Well we all saw how easily Tito was out-boxed by Wright last night... It was MORE one-sided than when Hopkins fought Trinidad.

The only difference being Trinidad came up in weight to fight Bernard where as Wright came up in weight to fight Trinidad.

Bernards career is still running solely on the fact that he beat Trinidad back in 2001'. He's fought Carl Daniels - Morrad Hakker - Robert Allen - Willaim Sloppy - Howard Eastman - And poor De La Hoya trying to fight 3 weight classes above himself. Bernard has hardly fought WORLD beater's since his one big fight against the "limited" Trinidad.

So I ask... Did Winky Wright show us last night exactly how much of a fraud Hopkins really is?

This is why I think Taylor will beat him. Hopkins has never faced a fighter like Taylor. Taylor is a boxer-puncher with power whereas Tito is nothing more than a continuous head-hunter.

However, you have to remember that Tito was in his prime when he fought Hopkins while Winky beat a Tito that came out of retirement and beat a human punching bag (Mayorga) that moved up in weight.

Well we all saw how easily Tito was out-boxed by Wright last night... It was MORE one-sided than when Hopkins fought Trinidad.

The only difference being Trinidad came up in weight to fight Bernard where as Wright came up in weight to fight Trinidad.

Bernards career is still running solely on the fact that he beat Trinidad back in 2001'. He's fought Carl Daniels - Morrad Hakker - Robert Allen - Willaim Sloppy - Howard Eastman - And poor De La Hoya trying to fight 3 weight classes above himself. Bernard has hardly fought WORLD beater's since his one big fight against the "limited" Trinidad.

So I ask... Did Winky Wright show us last night exactly how much of a fraud Hopkins really is?

No Tito is not a "fraud", but he is highly beatable.

Dont forget before Tito was dominated by Hopkins he was dominated by DLH years earlier. He just cant deal with a good jab plain and simple.

No Tito is not a "fraud", but he is highly beatable.

Dont forget before Tito was dominated by Hopkins he was dominated by DLH years earlier. He just cant deal with a good jab plain and simple.He never said Tito was a fraud, he asked if HOPKINS was.

Martin, Hopkins is probably at the top of my p4p "bore the **** out of me" list. How a giggling granddad who spends 12 rounds running around on his zimmer can be considered a great beats me. People were bigging up his 20th defence but there's a world of difference between "hit and not get hit" and "just run away for 80% of the fight". He's an ass.

No Tito is not a "fraud", but he is highly beatable.

Dont forget before Tito was dominated by Hopkins he was dominated by DLH years earlier. He just cant deal with a good jab plain and simple.
Trinidads only been dominated twice now, the DLH fight was very close, it could of very well been a draw. Hopkins win is supported with his win over DLH.

Trinidads only been dominated twice now, the DLH fight was very close, it could of very well been a draw. Hopkins win is supported with his win over DLH.


He lost the DLH fight 8-4 clean. Only extreme fans like you think it was close.

and he didn't even win those 4 rounds they were given to him.

Well we all saw how easily Tito was out-boxed by Wright last night... It was MORE one-sided than when Hopkins fought Trinidad.

The only difference being Trinidad came up in weight to fight Bernard where as Wright came up in weight to fight Trinidad.

Bernards career is still running solely on the fact that he beat Trinidad back in 2001'. He's fought Carl Daniels - Morrad Hakker - Robert Allen - Willaim Sloppy - Howard Eastman - And poor De La Hoya trying to fight 3 weight classes above himself. Bernard has hardly fought WORLD beater's since his one big fight against the "limited" Trinidad.

So I ask... Did Winky Wright show us last night exactly how much of a fraud Hopkins really is?

Why are you such a Hopkins hater? "Poor" De la Hoya did ok for himself at 154, so he was hardly out of his league at 160 (boxrec says that both he and hop weighed in at 155-157, anyway)

William "Sloppy" is ok to have on a resume for guys like Taylor and Trinidad, but is not credible on Hopkins' resume?

A lot of people on here picked Eastman to beat Hopkins, he couldnt have been that bad of a fighter, right?

Yea, the robert allen trilogy was abysmal, I'll give you that.

Last night didnt change my opinion about hopkins at all, not to mention he beat trinidad when he was considered at the top of his game, and he sent him into retirement for over 2 years.

Again, I ask you, why are you such a Hopkins hater? (you were trashing him in the lacy-cal***gie thread as well)

Trinidads only been dominated twice now, the DLH fight was very close, it could of very well been a draw. Hopkins win is supported with his win over DLH.
Yeah but De La Hoya should never have been fighting at middleweight... The Sturm Fight proved that before hand.

If Kostya Tszyu KO'd Erik Morlaes - would you seriously give praise to Kostya Tszyu for doing it?

It would be what we call in the game, "miss-match" as was Hopkins vs De La Hoya.

He lost the DLH fight 8-4 clean. Only extreme fans like you think it was close.

and he didn't even win those 4 rounds they were given to him.
What are you talking about, that fight was very close, your just a DLH nuthuger, back off, given or not, those are Trinidads rounds, boxing is scored on R.O.U.N.D.S.

Why are you such a Hopkins hater? "Poor" De la Hoya did ok for himself at 154, so he was hardly out of his league at 160 (boxrec says that both he and hop weighed in at 155-157, anyway)

William "Sloppy" is ok to have on a resume for guys like Taylor and Trinidad, but is not credible on Hopkins' resume?

A lot of people on here picked Eastman to beat Hopkins, he couldnt have been that bad of a fighter, right?

Yea, the robert allen trilogy was abysmal, I'll give you that.

Last night didnt change my opinion about hopkins at all, not to mention he beat trinidad when he was considered at the top of his game, and he sent him into retirement for over 2 years.

Again, I ask you, why are you such a Hopkins hater? (you were trashing him in the lacy-cal***gie thread as well)
I don't hate Hopkins... But I don't like him, I'm sick and tired of hearing about how "great" he is, when he's done FAR less than other fighters to back it up.

