From Boxing Monthly, November 2005, vol 17, issue 7, just out now (www.boxing-monthly.co.uk):

"He's a laid-back fighter. I consider Eastman my friend from afar, and honestly Eastman has to pull the trigger every time he fights - and he's lost again since fighting me, and that's not a good sign.

Do [sic] he have a chance in the middleweight division that doesn't run deep? Yes he does. Can he beat a lot of American guys over here. Yes he can.

What I did with Eastman was take the fight away from him psychologically, and once he played into trying to wait for one big shot it never came. I wanted to get my 20th defence for history* and win without any kind of risk. My whole thing, and my plan, was to win tonight and I'll fight tomorrow. But I'm gonna win.

I wasn't concerned about how I was going to win as long as I got that 20 defences, and that was very important to me. It wasn't a lacklustre fight - it had some moments - but it wasn't one that I would say to myself, other than the history part, that it was one of my most exciting fights. It was a fight that I got past, and I did what I had to do."





* I still don't get why people are saying Hopkins successfully defended the title 20 times. The first bout with Robert Allen was a No Contest, so Eastman was his 19th defence. This means that for his real 20th defence Taylor and the judges spoiled the party, surely?

"My whole thing, and my plan, was to win tonight and I'll fight tomorrow. But I'm gonna win."

If this is how he fought vs. Taylor in their first fight, surely thinking he would win and then fight Winky or Jones or Tarver for his farewell fight, you know he won't be fighting like that Dec. 3rd. Too much on the line...too much revenge to be had.

Bernard is one of my favorite fighters and he is an all time great middleweight, its good to see him give Eastman some respect.

* I still don't get why people are saying Hopkins successfully defended the title 20 times. The first bout with Robert Allen was a No Contest, so Eastman was his 19th defence. This means that for his real 20th defence Taylor and the judges spoiled the party, surely?


Technically, your answer would be that the Champion retains his title in a No Contest. In 20 consecutive bouts, he retained his title.

Technically, your answer would be that the Champion retains his title in a No Contest. In 20 consecutive bouts, he retained his title.
Again, it comes down to satisfaction. If Ali was counting defences as being one where he fell out the ring and bust his ankle I wouldn't really hold it up to much. But if I start that, you and me are back on a twenty pager. Besides, it's only Brits that think that. :D

Again, it comes down to satisfaction. If Ali was counting defences as being one where he fell out the ring and bust his ankle I wouldn't really hold it up to much. But if I start that, you and me are back on a twenty pager. Besides, it's only Brits that think that. :D


The fight you mention was a freak accident, and he didn't lose the title as a result, he retained it.

You asked a question, that's the answer.

The fight you mention was a freak accident, and he didn't lose the title as a result, he retained it.

You asked a question, that's the answer.
Alright, alright, I'm just ****in' wit ya! :D

Jeez, is it just me or is it only the Cannucks on this thread getting their knickers in a knot? :D

Alright, alright, I'm just ****in' wit ya! :D


No, you started another thread to whine about Hopkins.

As I mentioned the other day, that goes beyond having a (tiny) differing opinion from the vast majority, and goes into unwarrented spite.

That's knotted knickers my friend.

Technically, your answer would be that the Champion retains his title in a No Contest. In 20 consecutive bouts, he retained his title.

Exactly. Byrd almost lost to Golota and McCline...but he retained his title, as long as you dont let ur opponent win, u keep the title.

Exactly. Byrd almost lost to Golota and McCline...but he retained his title, as long as you dont let ur opponent win, u keep the title.


Not exactly, those were competitive fights Byrd could have lost, but got a win and a draw.

A No Contest like the one discussed here would be more like an accidental butt in the early rounds, etc.

Hopkins was winning the fight handily, and was injured. He knocked him out in 7 rounds in the next fight.

No, you started another thread to whine about Hopkins.

As I mentioned the other day, that goes beyond having a (tiny) differing opinion from the vast majority, and goes into unwarrented spite.

That's knotted knickers my friend.

"whine"? What a nice perjorative statement. Where is this "whining" of which you speak? I was just offering up Hopkins's (a respected middleweight) opinion on Eastman (a middleweight I respect, but not many do). That's all.


It's strange that when I'm copping **** off you and hearing "Brit" this and "Brit" that I'm supposed to just shrug it off, but the minute you get some back (even with smilies to show I'm just joking with you) you get all pissy about it.

"whine"? What a nice perjorative statement. Where is this "whining" of which you speak? I was just offering up Hopkins's (a respected middleweight) opinion on Eastman (a middleweight I respect, but not many do). That's all.


It's strange that when I'm copping **** off you and hearing "Brit" this and "Brit" that I'm supposed to just shrug it off, but the minute you get some back (even with smilies to show I'm just joking with you) you get all pissy about it.


lol, who's got their knickers in a knot now?

:D

I told you I could care less if you make a comment about my nationality.

I just noted that you threw in the comment at the end of the 1st post asking about the 1st Allen fight fishing for someone to answer.

When you got your answer, you jumped back into the discrediting of Hopkins title reign.

Like I said, if you just happened to disagree with the popular and commen sense rating of Hopkins, you wouldn't be so adamant about it.

I was just pointing out that it appears you have an agenda about it, and I find that amusing. :D

lol, who's got their knickers in a knot now?

:D

I told you I could care less if you make a comment about my nationality.

I just noted that you thrw in the comment at the end of the 1st post asking about the 1st Allen fight fishing for someone to answer.

When you got your answer, you jumped back into the discrediting of Hopkins title reign.

Like I said, if you just happened to disagree with the popular and commen sense rating of Hopkins, you wouldn't be so adamant about it.

I was just pointing out that it appears you have an agenda about it, and I found that amusing. :D


No, not at all. This is what ACTUALLY happened:


I created a Hopkins thread for the reasons already given, then asked a legitimate question about him at the end.

Now, if anyone else had given the answer I would have just said fine and left it. But as it was you, I decided to pull your leg/**** wit you/jerk your chain, whatever you want to call it. Just have a bit of a joke, that's all.

That's all, brother.

Well the 1st part of your post was a good read.

I like seeing Hopkins talk respectfully about Eastman, who I've always liked.

He's a scary looking fighter when he's got the crazy beard going.

<img src=http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39390000/jpg/_39390773_east_beardsley300.jpg>

I remember the UK SKY Sports reporter going into his dressing room after the Joppy points loss (where he'd even KD'd Joppy).

All you can see is Eastman's eyes and beard as all the lights are off and he's sitting on his own, just staring like a rat in the dark.

The guy asks him about the fight, and it goes something like this:


"Don't ask stupid questions, mon! I was ROBBED!" He was so angry you could hear the interviewer ****ting his pants.