Does this say something good about Taylor?

me too, but he certainly wasnt dominated like pavlik No he wasnt..At times he was catching a bit of a beating though but nothing like that pav fight

I thought B-Hop beat Taylor first time me too, but he certainly wasnt dominated like pavlik

I never had much love for Taylor and his sloppiness, but does Pavlik-Hopkins say something good about him? Or is it just that Hopkins could not make 160 and have any stamina back then? I thought B-Hop beat Taylor first time

All it says to me is, 'Styles make fights' Hopkins has trouble with speed, not workrate or power. That's a helluva point. I always thought the problem was workrate, but I am starting to budge.

I can't explain it (other than the styles making fights cliche), but Hopkins looked five years younger than the same guy who fought Taylor and Calzaghe. There is no accounting for that when you are talking about a 43 y/o athlete.

no 1 will agree with my "the division is one big circle jerk" statement

I never had much love for Taylor and his sloppiness, but does Pavlik-Hopkins say something good about him? Or is it just that Hopkins could not make 160 and have any stamina back then? what this says about taylor is that taylor moves straight back and gets caught at the end of Pavlik's power.

All it says to me is, 'Styles make fights' Hopkins has trouble with speed, not workrate or power.

It says styles make fights. And that Taylor is a more versatile figher than Pavlik; Pavlik was just a bad matchup for him. But Taylor has never put on as un-competitive a showing for a fight as Pavlik did against BHOP.

I guess you could say that Hopkins beating Pavlik makes Taylor look better since he was able to beat Hopkins twice (or atleast stay competitive with him) but then again Pavlik losing so badly makes Taylor look bad also since he lost to Pavlik twice.

it says the division is 1 big circle jerk