And I'm tired of all the excuses made for him... It's unacceptable for Calzaghe to face a mandatory challenger, but if Hopkins does it he get's loads of praise!

It's all bollox really...

What are you talking about, that fight was very close, your just a DLH nuthuger, back off, given or not, those are Trinidads rounds, boxing is scored on R.O.U.N.D.S.


Yes Boxing is scored on R.O.U.N.D.S. and you cant win 4 R.O.U.N.D.S. and win a 12 R.O.U.N.D. fight

He never said Tito was a fraud, he asked if HOPKINS was.

Martin, Hopkins is probably at the top of my p4p "bore the **** out of me" list. How a giggling granddad who spends 12 rounds running around on his zimmer can be considered a great beats me. People were bigging up his 20th defence but there's a world of difference between "hit and not get hit" and "just run away for 80% of the fight". He's an ass.

You can say same thing about RJJ who did the same hit/run tactics. That's why no one realized what a suspect chin he really had because his defense was so good. Until Tarver and Johnson got him.

But Roy at least was a good showman and made the hit run style fun to watch. Jabbing is most boring style ever, so what if its technically boxing.

some people call it the sweet science, and some people call it boring, it's just that a lot of guys want to see world war 3 at every fight

my question is during hopkins rein after the RJJ fight who was there to fight??? hopkins beat everyone in front of him he didnt handpick these guys who else was there to fight at that time huh? u cant call hopkins a fraud for beating people who he had to fight. so DLH and tito came from lower weight divsions? is that hopkisn fault he beat them so easly? its not like he had hearns,hagler,leanard,duran,toney's to fight lol

some people call it the sweet science, and some people call it boring, it's just that a lot of guys want to see world war 3 at every fightYou know, I disagree with that. I'm sure no one would deny that Ali was a fine exponent of the sweet science. Was Ali boring?

Mind you, I heard him say the other day that he would have gladly traded the Frazier trilogy off his resume for the Allen trilogy. "It was the greatest trilogy of all tahms" he was heard to have said, still enthralled by such a spectacle.

I don't why people are saying Winky's win was more one-sided than Hopkins' win. All Winky did for the most part was keep Tito away with the jab which was good for him. Hopkins not only used the jab to keep Tito away but also made Tito miss and counter with righthands and hooks. On top of that he made it a point to actually put his win on the line by exchanging more down the stretch and go for the knockout which Winky didn't even consider doing.

Well we all saw how easily Tito was out-boxed by Wright last night... It was MORE one-sided than when Hopkins fought Trinidad.

The only difference being Trinidad came up in weight to fight Bernard where as Wright came up in weight to fight Trinidad.

Bernards career is still running solely on the fact that he beat Trinidad back in 2001'. He's fought Carl Daniels - Morrad Hakker - Robert Allen - Willaim Sloppy - Howard Eastman - And poor De La Hoya trying to fight 3 weight classes above himself. Bernard has hardly fought WORLD beater's since his one big fight against the "limited" Trinidad.

So I ask... Did Winky Wright show us last night exactly how much of a fraud Hopkins really is?

1) Wright did not dominate Tito the way Hopkins did. Hopkins outmuscled and outbrawled and outboxed Tito, and finished him off in the end. Winky won every round with a good jab but fought his fight...Hopkins fought his and Tito's fight and won on both accounts.

2) Bernard's career is NOT running solely on the fact that he beat Tito in 2001. If you were a true boxing historian or truly knowledgeable you would understand the significance of other wins in his career; the WAY he beat guys like Segundo Mercado, Echols, Joppy, Allen, Holmes, his good performance vs Jones, etc. Bernard beats every top 10 fighter they put in front of them, and he controls them mentally and physically. I picked Hopkins to lose to Eastman even. Eastman is a legit top 5 middleweight (after all the crying of Hopkins not facing a "true" middlweight) and Hopkins dismantled him. Eastman was not smart enough for even old Hopkins and I was wrong in picking Eastman to win.

3) You don't like Bernard. I don't like Bernard. I root vs him everytime he fights. Only difference is you let your dislike of his style cloud your judgement of him. He has fought the best in his weight and he handled them all. Justbecause you don't like the way he fights at his old age, that doesn't mean he isn't great. History will remember him as great regardless of what you think, and rightfully so.

What are you talking about, that fight was very close, your just a DLH nuthuger, back off, given or not, those are Trinidads rounds, boxing is scored on R.O.U.N.D.S.

What are you talking about, i'v seen that fight over and over again, it wasnt close by a long shot. If you saw one of the judges score cards it says tito won 2 out of the 1st 3 rounds, DLH dominated tito forn the first 4 rounds clean. Even hardcore tito fans have told me that DLH was robbed, if anybodys a nuthuger it's you.

And to answer your quest martin, no Hopkins is not a fruad, Tito can't fight true boxers period, it showed with DLH, Hopkins, and Winky. He fought Hopkins and Winky, ppl with awsome jabs and defense, he needs a target to hit, if he doesnt have one he's pretty much done.

Why is Hopkins a fraud?

Hopkins beat Tito with skill when Tito was undefeated witout a layoff and on a roll in his career...

only a BHop hater would even consider calling Hopkins that

1) Wright did not dominate Tito the way Hopkins did. Hopkins outmuscled and outbrawled and outboxed Tito, and finished him off in the end. Winky won every round with a good jab but fought his fight...Hopkins fought his and Tito's fight and won on both accounts.

2) Bernard's career is NOT running solely on the fact that he beat Tito in 2001. If you were a true boxing historian or truly knowledgeable you would understand the significance of other wins in his career; the WAY he beat guys like Segundo Mercado, Echols, Joppy, Allen, Holmes, his good performance vs Jones, etc. Bernard beats every top 10 fighter they put in front of them, and he controls them mentally and physically. I picked Hopkins to lose to Eastman even. Eastman is a legit top 5 middleweight (after all the crying of Hopkins not facing a "true" middlweight) and Hopkins dismantled him. Eastman was not smart enough for even old Hopkins and I was wrong in picking Eastman to win.

