Is Vitali relatively young compared to Bernard Hopkins?

Its definitely that some can go beyond 40 others cannot. Then it's the punishment.. or lack of, that you have sustained in said career.

Are you trolling or what? Vitali was injured FOUR TIMES in 9 months prior to retiring and avoiding Rahman. What's more suspicious? A former Steroid Cheat who was CAUGHT during the Olympics going on to have a career of Ped-Related injuries Or Bernard Hopkins- Gym Rat team dedication ... fighting into his late 30's 40's ? So first it's Vitali is not old because he took 4 years off, now it's he's on steroids because he's still going strong with 41 years and the 4 years layoff doesn't matter. Lmao.

Just for the record, Vitali is older than Hasim Rahman, Oscar De la Hoya, Felix Trinidad, Shane Mosley, John Ruiz, Jose Luis Castillo, and Marco Antonio Barrera.

What's the ratio of wars between Eubank and Morales bro? Just wondering. I don't know the answer. Having more wars than another fighter doesn't necessarily mean you'll age quicker or slower. And, Eubank was in his fair share of wars anyway before the Calzaghe fight. What's the ratio of wars between Benitez and Morales? Yet Benitez was done at an even younger age than Morales. All fighters age differently and all for different reasons.

You have to take into account Vitali's massive size, unlike Marquez and Hopkins. That extra weight is bad for the knees, big men seem to be more prone to injuries. But you also have to take into account the level of competition they've faced their entire careers, and the fact that Vitali had a 4 year "break" from boxing. Marquez and Hopkins have fought GREAT fighters their entire careers and are still fighting them, Hopkins fighting guys like JT x2, Pascal x2, Pavlik, Dawson x2 etc. Marquez as well moving up in weight and Koing a guy like Pac. Imagine how fresh every fighter would be at age 40 if they fought C level fighters their entire career like Vitali has. His fans will try to pump up his opponents like they're talented fighters though lol. Well Hopkins did refuse to take a drug test, and, to me, it is mighty suspicious that he amassed his best wins after age 36 - very, very strange.

You have to take into account Vitali's massive size, unlike Marquez and Hopkins. That extra weight is bad for the knees, big men seem to be more prone to injuries. But you also have to take into account the level of competition they've faced their entire careers, and the fact that Vitali had a 4 year "break" from boxing. Marquez and Hopkins have fought GREAT fighters their entire careers and are still fighting them, Hopkins fighting guys like JT x2, Pascal x2, Pavlik, Dawson x2 etc. Marquez as well moving up in weight and Koing a guy like Pac. Imagine how fresh every fighter would be at age 40 if they fought C level fighters their entire career like Vitali has. His fans will try to pump up his opponents like they're talented fighters though lol.

B-Hop is the exception rather than the rule.

41 is not that old for a boxer. Hopkins was 46 and still dominating. Foreman won his second title at 45. Vitali will be scared into retirement by former cruiserweight David Haye So you make the claim that 41 is not old and then name two old boxers who were still successful. Two. That actually shows that boxers being succesful at old age is rather the exception than the rule, which is quite contrary to your theory.

Quote: Originally Posted by joseph5620 I wasn't comparing the two. My point is fighters age at different stages. You can't compare them by age. It's a basic concept and fact only someone as dumb as you wouldn't understand. Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android I know what you meant but I'm curious since you brought up the name Morales up. Since a grand boxing genius like yourself might be able to answer it, I asked. No harm done right? I already answred it. I'm not going to translate something that simple for you. If you don't understand it, that's a reflection of your lack of comprehension skills. Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

How old does Hopkins have to get before he is also considered as ancient as Vitali?

Quote: Originally Posted by joseph5620 If you're dumb enough to only consider age, I guess that would be funny.Using your logic, Eric Morales is still in his prime. What's the ratio of wars between Eubank and Morales bro? Just wondering. I don't know the answer. I wasn't comparing the two. My point is fighters age at different stages. You can't compare them by age. It's a basic concept and fact only someone as dumb as you wouldn't understand. Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

Many say Joe Calzaghe's win over Eubank was meaningless because Eubank was age 30. :lol1: Some say Spink's win over Ali isn't good because Ali was 36, and Holmes win over him wasn't because Ali was 38. And Marciano's win over Joe Louis wasn't any good because Louis was 37. A few fighters like Vitali and Jersey Joe Walcott were still good at 38. But very, very few are still good when they are past their 40th birthday. Walcott seemed old in the second fight with Marciano, but not in the first. Vitali looked good at 38 against Arreola and at 40 against Adamek, but he looked faded against Chisora and against Charr. Tarver looked pretty good over 40 but he tested positive for PEDs... If you're dumb enough to only consider age, I guess that would be funny.Using your logic, Eric Morales is still in his prime.

Seems like a simple math question. Yes, he is.

41 is not that old for a boxer. Hopkins was 46 and still dominating. Foreman won his second title at 45. Vitali will be scared into retirement by former cruiserweight David Haye

You have the IQ of a Chicken McNugget (not you BN). So that means you have the IQ of a french fry.. Easy on the carbs..

You have the IQ of a Chicken McNugget. :lol1::lol1:

You have the IQ of a Chicken McNugget (not you BN).

When did this new age of science and nutrition begin?