Do you think that Hopkins fought....

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Luciano
    Banned
    Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
    • Dec 2007
    • 1141
    • 30
    • 1
    • 1,220

    #21
    Originally posted by kayjay
    I agree with the bolded, but really it was just one time immediately after the long 10th round pause. That's why I say Hops gave it away; if he had fought like that for longer he had a good chance of winning.

    I disagree with the first few sentences: the fact that it is "his style" doesn't make it right. It is not as legitimate as any other style. The guy forcing the action rightfully gets the benefit of the doubt. Fighters should be expected to fight, not box negatively like Hopkins did
    It's called BOXING, not FIGHTING...it's just the way boxing is now nobody appreciates what real tacticians bring to the table because of moronic idiot fans like yourself.

    Comment

    • kayjay
      A ***** and I'm happy
      Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
      • Jan 2006
      • 13652
      • 1,813
      • 5,770
      • 30,799

      #22
      Originally posted by Luciano
      It's called BOXING, not FIGHTING...it's just the way boxing is now nobody appreciates what real tacticians bring to the table because of moronic idiot fans like yourself.
      I may be a moronic idiot, but that is beside the point. Hopkins fought too negatively to warrant the victory.

      I scored the fight the way Chuck Giampa, Harold Lederman, and Cliff Rold did. 116-111 for Calzaghe, even though I thought Hopkins LOOKED like the better boxer. I don't give style points. You have to engage the other guy or you lose. Failing to throw combinations or flurries, be it from lack of stamina or fear of getting hit, gets you a loss.

      Comment

      • RAESAAD
        THE MUTHA****IN TRUTH
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Jul 2005
        • 24331
        • 2,370
        • 1,730
        • 40,454

        #23
        Originally posted by Luciano
        It's called BOXING, not FIGHTING...it's just the way boxing is now nobody appreciates what real tacticians bring to the table because of moronic idiot fans like yourself.
        Mayweather boxes, Tarver Boxes, Roy boxes......Hopkins ran (used latteral movement) threw one punch and hugged.......

        Originally posted by kayjay
        I may be a moronic idiot, but that is beside the point. Hopkins fought too negatively to warrant the victory.

        I scored the fight the way Chuck Giampa, Harold Lederman, and Cliff Rold did. 116-111 for Calzaghe, even though I thought Hopkins LOOKED like the better boxer. I don't give style points. You have to engage the other guy or you lose. Failing to throw combinations or flurries, be it from lack of stamina or fear of getting hit, gets you a loss.
        Exactly......

        Comment

        • abadger
          Real Talk
          Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
          • Nov 2007
          • 6259
          • 242
          • 139
          • 13,256

          #24
          Originally posted by kayjay
          I agree with the bolded, but really it was just one time immediately after the long 10th round pause. That's why I say Hops gave it away; if he had fought like that for longer he had a good chance of winning.

          I disagree with the first few sentences: the fact that it is "his style" doesn't make it right. It is not as legitimate as any other style. The guy forcing the action rightfully gets the benefit of the doubt. Fighters should be expected to fight, not box negatively like Hopkins did
          Being defensive and counterpunching is as legitimate a style as any other, a boxer is entitled to fight any way he wants to, within the rules, if he thinks he can win doing it, as Hopkins has many times before.

          Yoy are right that the guy forcing the action gets the benefit of the doubt, Calzaghe did, but that doesn't make Hopkins's style illegitimate. The counterpunching boxer takes a calculated risk that he can win the fight that way, even in the face of a more aggressive opponent. Hopkins backed himself, but he backed wrong. IMO it doesn't take anything away from a remarkable performance. Someone had to lose.
          ________
          Amc Rebel
          Last edited by abadger; 03-20-2011, 11:47 PM.

          Comment

          • Del Coqui
            SAN JUAN
            Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
            • Feb 2005
            • 5407
            • 136
            • 245
            • 12,286

            #25
            Originally posted by Luciano
            It's called BOXING, not FIGHTING...it's just the way boxing is now nobody appreciates what real tacticians bring to the table because of moronic idiot fans like yourself.
            LMFAO!!! You call that boxing? Stick to Soccer if you think that's a tactician!

            Comment

            • Clegg
              Banned
              Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
              • Mar 2008
              • 24673
              • 3,726
              • 2,307
              • 233,274

              #26
              I think Hopkins fought poorly. He looked in good shape physically, but he got tired in the second half of the fight despite not having done much at all in the first half.

              After the knockdown he didn't throw another punch for 40 seconds! He just seemed to have very little energy, and no desire to take the initiative, even when it could've resulted in a 1st round KO. I don't think he would've KO'd Calzaghe, but he could've put some pressure on him somehow ie. by throwing a punch or moving forwards.

              Credit for Hopkins for being able to have a close fight with a top guy at the age of 43, but at the same time George Foreman had better stamina than that in his 40s, and he was more than a tad overweight.

              Comment

              • Thunder Lips
                Contender
                Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
                • Jan 2007
                • 434
                • 26
                • 1
                • 6,539

                #27
                Hopkins holding and lack of offense is what kept him in the fight, neutralize Joe's faster busier hands and drag him into an ugly low worrkate fight. This worked to some extent but Joe figured out his counter punches and ended up frustrating him instead. If Hopkins turned his hands loose he would have probably got busted up like Lacy, the last guy that pushed the fight against Joe. Even a great puncher like Kessler who likes to sit back and jab had trouble matching Joe punch for punch and ended up getting busted up. Hopkins did all he could do, pull a Bika as most expected. Joe was clearly not hurt after the flash knockdown and Hopkins knew this, the guy has been around for awhile he may talk **** but he knows what he's doing.

                Comment

                • Vladimir303
                  303
                  Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                  • May 2007
                  • 6067
                  • 398
                  • 276
                  • 12,727

                  #28
                  Originally posted by typeone
                  [B]Do you think that Hopkins fought like a real champ against Joe??? What did you make of him? I know he done well for a 43 year old man, But he ran like a big girl all night long!!
                  He did pretty well. If he won at least 5 rounds taking the 10-8 round into account, it could have easly been a draw.

                  When Hopkins put Joe on his ass in that 1st round, the Katsaidis-Casamayor fight immidately came to mind.

                  Comment

                  • beez721
                    Undisputed Champion
                    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                    • Aug 2005
                    • 9637
                    • 252
                    • 55
                    • 16,400

                    #29
                    Originally posted by abadger
                    Being defensive and counterpunching is as legitimate a style as any other, a boxer is entitled to fight any way he wants to, within the rules, if he thinks he can win doing it, as Hopkins has many times before.

                    Yoy are right that the guy forcing the action gets the benefit of the doubt, Calzaghe did, but that doesn't make Hopkins's style illegitimate. The counterpunching boxer takes a calculated risk that he can win the fight that way, even in the face of a more aggressive opponent. Hopkins backed himself, but he backed wrong. IMO it doesn't take anything away from a remarkable performance. Someone had to lose.
                    hopkins has turned into a light heavyweight version of ruiz over the last several years. he needs to retire so he can give us boxing fans a break. his style is dreadful to watch and he's also a poor sport. I cant believe all the crying he was doing after the fight when it was obvious he lost

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    TOP