3) You don't like Bernard. I don't like Bernard. I root vs him everytime he fights. Only difference is you let your dislike of his style cloud your judgement of him. He has fought the best in his weight and he handled them all. Justbecause you don't like the way he fights at his old age, that doesn't mean he isn't great. History will remember him as great regardless of what you think, and rightfully so.
Well said....

Hopkins is not a fraud, he will beat Taylor, but Tito should have been better, i want to see a rematch.

robert allen is a beast at middoe he entered the ring at 5'9 174

You don't like Bernard. I don't like Bernard. I root vs him everytime he fights. Only difference is you let your dislike of his style cloud your judgement of him. He has fought the best in his weight and he handled them all. Justbecause you don't like the way he fights at his old age, that doesn't mean he isn't great. History will remember him as great regardless of what you think, and rightfully so.

You know what I think you might be on to something there fella.

I think that my diss-like for Hopkins show's a lot and can cloud my judgement from time to time.

In England we have what's called the Manchester United syndrome... I'll explain, Manchester United are a football club (largest in the World - but not the best), and all the time you get "Manchester United are so great - this", and "Machester United are so great - that"... And you start to get pissed off with it all! And you start to question, Why?

It's only when you start to qustion it, that's when you find holes all over the place, and you start to realise that they aren't the best.

Same thing with Bernard Hopkins... However I genuinly believe that if weight was not included - Pound 4 Pound, Bernard Hopkins is NOT the best fighter in the World at the moment. There are far more better fighters, and far more proven fighters... I mean, if you compare the competition faced over the last 4-5yrs with Morales and Hopkins... They're just mixing in a different class. Morales Repeatedly fights P4P fighters over and over again where as Bernard fights - Carl Daniels - Morrad Hakker - Robert Allen - William Sloppy - Howard Eastman etc...

The thing is... (Manchester United syndrome)... If someone keeps telling you how great something is all the time, you end up resenting it!

He never said Tito was a fraud, he asked if HOPKINS was.

Martin, Hopkins is probably at the top of my p4p "bore the **** out of me" list. How a giggling granddad who spends 12 rounds running around on his zimmer can be considered a great beats me. People were bigging up his 20th defence but there's a world of difference between "hit and not get hit" and "just run away for 80% of the fight". He's an ass.
I totally agree with that!... I felt cheated when I bought the Eastman/Hopkins fight on PPV.

Before the fight Hopkins said that he'd looked into Eastman's eye's and he knew that Eastman had come to fight...

So instead of fighting he just ran for 12 rounds! Looking like he was scared of getting hit.

I thought to myself, "I've paid to watch the so called P4P best fighter in the World and he didn't even come to fight???" - cheated out of £15.00

And then not long after I saw Morales/Pacquiao and Arce/Hussien on another bill, and I thought these Mexican guy's don't F**k about... They ain't there to look good for the judges, they ain't scared of getting hit... And THEY DEFINATLY CAME TO FIGHT! These guy's are prize fighters, it's built into them and not only do they want nothing more than to win! They wanna win in style, and prove to the other guy and the WORLD that they're the toughest and the No.1 and they go to WAR!

There are so many fighters that are like this, not just Mexicans... Like Corrales/Pacquiao/Calzaghe/Gatti/Tszyu/Cotto and loads more...

But to me it's not just about going to WAR, It's about coming to fight... Knowing that they've gotta fight on their hands and They mean business!

Hopkins doesn't work this way :(

that is what makes Boxing....all fighters are different...sometimes meaning an exciting clash and sometimes not...Hopkins at this point in his career has a lot at stake and knows the ramifications of a loss...ever since he hit the big stage vs Tito, he has been a lot more cautious especially with the DLH fight and afterwards...

Hopkins is not a stupid man...he has not had the silk sheets life until now...he worked hard in some pretty exciting and tough fights throughout his career...now that he has made it, he doesn't want to mess anything up...look at it this way...

the poor man who worked hard to get where he's gotten is milking every bit of it that he can before someone mugs him...before he loses in the ring and no one will clamour to watch him again...not every fighter will just walk into a dangerous fight and start winging bombs knowing the possibility of getting hurt by just being foolish...Hopkins' style is not that of a Gatti or Morales...Hopkins is a counter puncher...those guys are not...counter punchers to not take the initial lead in fights...

regardless of what one may think of Hopkins, he has come a long way...been through some ups and downs in his career...and wants to make the best of what he has never had before it is time to go back down...Hopkins has not had Hagler, Monzon, Leonard, Robinson, and Hearns in his era...a lot of the knack on some fighters with Hopkins being one of them is that they have not fought many P4P or Legend fighters...well these days it is not a fighter like Hopkins' fault...if those major HOFer/P4P fighters are not in his weight class, then how can he fight them? If Hopkins always keeps himself in shape and would rather dominate his class, why not? Once a fighter moves up a class or two, then people are saying "I wish he would have stayed in one class, he could have dominated." If those HOFer/P4P fighters are smaller weight classes and choose to move up, why NOT fight them especially of the calibur and $$$ of Tito and DLH? Hagler did it and no one rags on him and Hagler LOST! Hopkins is making the smart business decisions. Hopkins fighting the smaller Tito and DLH is nothing new in Boxing. Hopkins beat them, Larry didn't beat Spinks, Hopkins beat them, Hagler didn't beat Leonard, Hopkins beat them, Ruiz didn't beat Jones/Toney. Hopkins won like he was supposed to.

Now that Tito has lost to Winky, I can only see someone who just hates Hopkins or just annoyed with his success as making a post degrading him because of Winky's win. Hopkins beat Tito when Tito was on a roll, fired up, and undefeated. Not many picked Hopkins to win. Hopkins fought his fight AND Tito's in some spurts and won on both occassions. Winky fought his fight and practically shut Tito out after the long layoff.

