Bernard Hopkins Media Interview Transcript

[edgarg]

Mario Veit

WARP 1432- you asked about Veit. Well, I'd seen reports on him from time to time, and know he was a top European ready for the World Scene. when Calzaghe KO'd him in the 1st round it was regarded as a stunning upset, as many expected Veit to win, he was much bigger and taller, and unbeaten as well. Then he went on to another long string of good and goodish wins.

When the second fight was proposed with Calzaghe there was a lot of talk against it. But others said that Veit had earned the fight and was still unbeaten except by Calzaghe. Calzaghe said that he was lucky in the first fight and had caught him by surprise, and didn't expect to do so the second time. I know he KO'd him again in the mid rounds in a much better fight. Not so long ago. (But I haven't heard that he's done much good since. I think Calzaghe ruined him) So up to then, Veit had lost only 2 fights to the same guy. Something Like Mosely and Forrest at that time. That they were both KO's advertises Calzaghe's punching power.

So, I think that the Veit fights were good wins, since he had an established, earned reputation, but not great wins, like the Kessler one, who already had a World class reputation, and was not only unbeaten but was also a 2 title belt holder and physically VERY big.

[warp1432]

Good win really? Because according to your logic he was **** because he didn't face any good opposition.

His oppnenots had a combined record of [insert some **** here]. That must be a horrible win and proved he was all hype.

What Hopkins did to Johnson was impressive and a great win because of what he did to him and the sucess he had after his career. And if Johnson had a fight 5 weeks earlier then he was already in shape.

I don't see anyone discrediting Sugar Ray Robinson's resume. Fighters back then took fights on short weeks notice all the time.

"Well Johnson didn't have time to prepare to watch tapes" Neither did Hopkins. It was a match up with 2 undefeated fighters and Hopkins slaughtered him, that's the only loss of Johnson's career that devastating.

[edgarg]

Good win really? Because according to your logic he was **** because he didn't face any good opposition.

His oppnenots had a combined record of [insert some **** here]. That must be a horrible win and proved he was all hype.

What Hopkins did to Johnson was impressive and a great win because of what he did to him and the sucess he had after his career. And if Johnson had a fight 5 weeks earlier then he was already in shape.

I don't see anyone discrediting Sugar Ray Robinson's resume. Fighters back then took fights on short weeks notice all the time.

"Well Johnson didn't have time to prepare to watch tapes" Neither did Hopkins. It was a match up with 2 undefeated fighters and Hopkins slaughtered him, that's the only loss of Johnson's career that devastating.

You ARE heated up. Did I do all that?? And all this antagonism is just to drive in that Hopkins win over a green, long-before-his-best Johnson, was an astounding victory???

That you actually bring in Sugar Ray Robinson is a disgrace, and you should be ashamed. What happened to him, happened to many overbrave, fight-too-often, take-too-much-punishment, fighters. By 60 he was almost a vegetable, and knew nothing about his wonderful record. As you should know, he died very young. And there were others-hundreds of them- who died much younger, in far worse circumstances, from the same ailment.

The same thing happened to BOTH Floyd Patterson AND his history making opponent Ingemar Johansen. As you may (or may not) know, Floyd was the first heavyweight Champ ever to regain his title. So many had tried, and all had failed. It was this, I believe which led to the phrase by some bright spark "they never come back". Well Floyd came back, but where did it lead him?? I'm totally against the sort of fights which make such demands on innocent, brave young guys and ruin them just to give us a momentary "thrill". It makes fans, enthusiasts, and followers appear like the crowds who used to attend the Roman Coliseum-howling for blood !!

And I know a hell of a lot more about it than you, and I take back my comment that you are usually fairminded !!

As for your little supposed "trap' about Veit, I think you must be simple or something, to spoil a legitimate discussion the way you have done. I realised that the question was supposed to be a "two-edged-sword" and decided to answer it strictly honestly. For your information, (and I decided to just now look it up) the guy who handed Veit his last KO defeat a few months ago,
(4th to date-all started by Calzaghe) is Jurgen Braehmer, who BECAUSE of beating Veit (showing how well Veit is STILL regarded) is NOW the #1 challenger to Calzaghe's WBO title.

I hope I didn't complicate things to much for you to understand.

[Orion]

B-Hop baby gonna shock people one more time.

[edgarg]

You ARE heated up. Did I do all that?? And all this antagonism is just to drive in that Hopkins win over a green, long-before-his-best Johnson, was an astounding victory???

That you actually bring in Sugar Ray Robinson is a disgrace, and you should be ashamed. What happened to him, happened to many overbrave, fight-too-often, take-too-much-punishment, fighters. By 60 he was almost a vegetable, and knew nothing about his wonderful record. As you should know, he died very young. And there were others-hundreds of them- who died much younger, in far worse circumstances, from the same ailment.

