Tweet
... I quite like the guy. He impressed me last time out, he'll naturally go in the HOF and he's a very good middleweight in a very average era. Get that? Very good. Not All Time Great, possibly not even Great, but very good.
Yet since the decline of Roy Jones and the need to sell copy, the guy seems to have been reconfigured as an ATG by The Ring, and made into something he's probably not.
This thread is not to detract from Bernard, but to separate what I see as major spin on his accomplishments.
Here's the top three examples of spin bull**** that get woven about Hop, and why they irk:
1. The Twenty Successful Defences. Let's not even go into the fact that it was actually 19 (unless we're counting NCs now?) people talk about this like it's an achievement in and of itself that overrides talent, opposition and historical perspective. I mean, defending a belt 20 times IS a good thing, (only seven of them as unified champ, note) but are we SERIOUSLY suggesting that if the likes of Robinson, Greb, Monson and Hagler had to face the likes of Glen Johnson, Morrade Hakkar, Carl Daniels and Robert Allen they'd have been ****ed over? No, of course not (right?) so the point IS...?
2. The "career defining" KO of The Acting Amigo. The guy was WAY outside his weight class, so much so that virtually NO ONE gave him a chance of winning. The size difference between the two was a joke, with Oscar having no power to speak of at the weight and having already been largely exposed as a middleweight in his previous bout. Yet he takes a dive/suffers a paralysing liver shot (delete as applicable) and it's "a leap to immortality" as the Ring memorably had it? Oscar as a middleweight was good marquee value, but brought little to the table. Yeah, he's HOF and all the rest of it, has a great resume, but... HE'S NOT A MIDDLEWEIGHT. So what's the point?
3. "Bernard beat a light heavyweight, even Sugar Ray Robinson didn't do that." SRR fought a light heavy over the fifteen round distance (not twelve) in heat estimated at 104 degrees. He had to retire from exhaustation, despite being ahead on points. In contrast, while I DID admire the performance, Bernard beat a weight-drained, overrated light heavy who forgot to pack his balls. In a decent temperature. So what's the point of mentioning the stat when it's comparatively meaningless? It's like talking about how boxers today are better than the boxers of old because there are more "multi weight champs". Except in the old days there weren't anywhere near as many divisions, or as many belts.
I like Bernard, but I only see him as a very good champ. His assension to legendary status seems to be based largely on manipulating facts and figures and the need for a "great" in this largely talent-challenged boxing era.
Yet since the decline of Roy Jones and the need to sell copy, the guy seems to have been reconfigured as an ATG by The Ring, and made into something he's probably not.
This thread is not to detract from Bernard, but to separate what I see as major spin on his accomplishments.
Here's the top three examples of spin bull**** that get woven about Hop, and why they irk:
1. The Twenty Successful Defences. Let's not even go into the fact that it was actually 19 (unless we're counting NCs now?) people talk about this like it's an achievement in and of itself that overrides talent, opposition and historical perspective. I mean, defending a belt 20 times IS a good thing, (only seven of them as unified champ, note) but are we SERIOUSLY suggesting that if the likes of Robinson, Greb, Monson and Hagler had to face the likes of Glen Johnson, Morrade Hakkar, Carl Daniels and Robert Allen they'd have been ****ed over? No, of course not (right?) so the point IS...?
2. The "career defining" KO of The Acting Amigo. The guy was WAY outside his weight class, so much so that virtually NO ONE gave him a chance of winning. The size difference between the two was a joke, with Oscar having no power to speak of at the weight and having already been largely exposed as a middleweight in his previous bout. Yet he takes a dive/suffers a paralysing liver shot (delete as applicable) and it's "a leap to immortality" as the Ring memorably had it? Oscar as a middleweight was good marquee value, but brought little to the table. Yeah, he's HOF and all the rest of it, has a great resume, but... HE'S NOT A MIDDLEWEIGHT. So what's the point?
3. "Bernard beat a light heavyweight, even Sugar Ray Robinson didn't do that." SRR fought a light heavy over the fifteen round distance (not twelve) in heat estimated at 104 degrees. He had to retire from exhaustation, despite being ahead on points. In contrast, while I DID admire the performance, Bernard beat a weight-drained, overrated light heavy who forgot to pack his balls. In a decent temperature. So what's the point of mentioning the stat when it's comparatively meaningless? It's like talking about how boxers today are better than the boxers of old because there are more "multi weight champs". Except in the old days there weren't anywhere near as many divisions, or as many belts.
I like Bernard, but I only see him as a very good champ. His assension to legendary status seems to be based largely on manipulating facts and figures and the need for a "great" in this largely talent-challenged boxing era.
Comment