Hopkins vs Dawson 2 Scorecards

[ICB]

1 Even
2 Hopkins
3 Hopkins
4 Dawson
5 Dawson
6 Dawson
7 Hopkins
8 Dawson
9 Dawson
10 Dawson
11 Dawson
12 Dawson

[Taeth]

I told everyone after the first fight, that Hopkins was screwed against Dawson. People argued and now look. Dawson is the first guy that Hopkins faced that had really good footwork. Calzaghe, Pavlik, Taylor, Wright(by the time they fought). Hopkins is very good at making you pay for being out of balance, even his defense which Bradley emulates evolves a lot of upper body movement with his feet also moving a lot. We will see how much trouble this causes for Pacquiao which I could see being a lot, but back to this fight Dawson is in complete balance most of the time, and unlike the Pascal fight he wasn't allowing Hopkins to just rush in without paying the price. I thought Hopkins looked pretty sharp, and still very quick, but Dawson would have beaten him or given any version of Hopkin fits for the same reason Roy did. He's got another level of speed, and he's still a brilliant boxer with more range to his style, and the speed to counter Hopkin's reckless counter attacks. Usually Hopkins picks such good moments to rush back in after having his opponent follow that they can't react, but this was the second time in his career that the person was fast and skilled enough to avoid and counter this game plan.

I give Dawson a lot of credit, now he has to stop having those lapses...

[Hulk]

1 even
2 Hopkins
3 Hopkins
4 Hopkins
5 Dawson
6 Dawson
7 Hopkins
8 Dawson
9 Dawson
10 Dawson
11 Hopkins
12 Hopkins

Upon watching the fight the second time I made the first round even, but there were a lot of close rounds so I could see 7-5 for Dawson.

[Gandalf]

I have it the same as Ice though I thought Dawson deserved the first round due to simply doing more.

9-3 Chad Dawson.

[p4pking]

I told everyone after the first fight, that Hopkins was screwed against Dawson. People argued and now look. Dawson is the first guy that Hopkins faced that had really good footwork. Calzaghe, Pavlik, Taylor, Wright(by the time they fought). Hopkins is very good at making you pay for being out of balance, even his defense which Bradley emulates evolves a lot of upper body movement with his feet also moving a lot. We will see how much trouble this causes for Pacquiao which I could see being a lot, but back to this fight Dawson is in complete balance most of the time, and unlike the Pascal fight he wasn't allowing Hopkins to just rush in without paying the price. I thought Hopkins looked pretty sharp, and still very quick, but Dawson would have beaten him or given any version of Hopkin fits for the same reason Roy did. He's got another level of speed, and he's still a brilliant boxer with more range to his style, and the speed to counter Hopkin's reckless counter attacks. Usually Hopkins picks such good moments to rush back in after having his opponent follow that they can't react, but this was the second time in his career that the person was fast and skilled enough to avoid and counter this game plan.

I give Dawson a lot of credit, now he has to stop having those lapses...

May I ask why you are always so vindictive? I swear you must have 3,000 posts that start with "I told everyone" Who cares?

[shza]

I told everyone after the first fight, that Hopkins was screwed against Dawson. People argued and now look. Dawson is the first guy that Hopkins faced that had really good footwork. Calzaghe, Pavlik, Taylor, Wright(by the time they fought). Hopkins is very good at making you pay for being out of balance, even his defense which Bradley emulates evolves a lot of upper body movement with his feet also moving a lot. We will see how much trouble this causes for Pacquiao which I could see being a lot, but back to this fight Dawson is in complete balance most of the time, and unlike the Pascal fight he wasn't allowing Hopkins to just rush in without paying the price. I thought Hopkins looked pretty sharp, and still very quick, but Dawson would have beaten him or given any version of Hopkin fits for the same reason Roy did. He's got another level of speed, and he's still a brilliant boxer with more range to his style, and the speed to counter Hopkin's reckless counter attacks. Usually Hopkins picks such good moments to rush back in after having his opponent follow that they can't react, but this was the second time in his career that the person was fast and skilled enough to avoid and counter this game plan.

I give Dawson a lot of credit, now he has to stop having those lapses...

May I ask why you are always so vindictive? I swear you must have 3,000 posts that start with "I told everyone" Who cares?

I've always liked Taeth's posts but this made me literally laugh out loud.

I actually scored it 10-2 Dawson. I only gave Hopkins 3 and 7 (though I understand giving him 2). Hulk, you have had a lot of complete outlier cards recently. Round 4? Really?

[p4pking]

Haha I kind of do to, he obviously has a keener eye for analysis than I do. It is almost as if he was beaten as a child for not having sufficient boxing knowledge the way he posts, however. "People argued and now look", yes Taeth... Dont WE all look silly

[ElTerribleMorales]

I told everyone after the first fight, that Hopkins was screwed against Dawson. People argued and now look. Dawson is the first guy that Hopkins faced that had really good footwork. Calzaghe, Pavlik, Taylor, Wright(by the time they fought). Hopkins is very good at making you pay for being out of balance, even his defense which Bradley emulates evolves a lot of upper body movement with his feet also moving a lot. We will see how much trouble this causes for Pacquiao which I could see being a lot, but back to this fight Dawson is in complete balance most of the time, and unlike the Pascal fight he wasn't allowing Hopkins to just rush in without paying the price. I thought Hopkins looked pretty sharp, and still very quick, but Dawson would have beaten him or given any version of Hopkin fits for the same reason Roy did. He's got another level of speed, and he's still a brilliant boxer with more range to his style, and the speed to counter Hopkin's reckless counter attacks. Usually Hopkins picks such good moments to rush back in after having his opponent follow that they can't react, but this was the second time in his career that the person was fast and skilled enough to avoid and counter this game plan.