Hopkins is a great middleweight. Sure not greatest P4P all time because he was not fortunate to have 3-5 HOFers in the middleweight division throughout the prime of his career. But Hopkins worked with what was available to him, beat them (except for Jones and his debut fight at crusier) and grew as a fighter over the year. For those who want to know what type of fighter Hopkins can be when faced with adversity or toughness, watch the first two Allen fights, the two Mercado fights, and the Echols fights. Sure they are not Ray Robinsons, but not many are. They tested Hopkins and Hopkins pulled through.

The man is a fighter. A tough son of a gun. Finally making it to the top and $$$ will make any tough son of a gun slow down a bit and take things as they come. Hopkins never claimed or claims to be an exciting fighter. He doesn't claim to be the fastest or the biggest puncher. He knows he is not fight of the year fighter. But guys, this world is not about EVERYONE being the same. Not everyone is Gatti, Pacman, Morales.

Trust me, Hopkins would rather be in this current position of facing Taylor for big money then possibly Winky, Joe C (if he gets past Lacy), and the Light HW winner, than to have foolishly traded with Tito, Joppy, or Eastman just to please a couple of people and possibly lose. As Hopkins said, "I will not make the same mistake Hagler made vs Leonard". Well Hopkins didn't vs his opponents such as DLH and Hopkins is still at the top of the mountain.

TyrantT316 - I totally understand what you're saying man, But to be a true great, and be remembered, you've gotta be in this game for the glory, NOT the money. You've gotta step up and take the challenge. You can only be the best by beating the best.

I have nothing wrong with people staying in their weight class all their career, but if there's no one else around to fight you've gotta go up or down and seek out the top guy's, as MANY MANY others have done.

I have SOOOO much more respect for a guy like De La Hoya for at least trying to go up to 160lb and win. He showed that he's not scared, and that he's got a lot of heart. He looked so much smaller in the ring than Hopkins... And he lost, :dunno: so what. He had the courage to take a gamble and try.

Hopkins wants the big money like the Tito's and De La Hoya's... And he still doesn't understand why He doesn't get it. It's BECAUSE he doesn't take risks, BECAUSE he doesn't take a gamble.

He fights for money not for glory... There's nothing wrong with that, but you'll never go down as a great, and be remembered that way.

Too Cautious.

TyrantT316 - I totally understand what you're saying man, But to be a true great, and be remembered, you've gotta be in this game for the glory, NOT the money. You've gotta step up and take the challenge. You can only be the best by beating the best.

I have nothing wrong with people staying in their weight class all their career, but if there's no one else around to fight you've gotta go up or down and seek out the top guy's, as MANY MANY others have done.

I have SOOOO much more respect for a guy like De La Hoya for at least trying to go up to 160lb and win. He showed that he's not scared, and that he's got a lot of heart. He looked so much smaller in the ring than Hopkins... And he lost, :dunno: so what. He had the courage to take a gamble and try.

Hopkins wants the big money like the Tito's and De La Hoya's... And he still doesn't understand why He doesn't get it. It's BECAUSE he doesn't take risks, BECAUSE he doesn't take a gamble.

He fights for money not for glory... There's nothing wrong with that, but you'll never go down as a great, and be remembered that way.

Too Cautious.

I understand your position as well...I just think back to Hopkins' early part of his career...he came from pretty much nothing and Boxing was his outlet...so he fought and fought to get his life together...not out of greed...now that he has hit the big time and is smart to realize opportunity that he never had, he is taking advantage of it...as a Boxing fan, yes I would like to see Hopkins in another dogfight as early in his career at 168 or 175...as a realistic human, I also realize he wants to milk what he never had in his career and life in general...

can you imagine the heat he would have taken if he turned down ODLH or Tito?...gave up his titles to not fight Tito in that tournament...

what Hopkins HAS done in his career solidifies his greatness...people need to remember that there is more than one level of greatness...if a fighter like Hopkins is called great, that doesn't always mean people are calling him a Robinson or Ali...if going undefeated for 11+ years with 20 title defenses, beating two HOFers regardless of size (Hagler did it, Larry did it), and still dominating at 40+ years old isn't at least the LEAST level of greatness...then what is? many might as well said his career was for nothing...

1)Lewis
2)Holyfield
3)Tyson

you can break greatness into three parts...Hopkins is at LEAST a 2-3...would be a 1 if he had the level of comp at 160 in his era as past fighters did

1)Lewis
2)Holyfield
3)Tyson
Yeah but these three were heavyweights... They didn't have the option of going up or down (in Holyfield's case after 20 fights).

I don't diss-agree with Hopkins fighting De La Hoya or Trinidad even though they were smaller... It makes perfect financial and career sense, And was definatly a good move for him!

The problem I have with Hopkins is that when he's finished fighting them guy's he goes back to fighting Carl Daniels - Morrad Hakker - William Sloppy - Robert Allen - Howard Eastman... He doesn't seem to want to show how great he can be by then moving up and fighting the super-middleweight Champion or the light-heavyweight champion to show everyone how good he can be.

He just sit on it, waiting for another welterweight champion to decide to move up in weight again. (thus looking for the little guy/risk-free fights).

I think Hopkins is a good fighter, but we'll never know how good because he never showed us. If he went up to super-middleweight and beat Calzaghe I would shut the F**k up! And the only things you'd hear coming from my mouth would be praise for the guy.

But I know Hopkins is never gonna take the risk and go up and fight Joe Calzaghe - For two reasons. Calzaghe WOULD be a very hard nights work!... Calzaghe's bigger, he hits like a kick from a mule, and Calzaghe will be looking to take Hopkins head off from round 1 through to round 12. Hopkins Will get hit a lot in that fight.

And the other reason would be, Hopkins doesn't want to get hurt... He doesn't want to get hit. He's happy fighting the smaller guy's where he can dictate the pace and keep them off him because he's bigger.

