Hopkins P4P ...Why?

Didn't sonofisis say he had never heard of Kessler? Isn't his input pretty much useless?

How's my logic off, you cant answer my question, So lets pretend what your saying above is all true, Who has calzaghe fought that is better than the names i listed, lets see the bigger and better names he has fought. Can you name them? more than one? or you gonna dodge the question yet again? ...................... OK... You give me the names of PRIME..real middle weights that Hopkins has beaten...and we are talking natural middleweights here, not welterweights looking to make a legacy or a bundle of cash... I'm struggling to think of any..Hold on a minute...Nope... At least Calzaghe has fought the best in his divsion and only fought true SMW, as no middle weight would last 2 rounds with him... Reid, Lacy ,Woodhall, Kessler and when he beat Eubank he wasn't even in his own prime...People say Eubank was over the hill, well Calzaghe wasn't even at the top of it... OK..the only one I can think of, a prime real quality middle weight who fought Hopkins when he himself was in his prime was Roy Jones...and Hopkins lost... Shit..he had 2 goes a Taylor and lost..and taylors not in Calzaghes league...No fucking way.. Go on help me out.....Give me some names TS..I've given you a few..

Besides the two world champions he beat right? he did hold 2 legit belts including the lovely WBC thats what made me respect him like i do.

He (Kessler) has literally fought nobody worth mentioning besides the person that he just lost to... Besides the two world champions he beat right?

Calzaghe has himself to blame. He waited until his mid 30s to make his move. Yes, Hopkins is a dick, but Joe could have traveled to the States a long time ago to get his recognition and fight the best. Instead, he waited...but at least he's been making moves lately.

Not at all a fair assessment given the level of competition as anybody can look like a super star vs. a bum, and as stated, the two fights I've seen him in has shown me nothing whatsoever. Even in getting knocked out, Taylor looked better in his last fight than Kessler imo, not to mention the competition that he'd fought and even beat, before. Same with Tarver. The ring and stuff similar to that puts great emphasis on quality wins and opposition, as do I.. He (Kessler) has literally fought nobody worth mentioning besides the person that he just lost to... Tarver has done nothing other than be in the right place at the right time three years ago. Taylor, in his last five fights, has never got out of second gear and the only time he did look like displaying his class he ended up getting knocked out due to what I would describe as inexperience if I didn't know better. Kessler on the other hand has maintained an incredible level of consistency looking good against everyone he has fought and has just put in a stellar display against one of the best fighters in the world.

Of course I disagree with his ranking. Looking at his level of opposition is one thing but looking at how he performs in each fight is just as important and that is something that you simply cannot get from reading his career history. His performances in the last two years have far excelled Antonio Tarver's and I would argue they have bettered Jermain Taylor's as well. I would go as far as to say that Kessler is currently operating on a level that Antonio Tarver has never operated on. Not at all a fair assessment given the level of competition as anybody can look like a super star vs. a bum, and as stated, the two fights I've seen him in has shown me nothing whatsoever. Even in getting knocked out, Taylor looked better in his last fight than Kessler imo, not to mention the competition that he'd fought and even beat, before. Same with Tarver. The ring and stuff similar to that puts great emphasis on quality wins and opposition, as do I.. He (Kessler) has literally fought nobody worth mentioning besides the person that he just lost to...

What I am saying, not merely based on "a list", how you simplify it, but the names on it. He's fought no one to suggest what you are saying and out of the two fights that I've seen of him, he is less than impressive and it just seems to reinforce his ranking and accomplishments so far. Is it a coincidence that Kessler isn't rated top ten because he'd never beaten a top ten fighter and just lost to one? No red herrings necessary. hat is your argument? That you disagree with his ranking? Conveniently avoiding this question would only show that you know your initial claim to be silly. These are your random claims that need proving or validation and your opinion (which can be completely biased or made up) is not considered evidence in support of your claim, while the most credible boxing mags, stats, accomplishments, and level of opposition can be. Of course I disagree with his ranking. Looking at his level of opposition is one thing but looking at how he performs in each fight is just as important and that is something that you simply cannot get from reading his career history. His performances in the last two years have far excelled Antonio Tarver's and I would argue they have bettered Jermain Taylor's as well. I would go as far as to say that Kessler is currently operating on a level that Antonio Tarver has never operated on.

Is it a coincidence that Kessler isn't rated top ten because he'd never beaten a top ten fighter and just lost to one? . This site has Kessler at #9, and I don't expect that to change after Saturday.

You are judging Kessler's career based on reading a list and you are lecturing me about what is ridiculous? You are only calling Kessler a nobody because he isn't American or hasn't fought enough Americans to get the necessary exposure which you so obviously consider to be vital when analysing the merits of a fighter. What I am saying, not merely based on "a list", how you simplify it, but the names on it. He's fought no one to suggest what you are saying and out of the two fights that I've seen of him, he is less than impressive and it just seems to reinforce his ranking and accomplishments so far. Is it a coincidence that Kessler isn't rated top ten because he'd never beaten a top ten fighter and just lost to one? No red herrings necessary. What is your argument? That you disagree with his rankings? Conveniently avoiding this question would only show that you know your initial claim to be silly. These are your random claims that need proving or validation and your opinion (which can be completely biased or made up) is not considered evidence in support of your claim, while the most credible boxing mags, stats, accomplishments, and level of opposition can be.

yep i knew calzaghe would win, and i already knew what he had...so i was really impressed with kessler(even more than i was before)the oly guy who will give him problems at 168 is Pavlik....but i would pick Kessler over him easily.... Pavlik is maybe an easier fight than Taylor for Kessler, in my opinion. Kessler is careful, fast, defensive. He could outjab Pavlik and avoid the big right hand.

