Disgusted...

Some of you sound suprised? Hopkins has been the dirtiest fighter in the sport for going on 15 years. You thought he would change last night? Hopkins skull has roughly the same connect percentage as the right hand he throws just before he grabs his opponent. If you ever paid money to watch either of these guys fight your nuts. If you paid to watch these two fight each OTHER? Man. If I want to watch two fighters find ways to win OTHER than boxing....I'll watch UFC. This thread deals with the ethical standing of dirty fighting.....the reason that's the hot topic is simple. Unless your a 147 guy moved up to middleweight... Hopkins wont really fight you at all. If he did...you wouldnt be talking about how sucky, how huggy, or how dirty his fights were. Which is all this guy is known for. I wish they would both retire so guys that actually want to fight could do it.

When i think of someones natural weight, i think of the weight someone walks around in when they are not training, for example Baldomir walks around at 200 lbs but has fought at welterweight for over a decade. If Hopkins had to train so much to make 160, dont you think his natural weight was prabobly around 175? OK, we have different definitions, I am thinking of natural weight class, to me it is the lowest weight at which a fighter can fight without doing ridiculous weigh draining. (eg: Corrales natural weight was not 130-135, but Hopkins was comfortable at 160) In the Duran vs. Buchanan fight the referee himself said that Buchanan got hit in the lower abdomen, and that it was not a low blow. ahem, you have seen the fight, i have seen the fight, no way you did not see the low blow. In fact we have both seen many fights, including Hopkins-Wright, where the ref did not see the fouls. Buchanan-Duran is one of those I see you understand why I didnt like the fight, because hopkins was able to "bend the rules in his favor". I guess the question i have for you is, Do you respect Hopkins more or less after the Wright fight, and how much of an affect do you think him bending the rules had in the outcome? I dont respect him more or less. He did what I imagined he would do. In my book, he is in the same place he was . How much effect... that's a tough one, it might have been decisive given the fight was relatively close. It might also have not been decisive. I tend to think it was decisive, but mostly because Wright found no way of dealing with it. Remember Oscar? The first time they got close, Oscar shot 3 low blows on Hop's nuts, just to "put things into perspective". Thing is you are getting in the ring with Hopkins, shouldnt you be prepared for that kind of shit? As you probably gathered from this and my other posts, my position is simply that rough housing, for one reason or another, is part of boxing. I dont have more or less respect for the "dirty" fighter than for the one-punch ko artist or the slickster. or whatever combination of styles. btw, had I been winky I would have been SURE Hopkins would have taken full advantage of the natural opportunities offered by lefty-right matchup and headbutted like crazy.

When i think of someones natural weight, i think of the weight someone walks around in when they are not training, for example Baldomir walks around at 200 lbs but has fought at welterweight for over a decade. If Hopkins had to train so much to make 160, dont you think his natural weight was prabobly around 175? In the Duran vs. Buchanan fight the referee himself said that Buchanan got hit in the lower abdomen, and that it was not a low blow. I see you understand why I didnt like the fight, because hopkins was able to "bend the rules in his favor". I guess the question i have for you is, Do you respect Hopkins more or less after the Wright fight, and how much of an affect do you think him bending the rules had in the outcome?

Hopkins started his carreer as a light heavy weight, and if it wasn't for his intense gym work he would have never made 160. He trains even when he doesnt have a fight lined up. His transition to light heavyweight was smooth, even bernard made mention of it, he said that now that he is a light heavy he was able to go all out and not reserve his energy, unlike when he was a middleweight. Bernard Hopkins is a 6'1" MW , a gym rat and 40 years old, of course it was easy for him to move up in weight. Among 175ers Hopkins would always have the smaller frame. Hopkins made 160 for 15 years, therefore his natural weight was 160. Shit in the DLH fight he was almost 40 and made the 157 catchweight without blinking. Hence he is NOT a natural 175er. I don't quite get it, is Floyd Mayweather Jr. a natural welter, when everyone in the division is bigger than him? Was Roy Jones Jr. a natural light heavy when he regularly faced bigger opponents at the weight. I agree that Duran is better than Hopkins, what i said earlier was that its an insult to compare Hopkins to him, especially if what you are comparing is the amount of fouling, and the way Bernard "won" yesterday. If i remember right Hopkins destroyed Joppy, and knocked robert allen down in there fight, but i should also mention that the trilogy with robert allen was awfull. I'm not going to defend any low blows that Duran has thrown through out his career. Im sure he has had his moments. But you could easily argue that the reason hopkins won last night was because of his foul play, it was from start to finish, I dont consider foul play boxing skill, if anything its fraud. Name me a more decisive foul in the history of boxing than KOing your opponent with a low blow. Draw the line between skill and fraud where you want, but this is how boxing turned out to be in a 100 year of history. Fighters who turn pro know this and if they can, they will bend the rules in their favor.