You know, I disagree with that. I'm sure no one would deny that Ali was a fine exponent of the sweet science. Was Ali boring?

Mind you, I heard him say the other day that he would have gladly traded the Frazier trilogy off his resume for the Allen trilogy. "It was the greatest trilogy of all tahms" he was heard to have said, still enthralled by such a spectacle.
sometimes people wear rose tinted glasses were ali is concerned, sure he may have had wars with frazier which were truly amazing, but he was also involed in a lot of negative fights, which some people may consider boring, there are very few fighters who have wars in every fight, certainly not ''boxers'' like ali

People seem to forget that Hopkins KNOCKED out Tito and..Wright didnt...meaning i think..Wright is a better boxer..but Hopkins..is almost as good and can adjust to Wright's style better than anyone..and he has more POWER

People seem to forget that Hopkins KNOCKED out Tito and..Wright didnt...meaning i think..Wright is a better boxer..but Hopkins..is almost as good and can adjust to Wright's style better than anyone..and he has more POWER

well neither of them fight to kill you and knock your head off like Tyson or Manny...

Hopkins fights with a bit more power and counters beautifully...he likes to just put leather on you at times...Winky likes to jab and get off quick punches...Hopkins broke Tito down with shots more powerful than Wrights...but I don't think comparing their victories over Tito means degrading Wright's because he didn't KO Tito...Wright is fine with just having fun and doing his thing...Hopkins just has a bit more power and broke Tito down with better shots throughout the entire fight/...

they both dominated near shutouts...Winky may have given Tito the 12th and Hopkins may have given Tito the 1st and 6th but those rounds could have gone either way in both fights

I totally agree with that!... I felt cheated when I bought the Eastman/Hopkins fight on PPV.

Before the fight Hopkins said that he'd looked into Eastman's eye's and he knew that Eastman had come to fight...

So instead of fighting he just ran for 12 rounds! Looking like he was scared of getting hit.

I thought to myself, "I've paid to watch the so called P4P best fighter in the World and he didn't even come to fight???" - cheated out of £15.00

And then not long after I saw Morales/Pacquiao and Arce/Hussien on another bill, and I thought these Mexican guy's don't F**k about... They ain't there to look good for the judges, they ain't scared of getting hit... And THEY DEFINATLY CAME TO FIGHT! These guy's are prize fighters, it's built into them and not only do they want nothing more than to win! They wanna win in style, and prove to the other guy and the WORLD that they're the toughest and the No.1 and they go to WAR!

There are so many fighters that are like this, not just Mexicans... Like Corrales/Pacquiao/Calzaghe/Gatti/Tszyu/Cotto and loads more...

But to me it's not just about going to WAR, It's about coming to fight... Knowing that they've gotta fight on their hands and They mean business!

Hopkins doesn't work this way :(



Nicely put ma main man! Any post that compliments Pac I give positive karma to. :cool:

well neither of them fight to kill you and knock your head off like Tyson or Manny...

Hopkins fights with a bit more power and counters beautifully...he likes to just put leather on you at times...Winky likes to jab and get off quick punches...Hopkins broke Tito down with shots more powerful than Wrights...but I don't think comparing their victories over Tito means degrading Wright's because he didn't KO Tito...Wright is fine with just having fun and doing his thing...Hopkins just has a bit more power and broke Tito down with better shots throughout the entire fight/...

they both dominated near shutouts...Winky may have given Tito the 12th and Hopkins may have given Tito the 1st and 6th but those rounds could have gone either way in both fights


and thats what makes Pac exciting to watch. His intention is to HURT his opponents and Knock them out. Positive points fo you doo!

well as Glen Johnson said, "I am not interested in getting my IBF title back from Clinton Woods..I am only interested in the money...I am not getting any younger"

Hopkins I guess realizes he is not getting any younger...the man is 40 year old and fighting better than some 27-33 year olds...I want him to move up as much as the next though

Well we all saw how easily Tito was out-boxed by Wright last night... It was MORE one-sided than when Hopkins fought Trinidad.

So I ask... Did Winky Wright show us last night exactly how much of a fraud Hopkins really is?
This post is obviously intended to create some reaction, but it is such an unbelievably ignorant bit of text, that it doesn't deserve any further attention from actual fight fans.

This post is obviously intended to create some reaction, but it is such an unbelievably ignorant bit of text, that it doesn't deserve any further attention from actual fight fans.
Munn - "Ohh I know everything about everything don't you know!!!"

Actually have a read of some of the opinions on this thread rather than dissmissing straight away... It was inteneded to disscuss Bernard Hopkins and where he's going, what he's doing etc etc.

And there's more intelligent conversation being had on this thread than most others... There's not a hint of: "I'm gonna open a can of Whoopass on you!!" Or "Ya'll MOFO!".

You say you're a real fight fan then you're more than welcome to express your opinion on this thread. :)

After all, this is a boxing forum where people are entitled to express their opinion.

Well we all saw how easily Tito was out-boxed by Wright last night... It was MORE one-sided than when Hopkins fought Trinidad.

With BHop Tito was unretired, while with Winky was coming from a fight before 29 months of retirement. Also, BHop knocked Tito down and dominated him psychologically.

The only difference being Trinidad came up in weight to fight Bernard where as Wright came up in weight to fight Trinidad.

Tito fought Joppy at middleweight before BHop, and he was ok, so he didn't come up in weight with BHop.

Bernards career is still running solely on the fact that he beat Trinidad back in 2001'. He's fought Carl Daniels - Morrad Hakker - Robert Allen - Willaim Sloppy - Howard Eastman - And poor De La Hoya trying to fight 3 weight classes above himself. Bernard has hardly fought WORLD beater's since his one big fight against the "limited" Trinidad.

BHop boxed 12 rounds with a prime Roy Jones, impossible for Tito.
Trinidad fought past his prime Camacho and Pernell W., and the DLH fight was a gift.

