Kelly Pavlik vs Bernard Hopkins

[sonofisis]

That question is irrelevant.

No it isn't, you'd just like to talk around it. Either you can answer it or not. Apparently not so by default Bernard is obviously the greatest middle weight of this era. You pretty much have no rebuttal to that statement.

[sonofisis]

Yes he has. I think my post that that covers the "blown up welters" is a bs argument and the fact he cleaned up the middleweight division, had the belts for over 10 years, etc. proves the point that he is an all time great without question.

Is Haglers win over Duran any less impressive? Or his fights with SRL? Should Hagler turned down the biggest fights of his career because they were "blown up welters?" Nope. He did what any boxer would do which is fight.

Even if you take away the big names, it's still impressive. He fought everyone in the middleweight division and beat them. Maybe Aaron Pryor shouldn't be in the hall of fame either because he didn't fight any big names either.

^^Great post..

[St@rscreem]

I stopped paying attention when it was clear that you are seriously comparing the accomplishments of Pavlik to those of Hopkins, or Calzaghe for that matter. This is not a debate that needs to be won, its a matter of common sense. 1 guy has won 20+ championship fights in multiple classes, the other guy has 1 in 1. At first I thought you were joking, but now I guess we are just going to have to disagree, strongly.

[moofo]

No it isn't, you'd just like to talk around it. Either you can answer it or not. Apparently not so by default Bernard is obviously the greatest middle weight of this era. You pretty much have no rebuttal to that statement.

He isn't though.
He LOST to the best Middleweights he fought.
RJJ & Jermain Taylor.
And he NEVER avenged those losses.
In between meeting these world class operators he never faced any future HOF fighters at the top of their game who gained their HOF status at middleweight.
Borenard was lucky enough to live through an era where there was no real talent in his chosen division.

That is a perfectly acceptable answer so **** off.


I am entitled to my opinion and I don't see what is wrong with my reasoning and you have not put forward an argument to change it either.

HE LOST TO THE BEST HE FACED.
HE DIDN'T BEAT THE BEST HE FACED.

[Dorian]

Call me crazy if u want but i think hopkins is made for Pavlik. Hopkins is not a easy guy to hit clean like taylor.

Hopkins would box him and duck most of pavliks power punches...

Hopkins close ud

[moofo]

I stopped paying attention when it was clear that you are seriously comparing the accomplishments of Pavlik to those of Hopkins, or Calzaghe for that matter. This is not a debate that needs to be won, its a matter of common sense. 1 guy has won 20+ championship fights in multiple classes, the other guy has 1 in 1. At first I thought you were joking, but now I guess we are just going to have to disagree, strongly.

He Lost to the best he faced and never avenged his losses.
As for this multi weight nonsense...get a ****ing grip.
He should have been at LHW most of his career when he realised there was no competition at middleweight.
Instead he defended against a long line of mediocrity and blown up fighters who made their names in lower weight divisions.

[Rane-Ex54]

haha, yall are tripping, saying that Hopkins isn't a HOF or whatever. He beat anyone that stepped into his weight class. All fighters go up in weight later in there carrer. This is Tito, ODLH, & Winky are all hall of fame bound & BHop beat them, CLEARLY. Stop it with the nonsense. I like Pavlik but Marandia & taylor are not shoe in's for HOF yet.

Now in reagrds to the Pav vs Bhop. I truthfully cannot pick. Pavlik is stronger, younger, and bigger. But BHop is a master of defense & has ring experience that Pavlik does not have yet. No matter what its going to the score cards, unless someone gets Super Lucky. Bhop doesn't thoough powerfull enough in his old age, and Bhop has defense and a head made of Steel. It would be an ugly ass fight. But interesting!

[St@rscreem]

He Lost to the best he faced and never avenged his losses.
As for this multi weight nonsense...get a ****ing grip.

I got a grip, thanks. Personally I think your views on this topic are completely ****ing insane, and so would anyone else with 1/8th of a brain, but I just said lets disagree and keep the **** moving. You could try to show the same respect.

If Hopkins and Pavlik both retired tomorrow, one of them is going to the hall of fame based on his accomplishments in the sport, and one of them isn't. This is not something that is up for debate even though you continue to do so.

[moofo]

I got a grip, thanks. Personally I think your views on this topic are completely ****ing insane, and so would anyone else with 1/8th of a brain, but I just said lets disagree and keep the **** moving. You could try to show the same respect.

If Hopkins and Pavlik both retired tomorrow, one of them is going to the hall of fame based on his accomplishments in the sport, and one of them isn't. This is not something that is up for debate even though you continue to do so.

If they retired then one could say he never tasted defeat to the best he faced.
The Hall of famer won't.
Cos he lost to RJJ & Taylor.
He has an inflated record too with Robert allen making up 3 of his defences.
That is like Calzaghe fighting Manfredo 3 times.

[sonofisis]

Also, B-Hop has always wanted to rematch RJJ, notwithstanding that Bernard totally demolished the only two people who destroyed Roy Jones in Glen Johnson (while he was still undefeated at that) and Antonio Tarver, "The Legend Killer". In addition to everything else he's accomplished, as St@rscreem says, there just is no debate. This is why you have one irrational poster (moofo) responding back and fourth to a sea of rational posters trying to defend his far fetched claims that are just too off target for any sane boxing fan to make sense of.

Anyone who says B-Hop isn't HOF material, deserves to just shut up and die..