Does Pavlik's lost to Martinez undermine Hopkin's win?

So Calzaghe's win over Kessler is shit then when Kessler only lost to a guy who was practically his size. Nice double standards. Lol. That would be because Kessler never fought anyone outside of Europe or his beloved Denmark. It was impressive in the fact that for some reason, so many people thought he would beat Calzaghe. Likewise, Calzaghes win over Jeff Lacy wasn't that impressive (after all the idiot mouths quit speaking) because Lacy was ridiculously over rated.

So Calzaghe's win over Kessler is shit then when Kessler only lost to a guy who was practically his size. Nice double standards. Lol.

And Bhops win over Pavlik is more impressive because of Common Foe. Jermain Taylor. Taylor could not be bested by Bhop, Pavlik knocked him cold and beat him handily again. Then Bhop came back and beat the man who had just established himself as THE dominant middle weight champion. And the fact that Sergio plain got lucky with the Cut. I think Pavlik would have swept the rest of the rounds if that didn't happen. Bhop 43, trouble making weight, etc, just way more impressive.

I enjoyed the fight, but Martinez got very, very lucky. He cut Pavlik wide open and the fight completely changed. Pavlik had taken over all the middle rounds. I gave 9-12 all to Martinez, but Pavlik took 4-8 IMO. Midway thru the 4th Pavlik was finding a home for counters and long jabs. To Martinez credit, he came out looking for bad intentions in the 9th knowing he was losing the fight at the time. But a cut like that is entirely luck. I haven't seen a gusher that bad in a while. To Pavliks credit, he didn't give up despite the fact that the blood was obviously messing with his vision.

Is Pavlik more powerful at 170 than he is at 160? I don't think so. I believe that you have your optimal weight, and then you reach a point where you plateau...or have diminishing returns. Would Mayweather be much stronger at 160? so, in my humble opinion, what Sergio did was MORE impressive than what Hopkins did. Hard to say, I think if Pavlik came in a bit lighter if there is a rematch it might be better for him. Hopkins made Pavlik look bad the entire fight. Look at any pro athletes stats at 43 they are not as good. Hopkins is a rare fighter and beat Pavlik worse then anyone ever has. What Sergio did was good. But he did not beat Pavlik every round, Hopkins did, I consider Sergio cutting Pavlik with punches as good of win. As if Pavlik had of knocked Sergio out in the 9th with a shot. Good win, but its not round after round domination.

Not Really. Pavlik made a good account of himself despite the loss with Martinez. He wasn't in the Hopkins fight at all from the opening bell...which makes Bhop look better I think.

But imagine if Sergio was as big as Pavlik. Imagine if Sergio didn't have to be so fearful of Pav's power. imagine if Sergio was 43 instead of 35. Imagine if Sergio was bigger? Sergio would be a lot tougher to beat in that case. But imagine if Pavlik was bigger yet. And was faster then Sergio! Who wins then?.

Hopkins win over Pavlik still looks good to me. Sergio and Pavlik were tooth and nail going into the 9th. 9th round against Hopkins It was a shut out and you new it was over. Was not even close.

Dont nobody wanna be the 24th person at the buffet.

Definitely. Really, when you stop to think about it Martinez beat Pavlik more impressively than Hopkins did because he actually came close to stopping him with those cuts and even knocked him back against the ropes at the end of the fight where as Hopkins just stunned Pavlik a couple times. And then you have to take into account how much Martinez was undersized in the fight and how much bigger Hops was than Pavlik. You also have to take into account that Hopkins is 10 years older than Martinez. And Hopkins does not have the size advantage over Pavlik that you're making it out to be. Add in the fight was fought at 170. No way is that too much weight for Pavlik.

Hell no. Hopkins was 43 and was supposed to get stopped for the first time by Pavlik. Hopkins ended up schooling him and didn't lose a round.

Hopkins won every single round so your point makes little sense. Martinez was losing the fight until he came on so strong late. Thank you. I was about to say the same thing.

Definitely. Really, when you stop to think about it Martinez beat Pavlik more impressively than Hopkins did because he actually came close to stopping him with those cuts and even knocked him back against the ropes at the end of the fight where as Hopkins just stunned Pavlik a couple times. And then you have to take into account how much Martinez was undersized in the fight and how much bigger Hops was than Pavlik.

no. hopkins was a hundred and three years old.

What's everyone's thoughts? No. Hopkins was 43 years old and actually his performance was more dominant than Martinez was. Pavlik landed almost nothing on Hopkins and certainly nothing meaningful. Nothing will change that.

No. Hopkins was 43 years old. It´s a miracle he´s even fighting at that age, most people are fat and working in an office.