I give Dawson a lot of credit, now he has to stop having those lapses...

May I ask why you are always so vindictive? I swear you must have 3,000 posts that start with "I told everyone" Who cares?

he was ignored as a child, but yea I'm thinking I'm the only guy who didn't see it as a walk in the park for Chad, although he was the clear winner he still struggled and IMO he hardly dominated a man who's already reaching for 50

[shza]

I told everyone after the first fight, that Hopkins was screwed against Dawson. People argued and now look. Dawson is the first guy that Hopkins faced that had really good footwork. Calzaghe, Pavlik, Taylor, Wright(by the time they fought). Hopkins is very good at making you pay for being out of balance, even his defense which Bradley emulates evolves a lot of upper body movement with his feet also moving a lot. We will see how much trouble this causes for Pacquiao which I could see being a lot, but back to this fight Dawson is in complete balance most of the time, and unlike the Pascal fight he wasn't allowing Hopkins to just rush in without paying the price. I thought Hopkins looked pretty sharp, and still very quick, but Dawson would have beaten him or given any version of Hopkin fits for the same reason Roy did. He's got another level of speed, and he's still a brilliant boxer with more range to his style, and the speed to counter Hopkin's reckless counter attacks. Usually Hopkins picks such good moments to rush back in after having his opponent follow that they can't react, but this was the second time in his career that the person was fast and skilled enough to avoid and counter this game plan.

I give Dawson a lot of credit, now he has to stop having those lapses...

May I ask why you are always so vindictive? I swear you must have 3,000 posts that start with "I told everyone" Who cares?

he was ignored as a child, but yea I'm thinking I'm the only guy who didn't see it as a walk in the park for Chad, although he was the clear winner he still struggled and IMO he hardly dominated a man who's already reaching for 50

Other than Roy Jones in their first fight, everyone has struggled to some extent with Hopkins and has not looked pretty against him. This was the most decisive loss Hopkins has had since that first Jones fight. I don't think that is debatable. And I think that merits some credit to Dawson.

[ElTerribleMorales]

I told everyone after the first fight, that Hopkins was screwed against Dawson. People argued and now look. Dawson is the first guy that Hopkins faced that had really good footwork. Calzaghe, Pavlik, Taylor, Wright(by the time they fought). Hopkins is very good at making you pay for being out of balance, even his defense which Bradley emulates evolves a lot of upper body movement with his feet also moving a lot. We will see how much trouble this causes for Pacquiao which I could see being a lot, but back to this fight Dawson is in complete balance most of the time, and unlike the Pascal fight he wasn't allowing Hopkins to just rush in without paying the price. I thought Hopkins looked pretty sharp, and still very quick, but Dawson would have beaten him or given any version of Hopkin fits for the same reason Roy did. He's got another level of speed, and he's still a brilliant boxer with more range to his style, and the speed to counter Hopkin's reckless counter attacks. Usually Hopkins picks such good moments to rush back in after having his opponent follow that they can't react, but this was the second time in his career that the person was fast and skilled enough to avoid and counter this game plan.

I give Dawson a lot of credit, now he has to stop having those lapses...

May I ask why you are always so vindictive? I swear you must have 3,000 posts that start with "I told everyone" Who cares?

he was ignored as a child, but yea I'm thinking I'm the only guy who didn't see it as a walk in the park for Chad, although he was the clear winner he still struggled and IMO he hardly dominated a man who's already reaching for 50

Other than Roy Jones in their first fight, everyone has struggled to some extent with Hopkins and has not looked pretty against him. This was the most decisive loss Hopkins has had since that first Jones fight. I don't think that is debatable. And I think that merits some credit to Dawson.

I'm not trying to play down Dawson on purpose the thing is Taeth makes it sound as if B-Hop got his ass handed to him when it was far from it

[TigerFan]

Official scores round by round




I had it 9-3 for Dawson

[Master]

B Hop did himself proud and I think the ref was helping Dawson by not allowing any infighting and splitting them immediately when they got caught together. I did not like Dawson complaining about the head all the time to the ref. Hopkins should have made it more dirty if he really wanted to win and make it more of a war, instead he allowed Dawson to pot shot and win rounds too easily.

[Pugilistic]

I had it 8-4 for Dawson.

Dawson stylistically was a very bad matchup for Hopkins because of his overall skillset combined with his size, speed and athleticism and it really showed on the night.

[Slim the BoxingManiac]

I was so enraged at how Hopkins fights that I was scoring 10-7 rounds off of no fighting. Then I realized that I was not in the right mind and stopped scoring.

[J_C]

Looking at the judges scorecards, theres 9 rounds that you could have 'officially' gave BHop there

(rounds 1,2,3,5,9,12 from the 114-114 card, rounds 4&11 from the 2nd card and round 7 on the 3rd card)

Or 11 rounds to Dawson via the same rationale.

Legitimately anywhere from 11-1 Dawson to 9-3 BHop just going from the official scores there. Shows you how subjective and mental scoring is really