The same thing happened to BOTH Floyd Patterson AND his history making opponent Ingemar Johansen. As you may (or may not) know, Floyd was the first heavyweight Champ ever to regain his title. So many had tried, and all had failed. It was this, I believe which led to the phrase by some bright spark "they never come back". Well Floyd came back, but where did it lead him?? I'm totally against the sort of fights which make such demands on innocent, brave young guys and ruin them just to give us a momentary "thrill". It makes fans, enthusiasts, and followers appear like the crowds who used to attend the Roman Coliseum-howling for blood !!

And I know a hell of a lot more about it than you, and I take back my comment that you are usually fairminded !!

As for your little supposed "trap' about Veit, I think you must be simple or something, to spoil a legitimate discussion the way you have done. I realised that the question was supposed to be a "two-edged-sword" and decided to answer it strictly honestly. For your information, (and I decided to just now look it up) the guy who handed Veit his last KO defeat a few months ago,
(4th to date-all started by Calzaghe) is Jurgen Braehmer, who BECAUSE of beating Veit (showing how well Veit is STILL regarded) is NOW the #1 challenger to Calzaghe's WBO title.

I hope I didn't complicate things to much for you to understand.

And while we're at it, since you're so knowledgeable about Mr. Wonderful's doings, do you recall the reason-the REAL reason-that he weaseled out of that fight with Calzaghe a few years ago. Yes we all know that he's agreed to fight for a particular price, then, at the LAST momenet, refused to sign unless he was paid DOUBLE, thus wiping out the fight. I think "weaseling" is a weak word, it should be much stronger, but I'm a polite person.

Logic dictates that since until that late moment he'd wanted the fight, logic again dictates that he'd probably found out something that caused him to shy away. The only thing I can think of which would cause a fighter to renege on a fight where all the important conditions had been OK'd and accepted, (apart from a broken leg) is that he realised that he had little chance of winning, and everything to lose.

At that time he was still in the top rank, not yet the has-been he's since become.

[warp1432]

You ARE heated up. Did I do all that?? And all this antagonism is just to drive in that Hopkins win over a green, long-before-his-best Johnson, was an astounding victory???

As for your little supposed "trap' about Veit, I think you must be simple or something, to spoil a legitimate discussion the way you have done. I realised that the question was supposed to be a "two-edged-sword" and decided to answer it strictly honestly. For your information, (and I decided to just now look it up) the guy who handed Veit his last KO defeat a few months ago,
(4th to date-all started by Calzaghe) is Jurgen Braehmer, who BECAUSE of beating Veit (showing how well Veit is STILL regarded) is NOW the #1 challenger to Calzaghe's WBO title.

I hope I didn't complicate things to much for you to understand.

I'm not heated up. Your arguement is just silly. Veit had beaten "no one", but that doesn't mean he wasn't still good. Just like Glen Johnson. However, Johnson had much more sucess later on in his career which shows that Johnson was better then he seemed and is a good victory.

And Veit's (4th to date-all started by Calzaghe) thing isn't impressive because when Johnson (probably) loses to Dawson I could say (11th to date-all started by Hopkns).

Hopkins delievered a beating to Johnson and what he did after was impressive because of what he did after. What you call "inexperienced" (with 32 fights?) is what I call impressive because of what the fighters did afterwards. That's why I give Jones Jr. fullcredit for beating Hopkins and Joe beating veit. Even if they were green. Especially in the way Joe dominated Veit I give him credit because it was an impressive performance.

Throw that in with all those other performances by Hopkins and against good opposition, that makes him a legend. Same with Calzaghe. People look into a person's resume wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy to much.

[warp1432]

And while we're at it, since you're so knowledgeable about Mr. Wonderful's doings, do you recall the reason-the REAL reason-that he weaseled out of that fight with Calzaghe a few years ago. Yes we all know that he's agreed to fight for a particular price, then, at the LAST momenet, refused to sign unless he was paid DOUBLE, thus wiping out the fight. I think "weaseling" is a weak word, it should be much stronger, but I'm a polite person.

Haha this. Alright the only thing that mentions this is Calzaghe's autobiography and his camp. But assuming they are telling the truth, that might have just been a big misunderstanding. Hopkins wanted 3 million for just his share. The lawyer probably misunderstood and got a contract for 3 million in total which wouldn't give Hopkins just 3 million. Or there was something in the contract that Hopkins didn't like.

I don't really care much about that because they are fighting now.

Logic dictates that since until that late moment he'd wanted the fight, logic again dictates that he'd probably found out something that caused him to shy away. The only thing I can think of which would cause a fighter to renege on a fight where all the important conditions had been OK'd and accepted, (apart from a broken leg) is that he realised that he had little chance of winning, and everything to lose.

Kinda like Joe Calzaghe taking on Glen Johnson and then backing out twice?