Age is nothing : Hopkins is at his prime now

[Mozza]

The point is not high work rate as Benny never had a high rate but he definitely had a much higher rate than he has now ,,,, and lets face facts here if he had a higher rate in this fight he wins .

I don't see how he would necessarily have won with a higher work rate. Calzaghe landed a ****load more punches.

[Guest]

Beating Hopkins at 43 is a big win. A win as big as any one else who has beat Hopkins, other than RJJ.

Because any boxing coach will tell you. A Spoiler can be at his best until 50. Right now Hopkins is fighting as good as i have seen him, and the same as i have seen him for a long time.

So before you stop saying hes 43 it doesn't matter. It was a big win. Joe beat him at his own game, when Hopkins was at his best!

What a joke...

[~Lucky13~]

I agree with the thread starter.

[warp1432]

Hopkins lost a lot of rounds to Howard Eastman? That's something new....

He lost 2 maybe, 3 at most.

[RodBarker]

I don't see how he would necessarily have won with a higher work rate. Calzaghe landed a ****load more punches.

Simply because it was a split on the scores as it stood another knockdown or higher rate and hops has it for sure , higher rate from Hopkins means less landed from Cal and more landed from Hopkins , higher rate means he is on the gas more which alters the whole dynamics of the fight , who knows he may have even stopped Joe as he had him shook a couple of times , all Cal landed were a ****load of pillow puffs , check Bhops face , mate he would get knocked around more shaving .

[Burner]

Beating Hopkins at 43 is a big win. A win as big as any one else who has beat Hopkins, other than RJJ.

Because any boxing coach will tell you. A Spoiler can be at his best until 50. Right now Hopkins is fighting as good as i have seen him, and the same as i have seen him for a long time.

So before you stop saying hes 43 it doesn't matter. It was a big win. Joe beat him at his own game, when Hopkins was at his best!

Are you ******ed...hes 43.

[Steak]

Hopkins lost a lot of rounds to Howard Eastman? That's something new....

He lost 2 maybe, 3 at most.

nah, not a lot. but it was rare for Hopkins to lose rounds against people when he was at his best, and even though he wasnt facing amazing competition, Eastman himself aint that amazing either.

[Scott9945]

No fighter is ever in their prime at age 43. Really, it seems amazing that this is being debated.

You're right. To say Hopkins is in his prime is lunacy, or at the very least wishful thinking.

[Dick-Sucker]

Try to refrain from the name calling. I know we are boxing fans and most of us on here, are classified as "mentally ******ed". But lets talk logic.

Have you ever seen Hopkins defence as good as it is now? Has it been throughout his career?

An improved defence can make up for a limited attack.

Im not saying hes as good as he was against Tito. But hes not far off from my view.

Keep the discussion going, with no name calling, facts and boxing opinion.

[warp1432]

nah, not a lot. but it was rare for Hopkins to lose rounds against people when he was at his best, and even though he wasnt facing amazing competition, Eastman himself aint that amazing either.

Eastman was still pretty good and he was ranked #1 by the ring at the time. Hopkins had slowed down by then though.

I think he still managed to beat Winky though.