So I ask... Did Winky Wright show us last night exactly how much of a fraud Hopkins really is?

No, he didn't. Winky and BHop are different, and both technically superior to Tito.

There's not a hint of: "I'm gonna open a can of Whoopass on you!!" Or "Ya'll MOFO!".
I suppose that's why you were compelled to add this?
Munn - "Ohh I know everything about everything don't you know!!!"
OK, let's start this thing again. Right now, it seems that you believe Hopkins is a fraud, based on your wording. I'm not sure if that's what you meant though, it just seems that way. My initial response to your question was based on the assumption that you believe Hops is/was a fraud.

So, if you don't mind, let's turn this around and offer you a chance to .....
..... express your opinion on this thread.
It always easy to ask questions, and demand clarification from other posters, but let's hear what you actually think about Wright's success against Tito and how that success should influence our perception of Hopkins.

The Tito that winky fought saturday was NOT the same Trinidad that B-HOp fought!!! hopkins ruined trinidad and broke his spirit. the old tito would have kept punching until he broke through wrights guard.

It would be easier if you scroll up and read the posts on this thread... But give me one sec and I'll do a quick copy and paste for you...

Actually I can't be bothered... Just scroll up.

I don't diss-agree with Hopkins fighting De La Hoya or Trinidad even though they were smaller... It makes perfect financial and career sense, And was definatly a good move for him!

Yes, he accepted these fight because of money and legacy (Tito and DLH are well known boxers). I think that the bad move were for them weighting more than they should.

The problem I have with Hopkins is that when he's finished fighting them guy's he goes back to fighting Carl Daniels - Morrad Hakker - William Sloppy - Robert Allen - Howard Eastman... He doesn't seem to want to show how great he can be by then moving up and fighting the super-middleweight Champion or the light-heavyweight champion to show everyone how good he can be.

I disagree, I like to see every fighter at his best weight: BHop at 160, DLH between 135 and 147, Tito between 140 and 154.

He just sit on it, waiting for another welterweight champion to decide to move up in weight again. (thus looking for the little guy/risk-free fights).

He fought these two little guys for money and legacy. You forgot that he fought bigger guys than him.

I think Hopkins is a good fighter, but we'll never know how good because he never showed us. If he went up to super-middleweight and beat Calzaghe I would shut the F**k up! And the only things you'd hear coming from my mouth would be praise for the guy.

But I know Hopkins is never gonna take the risk and go up and fight Joe Calzaghe - For two reasons. Calzaghe WOULD be a very hard nights work!... Calzaghe's bigger, he hits like a kick from a mule, and Calzaghe will be looking to take Hopkins head off from round 1 through to round 12. Hopkins Will get hit a lot in that fight.

Fortunately both BHop and Calzaghe are fighting in their class, as it sould be.

And the other reason would be, Hopkins doesn't want to get hurt... He doesn't want to get hit. He's happy fighting the smaller guy's where he can dictate the pace and keep them off him because he's bigger.

Wrong. You are biased here. Look at all his fights and you will se boxers thicker than him (Allen) ohters are natural middleweights, and some of them even went up in weight up to heavyweight (Roy Jones).

On the real, I don't see what all the fuss is about Hopkins. You wanna see him brawl a bit, check earlier in his career. Does, this fight make Hopkins look like a fraud? I don't think so. Why is it when one good fighter beats a fighter that another good fighter beat, the first fighter is suddenly discredited? If Winky was a chump I could see the logic in that, but he's pretty far from being that.

People bash Hopkins for beating Oscar in a mismatch, but didn't Winky fight Mosely TWICE? And nobody on this site can be real with themselves and tell me that Shane vs. Ronald was not a mismatch both times. With Shane originally coming from a lower weight class and fighting a bigger fighter just as Oscar did and just as Trinidad did, why hasn't Winky been bashed for this? Didn't he also lose to Fernando Vargas who was formerly in the 140 somethin weight class?

Let's be real, everytime previously, when cats were sayin that Hopkins was gonna lose he came out with the W. How many years has it been now? 12? Maybe I'm wrong, but if Hopkins was a fraud, shouldn't someone have exposed this by now? Everyone thought Eastman would've done it to the old man, but he couldn't realize that no matter how much he walked straight forward it wasn't gonna be a brawl. Everyone thought Tito would do it and he got knocked out initiating a one-sided brawl that Bernard gladly accepted (and regardless of what you wanna say, nobody can say Tito can't hit).

Fortunately both BHop and Calzaghe are fighting in their class, as it sould be.

Wrong. You are biased here. Look at all his fights and you will see boxers thicker than him (Allen) ohters are natural middleweights, and some of them even went up in weight up to heavyweight (Roy Jones).
I mentioned this quote earlier in the thread:

"I have nothing wrong with people staying in their weight class all their career, but if there's no one else around to fight you've gotta go up or down and seek out the top guy's, as MANY MANY others have done.

I have SOOOO much more respect for a guy like De La Hoya for at least trying to go up to 160lb and win. He showed that he's not scared, and that he's got a lot of heart. He looked so much smaller in the ring than Hopkins... And he lost, so what. He had the courage to take a gamble and try."

To be honest with you, Robert Allen may have been a couple of pounds heavier than Hopkins... But Robert Allen was ****. :dunno:

I mentioned this quote earlier in the thread:

"I have nothing wrong with people staying in their weight class all their career, but if there's no one else around to fight you've gotta go up or down and seek out the top guy's, as MANY MANY others have done.

I have SOOOO much more respect for a guy like De La Hoya for at least trying to go up to 160lb and win. He showed that he's not scared, and that he's got a lot of heart. He looked so much smaller in the ring than Hopkins... And he lost, so what. He had the courage to take a gamble and try."

DLH did that to be the only one to win 6 titles in 6 categories, not because he has courage, two different things.

