Originally Posted by dstew
2. Hopkins brutally beat the man who beat him twice
3. Another chance to silence the critics and earn the respect from Hopkins that he never got after their first 2 fights
i figured that but how does beating hopkins again(who he beat twice already) chnage the fact that he wont lose to pavlik if he fighst him again?, seems like stupid logic, he should fight ''pavlik'' if he wants to prove he's better than ''pavlik''
makes no sense, even for the money