt to be the first man to ever win a world title at age 50...and I think he will do it. It won't be against a superstar, but I can see Bernard being crafty enough to snatch a belt from some European belt holder at Cruiser or light heavy.
Go up to heavy and run rings around a klitschko lol
I would still like to see him and Toney fight.
I would say frustrate Chavez to tears in the ring..... but Martinez is already going to KTFO him on Sept 15th.
fight abraham for the super middleweight title S:... well it won't happen hopkins isnt a big enough draw for abraham to risk it.. would be cool if b-hop could win a super middleweight title and then retire
I see everybody is ;D:excited:, that he will carry on fighting if that what you call it.!
I'm not exitedQuote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
Wake me up when he's finished.;DQuote:
Originally Posted by DropanukeI'm not exitedQuote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
Yes I'll wake you up when he has finished 😝
Are we there yet.;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Dropanuke
Good film!!!
Better than watching Hopkins, for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dropanuke
I hate to say goodbye to a living legend but he should make a graceful exit even though there's seldom anything graceful about B-Hop. I love his style and his ring intellegince can really be appreciated if you watch the fight again and again until it dawns on you all the subtle things he did earlier in the fight to tighten the noose over his opponents neck.
It's sad that all my favourite fighters are old, well there's still Rigondeaux and here's hoping he's the next coming of Sweet Pete.
You make him out to be entertaining, Hopkins you must have a blindfold on or you follow him on the radio, Sorry but he put the S into shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by DavilaJones
Hopkins v Cleverly anyone?
Dia bando, I understand that Hopkins doesn't appeal to you and that you're not a fan.
But he is not a "shit" fighter.
He is one of the best of our generation.
His appeal to me, is not unlike, a snot sandwich. I don't like them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donny
I cant stand watching Hopkins sometimes, but i have to admire the guysQuote:
Originally Posted by Dia bandoHis appeal to me, is not unlike, a snot sandwich. I don't like them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donny
ring skills, he is old school.But it is time to hang the gloves up.
You no when I here his name, it turns my gut;s can't stand him utter total plank.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberto duran legendI cant stand watching Hopkins sometimes, but i have to admire the guysQuote:
Originally Posted by Dia bandoHis appeal to me, is not unlike, a snot sandwich. I don't like them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donny
ring skills, he is old school.But it is time to hang the gloves up.
I know he's old and all, but part of me just wants to see Old Man Hopkins thrashed by a powerful young fighter. I just don't like the guy, never have, never will. I respect his skill but he's a horrible fighter to watch, and he's so full of himself I just dislike him.
His style is not so much different from the way your precious Wladimir fights ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Hopkins fights nothing like Wlad. BHop is a dirty fighter that's constantly fouling his opponents. Wlad is more smooth.
Both hold a lot of the time. Both look for one or two shots at a time. Both are less than thrilling to watch, but effective. And don't tell me Wlad isn't dirty, much like Ali he constantly rides his opponent in the clinch and gets away with incessant holding.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Hopkins is more athletic and smooth if you will, Wlad is more robotic. Wlad has certainly gotten more stoppages in recent years though, even if they have been against less than stellar opponents. Best available I know I know.
You don't like B-hop, I don't like Wlad, and fact is they both bore most boxing fans.
i like them!Quote:
Originally Posted by hulkboth hold a lot of the time. Both look for one or two shots at a time. Both are less than thrilling to watch, but effective. And don't tell me wlad isn't dirty, much like ali he constantly rides his opponent in the clinch and gets away with incessant holding.Quote:
Originally Posted by el kabong
Hopkins is more athletic and smooth if you will, wlad is more robotic. Wlad has certainly gotten more stoppages in recent years though, even if they have been against less than stellar opponents. Best available i know i know.
You don't like b-hop, i don't like wlad, and fact is they both bore most boxing fans.
Speaking from experience here, are we?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
There's nothing wrong with disliking
a boxer. But because we don't like a fighter, it doesn't make them any better or worse a fighter.