Hopkins started his carreer as a light heavy weight, and if it wasn't for his intense gym work he would have never made 160. He trains even when he doesnt have a fight lined up. His transition to light heavyweight was smooth, even bernard made mention of it, he said that now that he is a light heavy he was able to go all out and not reserve his energy, unlike when he was a middleweight. I agree that Duran is better than Hopkins, what i said earlier was that its an insult to compare Hopkins to him, especially if what you are comparing is the amount of fouling, and the way Bernard "won" yesterday. If i remember right Hopkins destroyed Joppy, and knocked robert allen down in there fight, but i should also mention that the trilogy with robert allen was awfull. I'm not going to defend any low blows that Duran has thrown through out his career. Im sure he has had his moments. But you could easily argue that the reason hopkins won last night was because of his foul play, it was from start to finish, I dont consider foul play boxing skill, if anything its fraud.

blah blah blah...Hopkins can get away with headbutts & clinches because he's a master in disguising those dirty tactics, therefore the referee isn't quite sure what to make with most it...so most of the time he just lets it slide...I like hopkins style because its not how he adapts to his opponents, but how he manipulates the action..whether be the opponent or ref...he can make his opponent think they're dictating the fight, when in actuality B-Hop is wearing them out systematically...

I dont recall watching a fight where Duran threw that many low blows. watch him get on the inside when he was at 135, obviously he was not stupid and he would not have tried to rough-house Hagler Hopkins has been fighting with his stinkfest style for a few years now. Duran came up from 135 and fought at super middleweight at the time. Of course he was going to be slow and plodding, the man should have been retired already. Hopkins on the other hand has been fighting this way since middleweight, he was naturally a light heavy, in the early years he was more offensive minded, but since fighting Oscar he has turned to complete shite. 1) Not that it matters, but Hopkins is not a naturally lightheavy, otherwise by definition he would not have made 160 for 15 years. 2) Hopkins should also be retired by common sense, like Duran he is just so good that he can still compete. (Duran is better than Hopkins, I repeat it every once in a while nad no one tries to jump in on this) 3) It's not that since fighting Oscar he turned "complete shite", it's just that he turned 40, And btw Hop started slippingbefore that: if you want to mark the time of his decline it's somewhere between Joppy and Allen 3. Two years before he would have stopped both (in fact he stopped a 5 yers younger version of Allen).

Hopkins should have been docked a point early in the fight. His holding was excessive and made for a dour fight. If he'd been punished by the referee I think we'd have seen him win more impressively as when he let his hands go (although not very often), he did the better work. With the way Wink was struggling with the excess weight, if B-Hop had thrown more he could well of KOed him. Instead we had a poor fight in which Hopkins took the safest path to victory.

I dont recall watching a fight where Duran threw that many low blows. Hopkins has been fighting with his stinkfest style for a few years now. Duran came up from 135 and fought at super middleweight at the time. Of course he was going to be slow and plodding, the man should have been retired already. Hopkins on the other hand has been fighting this way since middleweight, he was naturally a light heavy, in the early years he was more offensive minded, but since fighting Oscar he has turned to complete shite.

no my point was disgust to anyone who respects a dirty fighter(specially when it is so blatant....), and the double standards people have.... do i give a fuck what the judges or referee want to see?????? fuck no, but the people should see what happens...and yet they respect that???? i have no probs with dirty fighters, but the double standars piss me off beyond reason (Hatton...)

so if you cheat in an exam and you get caught but because you only did some minor faults they let you get away with it, that makes it right?????fuck no.... i respect guys like anorak for example that posted he felt bad fro winky because even though in his opinion(anorak's) he lost, he was beat basically by cheating...but you guys are like i respect hopkins...blahbalhb;ah... what the fuck is there o respect in cheating.... I see your point, but the sport of boxing, as it is, as it has developed, includes a certain level of roughhouse tactics. It is not like Winky did not know that when he turned pro... and he definitely know that by the time he was facing Hopkins. Some fighters are masters at bending the rules, and i respect the mastery of something which is "de facto" allowed in boxing (althought the rules say otherwise)

I think it is an insult to Duran to compare him to Hopkins. Duran always came to fight, he had an underrated defense, and was an offensive monster. Hopkins throws illegal blows every single round, he holds and hits with the far hand so the ref doesnt see. Hopkins leads with his head, He holds and pulls your arm. People give hatton shit for holding, Hopkins is ten times worse. Duran threw illegal blows every minute of every round. I rank Duran higher than Hopkins, but it is surely not because Duran is not as dirty as Hopkins. What does Duran always come to fight means? Did you ever see Duran fighting in his 40s (his comeback after Leonard 3?)? Did you see Hopkins in the 90s?

