Fight Results We Need to be Honest About

I'm just going to say it again...if Taylor really was as good of a boxer as you seem to think he is he should have had no trouble beating Pavlik and Froch. Those guys aren't boxers. So of course he would be "outboxing" them during the fight. But if he can't finish the deal then how good is he really? I don't think he's that good. I think he's going to get his a$$ kicked by Abraham tomorrow night. It might be the worst beating of Taylor's career. Fangs, guess I was just hoping he would pull through, now i see what you were reffering to, sucks cause i really liked taylor and now I think he might be done. If he cant continue is it possible that they would let someone else in for him?

Well if you don't think Taylor beat Hopkins then you definitely can't say Hopkins BEAT Taylor because neither of the two fights were very decisive at all. Exactly. They were close fights, so people's perspective on who the winner was varies from person to person. This is nothing got to do with people 'not being honest'. It's not like it was clear cut. I'd like the thread starter to post his scorecard of Hopkins-Taylor I and II.

Well if you don't think Taylor beat Hopkins then you definitely can't say Hopkins BEAT Taylor because neither of the two fights were very decisive at all.

If you outbox a Bernard Hopkins then you don't fight a 115-113 fight with a Kelly Pavlik. This is like saying , "The United States obviously won the Vietnam war....you don't defeat Germany, Japan and the British Empire and then lose out to an impoverished 3rd world nation like Vietnam. Lets be honest with ourselves." You act as though our expectations about what would logically transpire have more reality to them than what actually happened. I don't care who in particular you think won whichever fight; you are arguing on the basis of something that verges on a psychiatric problem-you think the expectations bouncing around in your head are more true than realty itself. The question of who won a fight should be debated on what happened IN THAT FIGHT.

What is the bad reasoning? If you can outbox those ultimate boxers you should NEVER get beaten and KO'd by the types of sluggers or average boxers that these guys lost to. Hearns lost to Barkley( who was a massive underdog and is not an all time great) though beat great technical boxers like Duran, Benitez, Hill and many more. Is he an overrated bum or does he just struggle when a strong fighter gets inside?

Castillo didn't win the first Mayweather fight... The announcing was going crazy about castillo shots that MISSED and compubox was highly wrong. The announcing was just horrible in that fight. Floyd was catching so many shots they gave Castillo credit for with his elbows and gloves, and picking off the rest with his shoulder roll. In the later rounds, Floyd did square up with Castillo and started throwing all kind of counter shots and not budging..and all you hear from the announcers is about Castillo Castillo's major accomplishment was landing a few flush shots on floyd, mostly body shots. But compubox was a massive joke in that fight. Floyd won that fight.

Be honest with yourself man...serious...be honest with yourself. Taylor never beat Hopkins. The powers that be wanted people to believe Taylor was going to be the face of boxing and manufactured two wins over Hopkins. The beating Taylor took in those fights probably ruined him forever though. He never really looked good after the second Hopkins fight though. I wonder if you're being sarcastic, especially where you mention Taylor getting a beating from Hopkins. Both of those fights, was nothing more than a tactical chess match where Taylor out worked Hopkins, who has problems with technical boxers who is faster than him because it makes him think twice. Plus, Hopkins wouldn't start letting his hands go until the later rounds. Watch the first fight, and you'll really see how good Jermain is. He out jabbed Bernard, and momentarily staggered him in the first round.

Weight had nothing to do with PBFs domaince in the JMM fight.

co-signed..twice!:headbang: how the thread didnt end there i really dont know i took the bait

Be honest with yourself. That's all I'm saying. If in doing so you still manage to find a way to think Taylor won those fights then so be it. But then you can go ahead and wonder how on God's Green Earth Taylor got his a$$ kicked by Pavlik and Froch...two good, but definitely not great fighters. Think about it. Hopkins is still one of the 5 best P4P fighters in the sport. Neither Pavlik nor Froch have ever been that good. But those guys crushed the guy who you believe beat possibly the best middleweight of the last 40 or 50 years...TWICE. Like I said, be honest with yourself. Taylor got the first fight (by inches) Hopkins def won the second. And styles make fights dude, just bcuz one guy beats another dont mean he can beat the next guy. Paulie beat Diaz Strum and Sweet Pea beat Oscar. Oscar beat Tito ( I dont care if he ran, he beat that ass) Chavez really lost to Taylor.. Castillo beat Floyd (First fight) Cotto/Mosley in reality I see it as a draw. No clear winner or loser. Cotto landed the more telling shots, Mosley landed more.

Sure, I'm fine with that. I've made it clear elsewhere for some time now that I'm not giving JerJer much of a chance tomorrow, and I don't even dislike him. In fact, he's cool in my view. I like the guy because of his boxing style and personality, but his shortcomings in the ring are unfortunately too numerous to warrant my ever becoming a fan. No doubt...I don't have anything against him other than the fact that his "experience" and skills are over-rated. I felt bad for him when he got KTFO by Pavlik (you could just see how thoroughly disappointed he was), but at the same time this tournament is going to be harder than that fight with Pavlik was. I just don't see Taylor making it out of the group stage. I don't think he'll win a single fight.

to be honest both the taylor/hopkins fights could hav went either way. and i had taylor/wright a draw. i hav no reason to be bias cause im not really a fan of either one

just because fighter A beat fighter B and fighter B is an all-time great that doesnt necessarily mean fighter A is an all time great aswell That is true, BUT my point was not as simple as Taylor beat Hopkins so Taylor should have a better career than Hopkins. Look Paul Williams beat Winky Wright, but he didn't outbox Winky Wright. He put Winky on the ropes and rained punches on Winky. If Taylor'd done that to Hopkins then whatever. It say very little about what would happen in any other fight. BUT both Taylor-Hopkins fights were very technical. In order to win Taylor would have had to have been the one outboxing Hopkins. And IF you can outbox a master boxer then that means you beat an all-time great at his OWN game. That's all I'm saying dude. If you disagree then you're entitled to your opinion.