Fair enough. I'm not saying it would be an easy fight either; Taylor has pulled through beefore, you always have to give him a chance. But for people to put Kessler ahead of Taylor now is not bold or unreasonable or necessarily biased. Taylor has had better competition but Kessler has a number of advantages.

You are judging Kessler's career based on reading a list and you are lecturing me about what is ridiculous? You are only calling Kessler a nobody because he isn't American or hasn't fought enough Americans to get the necessary exposure which you so obviously consider to be vital when analysing the merits of a fighter. What I am saying, not merely based on "a list", how you simplify it, but the names on it. He's fought no one to suggest what you are saying and out of the two fights that I've seen of him, he is less than impressive and it just seems to reinforce his ranking and accomplishments so far. Is it a coincidence that Kessler isn't rated top ten because he'd never beaten a top ten fighter and just lost to one? No red herrings necessary. What is your argument? That you disagree with his rankings? Conveniently avoiding this question would only show that you know your initial claim to be silly. These are your random claims that need proving or validation and your opinion (which can be completely biased or made up) is not considered evidence in support of your claim, while the most credible boxing mags, stats, accomplishments, and level of opposition can be.

This fight will likely happen. Kessler can stay at 168 for another year or two and take on Taylor, Miranda, Lacy . . . . everyone else with one loss. yep i knew calzaghe would win, and i already knew what he had...so i was really impressed with kessler(even more than i was before)the oly guy who will give him problems at 168 is Pavlik....but i would pick Kessler over him easily....

BJ, with all due respect to Taylor, would you pick him to beat Kessler? I know you wouldn't, since I know you're an honest fan with a pair of eyes. It's not bold to say Kessler is better than Taylor. It just takes enough boldness to watch with your eyes, not HBO's or Ring Magazine's. i wouldnt even make a pick on that fight because of the fact that i think they are very even in terms of skill, taylor has the atheletic edge while kessler has the edge in power and boxing ability, they are pretty even to me, because looking at both of them, Kessler has fought one elite fighter and lost in a lop sided fashion, whereas taylor has fought 2 (or 3 if you count spinks, because like it or not spinks is somewhat elite because he does get the job done most of the time) and taylor kept it very close with the exception of getting KTFO by pavlik. But against wright and hopkins while i think he may have lost both of those, made it close enough to be disputed, i judge guys based on style and competition, and with Kessler having fought one elite, its hard for me to say how he would do against taylor, i dont really know. I dont know if you notice, but if i dont know the answer, i dont really make predictions. Rarely do you see me in prediction threads at all.

i agree....and im a bigger taylor fan... This fight will likely happen. Kessler can stay at 168 for another year or two and take on Taylor, Miranda, Lacy . . . . everyone else with one loss.

BJ, with all due respect to Taylor, would you pick him to beat Kessler? I know you wouldn't, since I know you're an honest fan with a pair of eyes. It's not bold to say Kessler is better than Taylor. It just takes enough boldness to watch with your eyes, not HBO's or Ring Magazine's. i agree....and im a bigger taylor fan...

regardless of his ignorance, you cant use the opinion of a magazine in rankings and then cast down magazines altogether. I think hes wrong in a sense of making judgements on a fighter he hasnt seen forming an opinion out of thin air, saying that Kessler is better than Tarver and Taylor is a pretty bold statement since both guys have combined for alot of elite level competition by all standards. I'm not casting down magazines or people who write for them I'm casting down people who need to be told their opinion rather than thinking for themself.

regardless of his ignorance, you cant use the opinion of a magazine in rankings and then cast down magazines altogether. I think hes wrong in a sense of making judgements on a fighter he hasnt seen forming an opinion out of thin air, saying that Kessler is better than Tarver and Taylor is a pretty bold statement since both guys have combined for alot of elite level competition by all standards. BJ, with all due respect to Taylor, would you pick him to beat Kessler? I know you wouldn't, since I know you're an honest fan with a pair of eyes. It's not bold to say Kessler is better than Taylor. It just takes enough boldness to watch with your eyes, not HBO's or Ring Magazine's.

I've never commented on his "qualities", so this is a straw man. I'm commenting that it is absurd to emphatically suggest that he's better than anyone outside of SMW, given his accomplishments, level of opposition, and p4p status (since it hasn't been PROVEN; see "burden of proof"). Sure, he may have looked sharp against a few of those fringe contenders, but he showed me nothing the other night to confirm your far fetched claim. He is indeed, a relative nobody compared to those guys when anyone puts their accomplishments, opposition, and talents under scrutiny. Kessler has done absolutely NOTHING in his career to give that impression and it is something so ridiculous that I have no idea why I'm even sitting here trying to persuasively refute it. You are judging Kessler's career based on reading a list and you are lecturing me about what is ridiculous? You are only calling Kessler a nobody because he isn't American or hasn't fought enough Americans to get the necessary exposure which you so obviously consider to be vital when analysing the merits of a fighter.