Tweet
Why Haven't Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins Fought a Rematch?
By Michael Hirsley, Updated: October 26, 2008
Bernard Hopkins has just taken Kelly Pavlik to school and Roy Jones will soon try to do the same to Joe Calzaghe.
What's wrong with this picture?
Two things are most glaring: Before Hopkins and Jones were anointed as the most credible litmus tests for champions Pavlik and Calzaghe, respectively, they should have at least fought their way past one contender-in-waiting.
The second wrong, and bigger question, is this: Why haven't Hopkins and Jones fought a rematch already?
For years, they have been saying that they don't need each other or a rematch of Jones's victory over Hopkins 15 years ago. Now, Hopkins seems to acknowledge that they should fight again … if Jones gets past Calzaghe on Nov. 8.
Hopkins already had his chance against Calzaghe. Did losing that bout make him the logical challenger against Pavlik? As for Jones, victories over past-his-prime Felix Trinidad and untested Anthony Hanshaw did not offset his losses to Antonio Tarver and Glen Johnson.
For most fighters, business in boxing is all about "what have you done for me lately." One loss can sidetrack -- if not outright derail -- a standout career. But for Hopkins and Jones, recent losses apparently have not diminished their marketability. Both are now 3-3 in their last six bouts.
It's not that Jones has no chance to dethrone light heavyweight titlist Calzaghe, or that Hopkins was a considerable underdog against middleweight king Pavlik. Although theirs was not a title fight, Hopkins had already knocked off Pavlik's crown in spirit, long before they stepped into the ring.
By experience alone, Hopkins and Jones are credible gatekeepers for the current champions.
But the biggest credential Hopkins and Jones now bring is that they are still cash cows from which good money can be milked. Whether they work out as gatekeepers or not, Hopkins and Jones are standing there primarily because their presence should bring decent receipts at the gates.
But if they are still solid attractions, why not pit them against each other in a rematch of Jones' victory by decision over Hopkins in 1993?
Fans of either fighter hunger for that matchup. Why have they had to wait so long for even a whiff that that might happen? If Jones beats Calzaghe, maybe a Jones-Hopkins rematch will be resurrected. If not, it will fall onto the heap of lost opportunities, rematches we'd like to see but probably won't.
Oscar De La Hoya, right, picked a fight with Manny Pacquiao after a rematch with Floyd Mayweather failed to come to fruition.
Perhaps the most anticipated rematch from the mainstream media's point of view is a second go-around between Oscar De La Hoya and Floyd Mayweather. De La Hoya's decent showing, losing by split decision to boxing's "best pound-for-pound" fighter, convinced De La Hoya that he could do better the second time around. But Mayweather was apparently content to retire after that one last monster payday he got courtesy of De La Hoya's drawing power.
Forced to take his commercial appeal elsewhere, De La Hoya picked Manny Pacquiao, who has ascended to Mayweather's pound-for-pound throne but is taking a risky move up in weight.
Though Mayweather is retired, a rematch between the former pound-for-pound (who retired while at the peak of his powers) and De La Hoya is a fight that could still be arranged, providing Mayweather wanted it. That can't be said for long-retired Lennox Lewis and Vitali Klitschko.
In the best matchup of the long deflated heavyweight scene, Lewis and Klitschko slugged toe-to-toe before Klitschko's gaping cut near his left eye outweighed Lewis' bruised body in dictating a stoppage after six rounds. Lewis retired after this brawl. Klitschko retired after a couple of follow-ups that could not rival what would have been a highly anticipated rematch.
Instead, Klitschko has now unretired, returned to the ring after a four-year absence, and dethroned champion Sam Peter.
As surprised as boxing fans might have been to see Klitschko make Peter look as overrated as Kimbo Slice, a more highly anticipated Klitschko-Peter bout would have been a rematch of Peter and Vitali's brother, Wladimir. Their 2005 brawl saw the relatively inexperienced Peter lose only after knocking Wladimir down three times, forcing him to exert and redeem himself.
Now that Peter has to start rebuilding, a rematch with Wladimir seems remote at best. And now that the Klitschko brothers are both champions who have said they would never fighter each other, there is a new obstacle against unifying the heavyweight crown.
There have been reams of rematches proving how popular and lucrative such matchmaking can be. Recent sequels such as Pacquiao-Juan Manuel Marquez, Marco Antonio Barrera-Erik Morales, Arturo Gatti-Micky Ward, Israel Vazquez-Rafael Marquez and Diego Corrales-Jose Luis Castillo have been hits at the box office and have appeased fight fans.
In bygone eras, rematches often topped the menu of public appetite. Tony Zale took two of three stirring bouts against Rocky Graziano, with all three ending in knockouts. The same results marked Floyd Patterson in taking two of three from Ingemar Johannson. And in a heroic series of rematches, Sugar Ray Robinson beat Jake LaMotta in five of their six fights. LaMotta would later quip, "I fought Sugar so many times, I'm surprised I'm not diabetic."
But even with all those sequels, there was at least one notable rematch that was never realized. Carmen Basilio fought Sugar Ray Robinson twice, each winning a split decision in what Ring Magazine acclaimed as "fights of the year" in 1957 and 1958.
Basilio long lamented that they never fought the rubber match that Basilio felt could have been his biggest payday.
