If Joe was gonna fight a rematch wit Jones, if he loss, then he should defintely fight Hopkins again since he won... B-Hop is bad and i bet he will try and fight Dawson next if not Calzaghe! PS RJJ is washed up and needs to get out the sport! before he ends up like hloyfield
BHOP is a bad man........
Collapse
-
-
That is because he beat Taylor in at least one of those fights and I think he beat Calzaghe. At least taylor gave him a rematch so Benard can't be to bitter towards him for that. Calzaghe well let's see if Hopkins fights him again or if Calzaghe fights Dawson instead....LeftyComment
-
Comment
-
I'm not holding Roy's late career losses against him, but you do have to consider them when comparing him to Hopkins, it's only fair. Hopkins has never been beaten decisively, they're all split decisions and 1 unanimous decision by the narrowest of margins. Where as Roy has been knocked cold twice (both by opponets Bernard slayed), and schooled twice (once by Tarver, and once by Joe).Hopkins was still great 35-43. But thats the time most fighters go down hill. Your holding roy's loses at the end of his career against him. That is wrong, you judge a fighter by their prime. Vargas was past his prime at 26, everyones prime varies. Roy hasn't been Roy in 7-9
Don't think I'm ****ting on Roy, I have the utmost respect for him, as does Bernard. But throughout his entire career Hopkins had to play second fiddle to Roy because he wasn't as flashy. Hell even after shocking the world when he slayed Tito, it still took Hopkins years to get another big match in De La Hoya.
For the most part, Roy fans I've talked to have always said Roy ****s on Bernard, and I just don't see it that way at all. Especially when you look at their records (including losses), big fights, and longevity.
Aren't you British? Anyone else find it hilarious a Brit of all people would be complaining about a fighter who holds when nearly all of them idolize Ricky "hug and hold" Hatton?2. A judge giving Hopkins the fight - that was an embarrassment to America because the judge basically said "Over here, we rate our fighters on holding, crying, hiding, butting and playing dead"
Holding is what you need to do against Joe. Hopkins is a master of knowing how to take away a fighter's biggest advantages. Look at how Trinidad never landed the left hook on him. Look at how Wright wa never able to mount a serious offense. Look at how Pavlik was never able to land a straight right hand on him.
You need to do things with Joe that aren't pretty in order to smother his offensive output, so you don't get swamped by slaps.
Anybody who watched that fight from an objective point of view admits that Joe looked like **** and Bernard landed the cleaner, more effective blows. Whereas Joe was just rushing in and slapping, trying to swarm him.The narrowest thing about Hopkins Calzaghe was the distance between the fighters for most of the fight because Hopkins played the baby. Despite holding like a *****, he still couldnt stop Joe landing more shots than any other fighter on him EVER. god knows how many Joe would have landed if Hopkins had come to fight!
Look, I give Joe credit. This thread isn't even about Joe, it's a respect thread for Hopkins. But even Joe himself admits he looked like absolute **** against Hopkins, and named Hopkins as the toughest opponet of his career to fight, because of his style.
Be happy Joe got the split decision, you have nothing to worry about unless he goes for a rematch with Bernard. Then I'd be very scared. It's a well known fact that any fighter who fights Hopkins twice is damaged goods, whether they win or not.
Jermain Taylor
Robert Allen
Segundo MercadoComment
-
You can't showboat against Joe, you'll get swamped. Bernard was showing him the proper respect. Joe has too much speed and too much skill for an opponet to try to play around with him. Whereas Kelly Pavlik isn't as fast, and doesn't have the skillset Joe does, it's easy to make him look like **** if you know what you're doing.Comment
-
Comment
Comment