What exactly does Kessler do to beat Bhop?

[warp1432]

He is young enough to throw enough punches. I am not sure who I'd pick, but that would be the logic.

That's horrible logic. Just because the fighter doesn't throw as many punches as the other guy, doesn't mean the first guy loses.

regarding winky

i think if winky and bhop wouldve fought at MW, winky wouldve won

if you watch the fight again after the 4th round you can see winky breathin heavily with his mouth wide open in between rounds. he was winning early on, despite the big gash in his head, despite bhop clinching so much, and despite not being able to use his jab.

bernard only caught up because winky couldnt hang on. by the 10th round winky was doing all the clinching, not cause it was his strategy, but b/c he was too tired

personally i had that fight a draw

No. Hopkins clear as day won that fight and Winky wasn't winning after 3. I had it 29-28 for Hopkins. A lot of people give round 2 to Wright, but if you watch closely you can see Wright clearly missing and Bernard countering very nice. Round 3 was also close, but Wright landed a couple good shots.

I had it 116-112 (easily could have seen 117-111/115-113) for Hopkins.

[Jolly Roger]

I'm a bit confused about the speed part. Kessler DOES have above average speed, he was almost matching Calzaghe in their fight.

[warp1432]

Well I meant like athletic speed. Kessler has good speed, but doesn't use it like Jones did for example.

Kessler is more of a technical by the book type of boxer with power.

[ExecutiveOutlaw]

That's horrible logic. Just because the fighter doesn't throw as many punches as the other guy, doesn't mean the first guy loses.

regarding winky



No. Hopkins clear as day won that fight and Winky wasn't winning after 3. I had it 29-28 for Hopkins. A lot of people give round 2 to Wright, but if you watch closely you can see Wright clearly missing and Bernard countering very nice. Round 3 was also close, but Wright landed a couple good shots.

I had it 116-112 (easily could have seen 117-111/115-113) for Hopkins.

i would say the general consensus is that winky was clearly winning in the early rounds, the mid rounds could have gone either way, and bhop clearly won the late rounds

which to me is good evidence that had winky not ran out of gas, he wouldve won

[Pugilistic™]

i could see hopkins beating kessler in a close fight to begin with then hopkins being effective late to take a close decision

[sparked_85]

I agree with the guy who basically said Kessler is a bigger, harder hitting more technically sound version of Jermaine Taylor.

He's also massive.

[wmute]

That's horrible logic. Just because the fighter doesn't throw as many punches as the other guy, doesn't mean the first guy loses.

It's pretty clear and good logic... if you can think for 2-3 seconds before typing.

What did Taylor have that Winky and Tarver did not have? Youth, activity. In fact that's what cost Hopkins the fight. Taylor certainly did not score well on defense, ring generalship and so on, and is certainly not half the boxer winky is. He won because he is big ad young.

[warp1432]

It's pretty clear and good logic... if you can think for 2-3 seconds before typing.

What did Taylor have that Winky and Tarver did not have? Youth, activity. In fact that's what cost Hopkins the fight. Taylor certainly did not score well on defense, ring generalship and so on, and is certainly not half the boxer winky is. He won because he is big ad young.

I guess this applied for George Foreman and Michael Moore too huh?

How about Archie Moore and he countless victories when he was in his 40s?

There's some special cases, but to say this in Kessler's case is not true because he doesn't be able to seem to beat Bernard. It would be close, but just because Kessler throws more punches wouldn't give him the advantage.

[wmute]

I guess this applied for George Foreman and Michael Moore too huh?

How about Archie Moore and he countless victories when he was in his 40s?

There's some special cases, but to say this in Kessler's case is not true because he doesn't be able to seem to beat Bernard. It would be close, but just because Kessler throws more punches wouldn't give him the advantage.

I think Hopkins is also a special case, just because of his career after age 35.

I will repeat my point it from as slightly different angle.

If Taylor threw the same number of punches as Hopkins in their fights, who do you think would have won?

If you take away Hopkins' age you have one of the best active fighters, i would say p4p#2, but he is 43. Do you think it's random that after Taylor, he is only fighting opponents over 35?

Youth does not bring smarts, power, skills... but it sure brings punches, which are good to sustain agression (effective or not).

[warp1432]

If Taylor threw the same number of punches as Hopkins in their fights, who do you think would have won?

Hopkins because he would land cleaner. And it's disputed who won the Taylor fights anyway, so I think Bernard being 40 he did a pretty damn good job against a younger fighter. Kessler is more by the book fighter. He hasn't shown that experience that would get used to Bernard and that's why I think he would lose.

If you take away Hopkins' age you have one of the best active fighters, i would say p4p#2, but he is 43. Do you think it's random that after Taylor, he is only fighting opponents over 35?

Probably not, but they are still some of the best fighters in the world. Winky was #4 pound for pound when he was set to fight Hopkins. Joe Calzaghe is #3. Tarver was #10 and the man of his division.

Youth does not bring smarts, power, skills... but it sure brings punches, which are good to sustain agression (effective or not).

To sustain agression, but not automatically win the fight. I agree most of the time agression takes out the old fighter (See Juan diaz and Manny Pacquiao), but Bernard is a special case and I don't think Kessler would beat him and haven't seen anything that disproves my point except for the uppercuts and Kessler's strength.