Jones CLEARLY won...Dawson CLEARLY won....Taylor won the rematch but not CLEARLY imo...the rest can be debated
Even the Calzaghe fight? It's been ages since I've sat down to watch it but I remember Hopkins' lack of activity hurting his chances against someone so busy.
I was rooting for Hopkins when I saw that fight live.
Taylor won both. As good as Hopkins rep is today it doesn't change the fact that Taylor beat him twice. Taylor wasn't intimidated at all by Hopkins and fought like it.
Both fights were close. I am going to have to go in my VHS boxing collection and dig those fights out and score those two fights. I was watching the Wright vs Taylor fight yesterday I only got to the 4th round because I had some **** to do but I had a tie two rounds a piece. What a fight that was too. I am watching that fight right now.
So You're telling me Hopkins didn't win a single round prior to round 8 and that they were all CLEAR Taylor rounds, meaning there was not at least one out of those 7 rounds that was close or "could have gone either way"?
people use vague statements like "hopkins started too late" to explain their shi-tty scoring. when you break it down round by round it's basically impossible to have taylor winning the first fight. then some people will turn around and say "hopkins faded" against calzaghe implying that the first 8 rounds didn't even happen. i thought every round counted the same but when you are biased you have to make up your own scoring system in order to get the result you desire.
I remember having Hopkins ahead in both by very slim margins. Fights that could have gone either way. But I havent watched them for years so who knows.
I remember having Taylor winning the second fight but scored the first one a draw.
I had the first one a draw, had Hopkins winning the rematch but both were close..
This.
A lot of people (for the sake of brevity, let's call them 'tards) think Hopkins won the first bout despite doing f*ck all until the 8th round. Rounds 8-12 were clearly his, but he still deserved to lose a 7-5 decision for having done absolutely nothing up until the final third of the fight.
How impressive he was in closing against Taylor the first time is irrelevant because, from a purely mathematical standpoint, he gave away too many rounds to be considered the victor.
As for the second bout, I thought that was the much clearer of the two Taylor fights. Hopkins did everything he did to Taylor in the first fight here, but he was also much more active early, and he used his jab to much greater effect.
I don't see how anybody scores that fight for Taylor.
I may be getting the first fight mixed up with the second.
Taylor won the first because Hopkins got started too late...
I don't understand this notion that Taylor did better in the rematch or was somehow more active than Hopkins in the first six rounds. Hopkins clearly won the second IMO.
This.
A lot of people (for the sake of brevity, let's call them 'tards) think Hopkins won the first bout despite doing f*ck all until the 8th round. Rounds 8-12 were clearly his, but he still deserved to lose a 7-5 decision for having done absolutely nothing up until the final third of the fight.
How impressive he was in closing against Taylor the first time is irrelevant because, from a purely mathematical standpoint, he gave away too many rounds to be considered the victor.
As for the second bout, I thought that was the much clearer of the two Taylor fights. Hopkins did everything he did to Taylor in the first fight here, but he was also much more active early, and he used his jab to much greater effect.
I don't see how anybody scores that fight for Taylor.