DLH did that to be the only one to win 6 titles in 6 categories, not because he has courage, two different things.
That's ludicrious... DLH had already won the WBO belt at that stage, so was already considered a 6 weight champion (argueable I admit).

He was fighting at several weight divisions above himself, and that takes tremendous courage. Not only that... He challenged the undisputed middleweight champion.

I don't understand the "two different things" you said... Either you're just winding me up?... :dunno: Or you don't know what you're talking about?

That's ludicrious... DLH had already won the WBO belt at that stage, so was already considered a 6 weight champion (argueable I admit).

He was fighting at several weight divisions above himself, and that takes tremendous courage. Not only that... He challenged the undisputed middleweight champion.

I don't understand the "two different things" you said... Either you're just winding me up?... :dunno: Or you don't know what you're talking about?

I know what I'm talking about. DLH said some years before that he wants six belts in different categories. And as you said although he has the WBO belt he wanted more belts in that category, and better ones.

Yes he needs some courage to go up, but I wanted to say that he didn't do it to show courage, but because he wants the belts. Hope it's clear now.

I know what I'm talking about. DLH said some years before that he wants six belts in different categories. And as you said although he has the WBO belt he wanted more belts in that category, and better ones.

Yes he needs some courage to go up, but I wanted to say that he didn't do it to show courage, but because he wants the belts. Hope it's clear now.
Yeah that makes more sense... I'm not a De La Hoya fan, I don't really look forward to his fights. (To be honest I was always kinda baffeled as to how he earnt so much money and had such a following - Coz' he wasn't that exciting to watch).

But I've always admired the fact that he hasn't ducked anyone. He's gone for the best in each division... And that means more to me than defending the same belt in the same weight class to the same people over and over again.

Yeah that makes more sense... I'm not a De La Hoya fan, I don't really look forward to his fights. (To be honest I was always kinda baffeled as to how he earnt so much money and had such a following - Coz' he wasn't that exciting to watch).

I too am surprised on guys like him making millions and millions, while others that deserve credid doesn't.

But I've always admired the fact that he hasn't ducked anyone. He's gone for the best in each division... And that means more to me than defending the same belt in the same weight class to the same people over and over again.

Moving in weight works when you can carry the weight, DLH was so much over at 160 that he almost draw with Sturm and lost to BHop. I prefer to see him again, between 135 and 147, and forget about the belts. I also prefer Pacman at 122, Morales at 122-130, but not 135 like he said he could move.

I personally respect a boxer that never move to other weight classes and didn't duck anyone at his weight class.

Moving in weight works when you can carry the weight, DLH was so much over at 160 that he almost draw with Sturm and lost to BHop. I prefer to see him again, between 135 and 147, and forget about the belts. I also prefer Pacman at 122, Morales at 122-130, but not 135 like he said he could move.

I personally respect a boxer that never move to other weight classes and didn't duck anyone at his weight class.
I'd prefer to see Pacquiao at 122lb or 126lb And I think that DLH lost to Felix Sturm!... It was bent American judges!

Morlaes though... Imagine he went up to 135lbs and beat Diego Corrlaes, (he could move back down after) - I reckon that Morlaes could out-box Corrales on the back foot!

Morales would cement himself in the all time greats!... He did the impossible!!!

It's worth the gamble I reckon!

It would be easier if you scroll up and read the posts on this thread... But give me one sec and I'll do a quick copy and paste for you... Actually I can't be bothered... Just scroll up.
Like I said my friend, it's always easy to ask questions, wait for a reply, and then demand clarification from other posters. Again, let's hear what you actually think about Wright's success against Tito and how that success should influence our perception of Hopkins. That was your original question, wasn't it?

I've checked your posts, as you suggested, and, as I suspected, there's nothing there, really. Not once have you referred directly to Tito vs Wright in comparison to Tito vs Hopkins, in an effort to compare those two Tito defeats. Care to weigh-in on your own question? Come on, it'll be fun.

If you do care to respond, recall that your dear Calzaghe hasn't strayed too far from Supermiddle has he? Be careful, remember that "great" Johnny Owen didn't make a move away from Bantamweight, yet you'll be hard pressed to find anyone in the UK that would challenge him (except maybe those who accept your logic) for staying at his natural weight, right? There's many more "great" fighetrs who moved neither up or down, it's just that Zaghe and Owen came to mind first.

By the way, in comparison, I agree 100% with you that De La Hoya should never have wandered up to Middle. In that regard, I guess Calzaghe is smarter than Oscar.

Like I said my friend, it's always easy to ask questions, wait for a reply, and then demand clarification from other posters. Again, let's hear what you actually think about Wright's success against Tito and how that success should influence our perception of Hopkins. That was your original question, wasn't it?

I've checked your posts, as you suggested, and, as I suspected, there's nothing there, really. Not once have you referred directly to Tito vs Wright in comparison to Tito vs Hopkins, in an effort to compare those two Tito defeats. Care to weigh-in on your own question? Come on, it'll be fun.

If you do care to respond, recall that your dear Calzaghe hasn't strayed too far from Supermiddle has he? Be careful, remember that "great" Johnny Owen didn't make a move away from Bantamweight, yet you'll be hard pressed to find anyone in the UK that would challenge him (except maybe those who accept your logic) for staying at his natural weight, right? There's many more "great" fighetrs who moved neither up or down, it's just that Zaghe and Owen came to mind first.

By the way, in comparison, I agree 100% with you that De La Hoya should never have wandered up to Middle. In that regard, I guess Calzaghe is smarter than Oscar.
Well 1st off... There's no need for sarcastic comments! "Come on, it'll be fun". I'm not here to argue about boxing, I'm here to discuss it! I'm entitled to my own opinion as are you, And I'm interested in you opinion (if you know what you're talking about), I find myself quickly filtering through the argumentative types.