I don't believe Hopkins and I could ever have a conversation, but I really respect him as a fighter.
So what you are saying, is Hopkins is a COCK I no that Hagler would have beat the crap out of him,Quote:
Originally Posted by DonnySpeaking from experience here, are we?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
There's nothing wrong with disliking
a boxer. But because we don't like a fighter, it doesn't make them any better or worse a fighter.
I don't believe Hopkins and I could ever have a conversation, but I really respect him as a fighter.
now there's a great fight. Hopkins is not fit to carry, HAGLER'S jockstrap.;)
When you look back at the history of the Middleweight division, even as far as 1970, the most respected middleweights have not been the most amiable of gentlemen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
Hopkins, Hagler, Monzon; all were "bad guys" who were attractions because of there imposing personas, even the aura od menace surrounding them. (particularly Monzon.)
Before that you had street gladiators such as Graziano, LaMotta.
Even before that you had Mickey Walker and Harry Greb.
All of these fighters were notoriously tough, rugged veterans who were awarded the respect of the boxing public because of their performances; certainly not their winning personalities.
Regrding your last point; the hypothetical match between Hagler and Hopkins; I'm afraid I don't understand.
You say "now there's a fight."
Yet you mention that Hopkins " is not fit to carry, HAGLER'S jockstrap" and "Hagler would have beat the crap out of him."
With these sentiments, why would Hagler vs. Hopkins be a good fight?
If you truely believe that, then the only way this would be a good fight is if you watch boxing to see sadistic, one sided beatings.
:-\
For Hopkins I would love to see him, take a one sided SADISTIC beating yes I would really really reallyQuote:
Originally Posted by DonnyWhen you look back at the history of the Middleweight division, even as far as 1970, the most respected middleweights have not been the most amiable of gentlemen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
Hopkins, Hagler, Monzon; all were "bad guys" who were attractions because of there imposing personas, even the aura od menace surrounding them. (particularly Monzon.)
Before that you had street gladiators such as Graziano, LaMotta.
Even before that you had Mickey Walker and Harry Greb.
All of these fighters were notoriously tough, rugged veterans who were awarded the respect of the boxing public because of their performances; certainly not their winning personalities.
Regrding your last point; the hypothetical match between Hagler and Hopkins; I'm afraid I don't understand.
You say "now there's a fight."
Yet you mention that Hopkins " is not fit to carry, HAGLER'S jockstrap" and "Hagler would have beat the crap out of him."
With these sentiments, why would Hagler vs. Hopkins be a good fight?
If you truely believe that, then the only way this would be a good fight is if you watch boxing to see sadistic, one sided beatings.
:-\
enjoy it wonderful.;D
Hagler was a god damn excellent boxer but I don't think anyone could give Hopkins a beat down. If the fastest man in the Middleweight division couldn't do it I highly doubt Hagler could. As to who would win? Damn I don't know.
Hopkins has problem with boxers with high punch output or those who don't always come towards him, Hagler like most solid boxers rather box with you instead of going side to side or pressuring a counter boxer. I don't know why he has a persona of a brawler where in fact he was a great mid-range boxer.
I must be missing something,! Hopkins is abysmal a very unattractive style technically horrible to watch,Quote:
Originally Posted by DavilaJones
Hagler on the other hand, technically head and shoulders above Hopkins in ever department , and I
no who would win HAGLER,
Well if Marvin fought like he did against Hearns old Bhop would be in trouble then.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by DavilaJones
this is too obvious......we all know we want to see a third fight with jones of course
Dia, I am a boxer and this sport means a lot to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
I see the smiley, but that just makes me sick.
No one could put a sadistic beating on Hopkins even at his age he is too good. Only a heavyweight could do some damage but Hopkins is too wise to go there. Didn't he want to fight Haye at one stage?Quote:
Originally Posted by DonnyDia, I am a boxer and this sport means a lot to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dia bando
I see the smiley, but that just makes me sick.
I think you're probably right. He is a throwback in that respect alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Yeah, he had looked into fighting both Haye and Adamek!