read my post above, fouls you dont get caught for are just another means towards victory, and that's it. And the point made by the thread starter is disgust towards Hopkins' being dirty (which is of course an undeniable fact), why be disgusted? if you are not caught then why not do it? If it can buy you victory, why not do it? Ali used to hold behind the head, Mayweather elbows... Hopkins always knowing where the ref is just another skill... no my point was disgust to anyone who respects a dirty fighter(specially when it is so blatant....), and the double standards people have.... do i give a fuck what the judges or referee want to see?????? fuck no, but the people should see what happens...and yet they respect that????

I think it is an insult to Duran to compare him to Hopkins. Duran always came to fight, he had an underrated defense, and was an offensive monster. Hopkins throws illegal blows every single round, he holds and hits with the far hand so the ref doesnt see. Hopkins leads with his head, He holds and pulls your arm. People give hatton shit for holding, Hopkins is ten times worse.

rules are rules and that's it. however if you are "disgusted", you should be disgusted by MANY all time greats, which makes me think that maybe you should be disgusted by the sport itself. There is only one ref (the judges dont look at fouls), and Hop is a master at fouling on the other side of the ref. Fouls you dont get caught for are just another means of winning the fight. And that's it. so if you cheat in an exam and you get caught but because you only did some minor faults they let you get away with it, that makes it right?????fuck no.... i respect guys like anorak for example that posted he felt bad fro winky because even though in his opinion(anorak's) he lost, he was beat basically by cheating...but you guys are like i respect hopkins...blahbalhb;ah... what the fuck is there o respect in cheating....

well, that doesn't justify the fact that hopkins fights dirty, does it? the only point made by the thread starter is that hopkins fights dirty, not about whether he should be considered great or p4p best. if dirty fighting is legit, they should change the rule to say so. but as of now, i have to say that hopkins does a lot of fouling. i really don't like it when a fighter fights dirty/against the rule, whether i like that fighter or not. read my post above, fouls you dont get caught for are just another means towards victory, and that's it. And the point made by the thread starter is disgust towards Hopkins' being dirty (which is of course an undeniable fact), why be disgusted? if you are not caught then why not do it? If it can buy you victory, why not do it? Ali used to hold behind the head, Mayweather elbows... Hopkins always knowing where the ref is just another skill...

holy crap... Roberto Duran won his lightweight crown with a blatant low blow and was dirty throughout his career. He is considered top5 p4p EVER. Harry Greb was dirty as a road in the desert and is one of the greatest middleweights everm the only man to beat LHW and HW champion Gene Tunney. We are talking about the entire history of gloved boxing against your opinion... which one do you think should adapt? well, that doesn't justify the fact that hopkins fights dirty, does it? the only point made by the thread starter is that hopkins fights dirty, not about whether he should be considered great or p4p best. if dirty fighting is legit, they should change the rule to say so. but as of now, i have to say that hopkins does a lot of fouling. i really don't like it when a fighter fights dirty/against the rule, whether i like that fighter or not.

im not saying it has to cahnge but what right is right and what's wrong is wrong... now am i wrong in saying dirty fihters should get penalized??????no because there are rules plain and simple, that those dirty tricks are accepted is different ......anyway i dont want to post anymore about this............ rules are rules and that's it. however if you are "disgusted", you should be disgusted by MANY all time greats, which makes me think that maybe you should be disgusted by the sport itself. There is only one ref (the judges dont look at fouls), and Hop is a master at fouling on the other side of the ref. Fouls you dont get caught for are just another means of winning the fight. And that's it.

im not saying it has to cahnge but what right is right and what's wrong is wrong... now am i wrong in saying dirty fihters should get penalized??????no because there are rules plain and simple, that those dirty tricks are accepted is different ......anyway i dont want to post anymore about this............

stop watching boxing or fighting period then because that is what is out there and it's all over the place...........and it isnt going to stop either. had it been blatant fouls the ref would've taken a point away. plain and simple. you're bitter like everyone else that is bitter because you wanted winky to win. had winky won i don't even think this would be an issue. your argument is irrelevant to the point in discussion. it's about the established rules in boxing. a lot of what Hopkins did were against the rules and that means he didn't follow the rules. well, hopkins has been using his hold-n-hit tactic (along with many other dirty stuff) for a long time, but i still don't like it and it's amazing how he always gets away with it.. also, fouling is not equivalent to agression or "pressing the action". remember boxing is a sport, not fighting.