Did Hopkins win the Tito fight with his strenghth or his boxing abilities?

[hunter010]

Just like Lacy was allegedly to big for Joe????????????? Great logic!

tito should never be fighting light heavyweights.

[abadger]

Just like Lacy was allegedly to big for Joe????????????? Great logic!

What? Who the hell said Lacy was too big for Joe? Certainly not me.

I know lots of people thought he was going to be prior to the fight, but the fact is, he wasn't, so I have no idea what you're trying to say.

[MELLY-MEL...]

What? Who the hell said Lacy was too big for Joe? Certainly not me.

I know lots of people thought he was going to be prior to the fight, but the fact is, he wasn't, so I have no idea what you're trying to say.

exactly, the logic was wrong about lacy after joe took him to school, and wrong in saying bhop beat tito on size, and strength. size and strength did not win either fight! boxing ability did!

[ИATAS]

exactly, the logic was wrong about lacy after joe took him to school, and wrong in saying bhop beat tito on size, and strength. size and strength did not win either fight! boxing ability did!

yep, exactly. Everyone thought lacy was too powerful for joe and would knock his head off. Superb boxing ability got joe the win. Same with hopkins, it was skill that won his fight against tito, much like all of his fights. Like someone else said, the only time hopkins really get a win based on strength and size was against winky, where hopkins roughed him up, clinched, etc to get the win. That was not the case in the least bit against tito, tito was the aggressor the whole fight.

[abadger]

exactly, the logic was wrong about lacy after joe took him to school, and wrong in saying bhop beat tito on size, and strength. size and strength did not win either fight! boxing ability did!

The only place there is no logic is in your argument. The fact that Lacy was not too big for Calzaghe has nothing to do with whether or not Hopkins was too big for Tito.

[MELLY-MEL...]

The only place there is no logic is in your argument. The fact that Lacy was not too big for Calzaghe has nothing to do with whether or not Hopkins was too big for Tito.

[ALT-Assassin]

The only place there is no logic is in your argument. The fact that Lacy was not too big for Calzaghe has nothing to do with whether or not Hopkins was too big for Tito.

Pavlik is to big for many of his opponents but do they question his victories? The same could be said about Williams or Klitchko.They don't because all of those fighters use superior boxing skills and ring generalship to beat their opponents!Hopkins in no way out muscled Tito but out boxed him instead

[abadger]

Pavlik is to big for many of his opponents but do they question his victories? The same could be said about Williams or Klitchko.They don't because all of those fighters use superior boxing skills and ring generalship to beat their opponents!Hopkins in no way out muscled Tito but out boxed him instead

I repeat. Hopkins was able to outbox Tito so impressively because he was the bigger stronger man and Tito could not impose himself on Hopkins at all. Thus, Hopkins controlled the fight.

Whether I 'question' the victory is another matter entirely. All I have done so far is state the major factor that I think helped Hopkins to win so well. I haven't questioned it at all.

[hunter010]

abadger is right lol

[Porter's Dad]

Skill.

That performance was sensational, IMHO.