Quote Originally Posted by p4pking View Post
I think it's a little harder to rag on Pavlik after he stood up to that ass whipping than it is Wlad Klitschko for playing patty cake with Ibragimov. Not to mention it was a lot more entertaining to watch than any meaningful HW fight in years, imo. If there were any HWs out there who could bring what Hopkins did last night all the others would be lucky just to hear the final bell as well if you ask me. Basically, no.... People call HW's gutless because most aren't getting in condition to fight hard or showing any urgency in the ring when it's right there for the taking. Little different when you've got a defensive wizard clobbering you all over the place.
I'm thinking more about Tony Thompson really. This was a guy who didn't turn pro until he was 30 and fought his way to a title shot the hard way, with no publicity, by being the underdog and beating fighters he wasn't supposed to beat including travelling to Germany to do so.

He simply didn't have the tools to beat Wlad but fought until the 11th round. Meanwhile Steve (fat bastard who knows nothing) Bunce labelled him gutless, a disgrace to the sport and typical of the current generation of useless lazy yanks.

I thought it was completely unfair to Thompson who had worked extrememely hard to get to where he was.

Meanwhile Pavlik gives a display as wholly uninspired, he literally did nothing the whole fight and people label him as brave for fighting until the end.

I'm not criticising Kelly I really like the guy, I just hate the double standards.

Which is why I asked the question, if Kelly was a heavyweight and had given that exact same performance against Wlad would people have labelled it an insipid, gutless, heartless display?