By Michael Hirsley, Updated: October 26, 2008
Bernard Hopkins has just taken Kelly Pavlik to school and Roy Jones will soon try to do the same to Joe Calzaghe.
What's wrong with this picture?
Two things are most glaring: Before Hopkins and Jones were anointed as the most credible litmus tests for champions Pavlik and Calzaghe, respectively, they should have at least fought their way past one contender-in-waiting.
The second wrong, and bigger question, is this: Why haven't Hopkins and Jones fought a rematch already?
For years, they have been saying that they don't need each other or a rematch of Jones's victory over Hopkins 15 years ago. Now, Hopkins seems to acknowledge that they should fight again … if Jones gets past Calzaghe on Nov. 8.
Hopkins already had his chance against Calzaghe. Did losing that bout make him the logical challenger against Pavlik? As for Jones, victories over past-his-prime Felix Trinidad and untested Anthony Hanshaw did not offset his losses to Antonio Tarver and Glen Johnson.
For most fighters, business in boxing is all about "what have you done for me lately." One loss can sidetrack -- if not outright derail -- a standout career. But for Hopkins and Jones, recent losses apparently have not diminished their marketability. Both are now 3-3 in their last six bouts.
It's not that Jones has no chance to dethrone light heavyweight titlist Calzaghe, or that Hopkins was a considerable underdog against middleweight king Pavlik. Although theirs was not a title fight, Hopkins had already knocked off Pavlik's crown in spirit, long before they stepped into the ring.
By experience alone, Hopkins and Jones are credible gatekeepers for the current champions.
But the biggest credential Hopkins and Jones now bring is that they are still cash cows from which good money can be milked. Whether they work out as gatekeepers or not, Hopkins and Jones are standing there primarily because their presence should bring decent receipts at the gates.
But if they are still solid attractions, why not pit them against each other in a rematch of Jones' victory by decision over Hopkins in 1993?
Fans of either fighter hunger for that matchup. Why have they had to wait so long for even a whiff that that might happen? If Jones beats Calzaghe, maybe a Jones-Hopkins rematch will be resurrected. If not, it will fall onto the heap of lost opportunities, rematches we'd like to see but probably won't.
Oscar De La Hoya, right, picked a fight with Manny Pacquiao after a rematch with Floyd Mayweather failed to come to fruition.
Perhaps the most anticipated rematch from the mainstream media's point of view is a second go-around between Oscar De La Hoya and Floyd Mayweather. De La Hoya's decent showing, losing by split decision to boxing's "best pound-for-pound" fighter, convinced De La Hoya that he could do better the second time around. But Mayweather was apparently content to retire after that one last monster payday he got courtesy of De La Hoya's drawing power.
Forced to take his commercial appeal elsewhere, De La Hoya picked Manny Pacquiao, who has ascended to Mayweather's pound-for-pound throne but is taking a risky move up in weight.
Though Mayweather is retired, a rematch between the former pound-for-pound (who retired while at the peak of his powers) and De La Hoya is a fight that could still be arranged, providing Mayweather wanted it. That can't be said for long-retired Lennox Lewis and Vitali Klitschko.
In the best matchup of the long deflated heavyweight scene, Lewis and Klitschko slugged toe-to-toe before Klitschko's gaping cut near his left eye outweighed Lewis' bruised body in dictating a stoppage after six rounds. Lewis retired after this brawl. Klitschko retired after a couple of follow-ups that could not rival what would have been a highly anticipated rematch.
Instead, Klitschko has now unretired, returned to the ring after a four-year absence, and dethroned champion Sam Peter.
As surprised as boxing fans might have been to see Klitschko make Peter look as overrated as Kimbo Slice, a more highly anticipated Klitschko-Peter bout would have been a rematch of Peter and Vitali's brother, Wladimir. Their 2005 brawl saw the relatively inexperienced Peter lose only after knocking Wladimir down three times, forcing him to exert and redeem himself.
Now that Peter has to start rebuilding, a rematch with Wladimir seems remote at best. And now that the Klitschko brothers are both champions who have said they would never fighter each other, there is a new obstacle against unifying the heavyweight crown.
There have been reams of rematches proving how popular and lucrative such matchmaking can be. Recent sequels such as Pacquiao-Juan Manuel Marquez, Marco Antonio Barrera-Erik Morales, Arturo Gatti-Micky Ward, Israel Vazquez-Rafael Marquez and Diego Corrales-Jose Luis Castillo have been hits at the box office and have appeased fight fans.
In bygone eras, rematches often topped the menu of public appetite. Tony Zale took two of three stirring bouts against Rocky Graziano, with all three ending in knockouts. The same results marked Floyd Patterson in taking two of three from Ingemar Johannson. And in a heroic series of rematches, Sugar Ray Robinson beat Jake LaMotta in five of their six fights. LaMotta would later quip, "I fought Sugar so many times, I'm surprised I'm not diabetic."
But even with all those sequels, there was at least one notable rematch that was never realized. Carmen Basilio fought Sugar Ray Robinson twice, each winning a split decision in what Ring Magazine acclaimed as "fights of the year" in 1957 and 1958.
Basilio long lamented that they never fought the rubber match that Basilio felt could have been his biggest payday.
Comment