I think that Tito was just "WAITING" to be taught a boxing lesson before Hopkins got his hands on him. I did at the time - (just before the Tito vs Hopkins fight) see Tito as a gold trophey just waiting to be taken! - There are other fighters out there at the moment I do aswell... But wait... I'm not negative, there are also some fighters that I have strong deep feeling are the future of boxing!

There's not too much I can say without going back over what I said further up on this thread...

Tito has been a little bit of a sitting duck for quite a long time now, I felt it was just a case of, the 1st slick boxer takes the jewel!

That happened to be Bernard Hopkins. :dunno:

Hey, Martin. "It'll be fun" is alot softer than your previous comment to me about "knowing everything". I meant it though, it'll be fun. Nothing more.

Trouble is, there's no way Winky's defeat of Trinidad makes Hops defeat of Trinidad any less important. It's been four years since Tito got himself KTFO on the receiving end of a flush Hopkins right hand. It was beautiful. It still is. Wright's win changes nothing.

Your true gripe seems to be Calzaghe not getting respect, while Hopkins gets "great" staus. Get over it, it's for real. Hopkins' place in the Boxing Hall of Fame is secure and Calzaghe will be a candidate who will have to be balloted "in".

I'm very tired of hearing the same old (and very tiresome) argument that Hopkins was a wuss for his stay-at-home attitude. If you slag Hopkins for not moving up, you gotta' mention Hagler too then and many many other "greats".

What you need Martin is a Winky-Hopkins showdown, eh? Maybe we all need it.

Hey, Martin. "It'll be fun" is alot softer than your previous comment to me about "knowing everything". I meant it though, it'll be fun. Nothing more.
I took it the wrong way...

Trouble is, there's no way Winky's defeat of Trinidad makes Hops defeat of Trinidad any less important. It's been four years since Tito got himself KTFO on the receiving end of a flush Hopkins right hand. It was beautiful. It still is. Wright's win changes nothing.
I still think Tito was trophy waiting to be taken, as Oscar laid out the blue print...

Your true gripe seems to be Calzaghe not getting respect, while Hopkins gets "great" staus. Get over it, it's for real. Hopkins' place in the Boxing Hall of Fame is secure and Calzaghe will be a candidate who will have to be balloted "in".
You're close, almost there.... My gripe is that FAR greater fighters get absolutly NO recognition where as mediocre Americans get labelled as hall of fammers!

I'm very tired of hearing the same old (and very tiresome) argument that Hopkins was a wuss for his stay-at-home attitude. If you slag Hopkins for not moving up, you gotta' mention Hagler too then and many many other "greats".
I'm more tired of hearing Hopkins shouting, "THEY'RE ALL AFRAID TO COME UP IN WEIGHT AND FIGHT A REAL MAN!!!... THEY ALL EAT LIKE MODELS COZ' THEY'RE AFRAID OF ME!!!... *******!!!!"

What you need Martin is a Winky-Hopkins showdown, eh? Maybe we all need it.
You're right man... That's what we all need!. And I will be cheering for WRIGHT!... Only the thing is, we'll be treading over old ground again. It's ANOTHER FIGHTER coming up in weight to face Bernard... :dunno:

It makes me wanna give up!... LOL!..

Well we all saw how easily Tito was out-boxed by Wright last night... It was MORE one-sided than when Hopkins fought Trinidad.

The only difference being Trinidad came up in weight to fight Bernard where as Wright came up in weight to fight Trinidad.

Bernards career is still running solely on the fact that he beat Trinidad back in 2001'. He's fought Carl Daniels - Morrad Hakker - Robert Allen - Willaim Sloppy - Howard Eastman - And poor De La Hoya trying to fight 3 weight classes above himself. Bernard has hardly fought WORLD beater's since his one big fight against the "limited" Trinidad.

So I ask... Did Winky Wright show us last night exactly how much of a fraud Hopkins really is?

So you're saying you were stupid enough to be deluded despite all the "evidence" you've cited?

Hahaha, seriously man. Hopkins is no fraud. Your whole premise is fraudulent though.

No matter how bad you may hate it, you can't re-write history to suit your own little world.

Hell, Wright beat him nearly 3 years later ... 3 years of sitting on his ass and gaining fat so that he can weigh in at 160. Then he beats up a pudgy little welterweight and that's supposed to make this win as credible as Bernards?

You're not serious.

Bernard Hopkins is a record holder, and a top ten all time middleweight, and beat two greats.
FUN FACT: Trinidad defended his belt 18 times at Welterweight, and beat three all time greats. :D

Bernard Hopkins is a record holder, and a top ten all time middleweight, and beat two greats.
FUN FACT: Trinidad defended his belt 18 times at Welterweight.


Any news bout Tito brah?

Dude, I have you on "ignore" but I'm glad I chose to view that post. It's true what you say; I think he's started to decline but even then nothing can ever take away from what he's accomplished in boxing.

Same with Tito.

So I ask... Did Winky Wright show us last night exactly how much of a fraud Hopkins really is?

:D Hopkins is no fraud, Winky showed us all the great fighter he really is.

You know what guy's... Maybe that's why my post aren't so high... (I wondered why some people have only been a member for 2 or 3 months and have 1,500 posts) - Because before posting on a thread I HAVE to read all the posts on it before hand, so not to cover old ground and make myself look out of place... :dunno:

Any news bout Tito brah?
i have one.... tito dreamt of doing this to winky :D :D LOL!!

http://n00108.myspace.com/00108/72/69/108189627_l.gif

How heavy does Winky weigh during the fight? He looked a lot bigger than trinidad and that my analysis is that even if they fought 3 times, still, trinidad won't win any one of them. Did Winky compete in the Olympics? I never thought he could be such an amazing boxer until i saw this fight. I hope he fights Hopkins. This could be a very interesting fight.

i have one.... tito dreamt of doing this to winky :D :D LOL!!

http://n00108.myspace.com/00108/72/69/108189627_l.gif

lol. All dreams are not to be! LOL

Guy Everyone who saw the fight knows that it wasn't even close to a draw and even far far away for a tito win.