Lets be honest here, This is the 1st weekend of the super 6! :headbang::boxing:

Cotto and even Vargas did have some come from behind victories. Taylor doesn't have any. Great boxers are supposed to have supreme ring intelligence. Taylor just does the same thing over and over. Guys like that don't beat the Hopkins types of the world. Just my two cents. Sure, I'm fine with that. I've made it clear elsewhere for some time now that I'm not giving JerJer much of a chance tomorrow, and I don't even dislike him. In fact, he's cool in my view. I like the guy because of his boxing style and personality, but his shortcomings in the ring are unfortunately too numerous to warrant my ever becoming a fan.

well the standard for HOF fighters is high and I think a fighter as young as Taylor may still make some good fights that may put him there, Is he there now? I dont know... Just for clarification; I dont believe he won that fight against Hopkins and I do believe that young fighters that show promise tend to get good treatment in judging. I also dont believe he is as overrated as you may be thinking. thats all im saying. and NO, a win over Hopkins will not be his only credit at the end of his career, hopefully this Super SIX tourney goes well for the sport and if it does I would put everyone who participated with courage in high regard. Taylor fights Abraham, Ward and Froch in that order. I think he gets beaten badly tomorrow. As long as Ward acquits himself well against Kessler (especially if he wins) then he should beat Taylor. Let's say Taylor losses to Ward also; do you think he avenges his defeat against Froch coming off of a three fight losing streak? Obviously, I've been wrong many times before and will be wrong many times in the future. But the fact is that Taylor has the most to prove in this tournament and it's not easy. All of his fights will be tough and based on what I've seen of him against middleweights and 147/154 lb fighters coming up in weight I have a hard time seeing him do better against talented legit 168 lb contenders/champions plus Abraham (a 160 lb stud who should be good at 168).

1. You obviously hate Taylor 2. He beat Hopkins 2 times 3. We'll see what happens: if he beats Abraham; Kessler; Froch; Dirrell & Ward maybe your opinion will change. It will be hard i know that if he beats Abraham tomorow night he will have my respect even if he loses to the other guys! 1. Maybe...I want to like him, but he's just a big disappointment...he hasn't gotten any better like a veteran fighter should. 2. That's what the official scorecards say; and if you believe it also then you're entitled to your own opinion. 3. IF, and this is a big if, he beats Abraham (much less anyone else in the tournament) my opinion of him will change. I'm just not putting any money on it or holding my breathe.

Ok then let me ask you this question; do you consider Taylor a hall of fame calibre boxer? I'll answer my own question too; It really seems like if he were a hall of famer it'd be based entirely on the Hopkins "wins," being an American and HBO's support. He's really not that good. well the standard for HOF fighters is high and I think a fighter as young as Taylor may still make some good fights that may put him there, Is he there now? I dont know... Just for clarification; I dont believe he won that fight against Hopkins and I do believe that young fighters that show promise tend to get good treatment in judging. I also dont believe he is as overrated as you may be thinking. thats all im saying. and NO, a win over Hopkins will not be his only credit at the end of his career, hopefully this Super SIX tourney goes well for the sport and if it does I would put everyone who participated with courage in high regard.

A lot of people may care, actually. Vargas was giving Trinidad hell before getting stopped, and likewise Cotto was giving Margarito all he had. Both have since been praised for their efforts, despite coming up short. The fact that a fighter gets stopped, should they be outboxing their opponent, says a lot about that fighter, the fight itself, and even the guy who nabbed the stoppage. Questions may be raised about the skills of the latter, especially if they were being trounced before the stoppage opportunity arose. Sure, the stoppage came, but what may have been happening before that? It can be important to think about. In Froch's case, despite winning, he was being made to look like an idiot prior to the last few rounds. IMO the only reason he won that fight was because of Taylor's issues - not because of his own skill. So it's all good and well to say "Taylor may have been outboxing Froch, but because he got stopped who cares?", but that's a foolish way to look at it. I'm sure Froch himself would agree, in that even he knew he was in trouble before Taylor gassed out. He was getting outboxed, and it says a lot about Taylor's ability to do so. The only thing he didn't get was the win, but it was so nearly there. That just can't be disregarded. Fighting valiantly is obviously a thing that we should respect. Especially in Cotto's case with what we know about Margarito it's a shame that Cotto probably did what he did while Margarito had plaster of paris in his gloves. With Vargas, he fought bravely. He even made some adjustments. Taylor, at least to my eyes, never really made any adjustment at virtually any point in his career. He's a front runner. If it ALWAYS falls apart as soon as the other guy starts to come on strong then, well, the fighter has more than just stamina issues. Cotto and even Vargas did have some come from behind victories. Taylor doesn't have any. Great boxers are supposed to have supreme ring intelligence. Taylor just does the same thing over and over. Guys like that don't beat the Hopkins types of the world. Just my two cents.

1. You obviously hate Taylor 2. He beat Hopkins 2 times 3. We'll see what happens: if he beats Abraham; Kessler; Froch; Dirrell & Ward maybe your opinion will change. It will be hard i know that if he beats Abraham tomorow night he will have my respect even if he loses to the other guys!