better boxer and defense, pbf or bhop?

[Silencers]

No. Not agreed to disagree. You know I love you, but you are flat out wrong. The angles and footwork are not what they are when he is older because he didn't need them to be.

Older fighters fight different. You have to execute (no pun intended) a different game plan when you are older, than you execute when you are younger.

Hopkins DID show the footwork at spots. He did show the angles at spots. The key point that you are missing is that he showed them when he needed too.

When he got older he needed to implement those tools more frequently, that does not mean that he didn't have them, as he clearly demonstrated that he did. A fighter cannot show glimpses of something he does not have.

All that happened is that he needed to rely on his defensive skills more and more as he aged. It doesn't mean they got better. He didn't pick up anything new, we simply began to see more of it.

Accept it or not, that is the truth.

You just confirmed what I said, you see glimpses of what his defense will become, he shows pretty much everything that he is now from the first Echols fight onward. And a fighter can show glimpses of something he has not put together yet, he showed glimpses of his defense but didn't put it all together yet back then, that's what I think anyways.

We'll need to agree to disagree because you believe he was capable of his superb defense back then but chose not to use it whereas I believe that his defense hadn't developed to that level yet, I'm not convincing you and you're not convincing me.

[robjr]

I will go with bhop

[!! Shawn]

You just confirmed what I said, you see glimpses of what his defense will become, he shows pretty much everything that he is now from the first Echols fight onward. And a fighter can show glimpses of something he has not put together yet, he showed glimpses of his defense but didn't put it all together yet back then, that's what I think anyways.

We'll need to agree to disagree because you believe he was capable of his superb defense back then but chose not to use it whereas I believe that his defense hadn't developed to that level yet, I'm not convincing you and you're not convincing me.

I don't believe you have watched the fight recently enough. He didn't just show glimpses. There were spots where there were very clear and deliberate implementations of tools he would rely more heavily on later in his career.

Not the moves a fighter that hasn't put it together yet. The moves of a fighter that had sharper tools at his disposal at the time.

Tools such as blistering speed, combinations, and stamina.

He didn't need to create angles to get in his punches. He had the speed to get in what ever he wanted. He didn't need to set traps, he could bull his way in and open them up.

Just because he chose to use other tools does not mean he didn't have those tools at his disposal.

Watch round 8 for instance.

[Silencers]

I don't believe you have watched the fight recently enough. He didn't just show glimpses. There were spots where there were very clear and deliberate implementations of tools he would rely more heavily on later in his career.

Not the moves a fighter that hasn't put it together yet. The moves of a fighter that had sharper tools at his disposal at the time.

Tools such as blistering speed, combinations, and stamina.

He didn't need to create angles to get in his punches. He had the speed to get in what ever he wanted. He didn't need to set traps, he could bull his way in and open them up.

Just because he chose to use other tools does not mean he didn't have those tools at his disposal.

Watch round 8 for instance.

As I said, we'll have to agree to disagree because from the Echols fight onwards, he showed everything in his defense while being offensive at the same time so I don't believe he could do the things that he does now back then, he just didn't put it all together yet.

[!! Shawn]

As I said, we'll have to agree to disagree because from the Echols fight onwards, he showed everything in his defense while being offensive at the same time so I don't believe he could do the things that he does now back then, he just didn't put it all together yet.

I just watched both back to back. There is not a difference other than the fact that Echols is much stronger and more aggressive than Johnson.

[Silencers]

I just watched both back to back. There is not a difference other than the fact that Echols is much stronger and more aggressive than Johnson.

That is your opinion and you're entitled to it, as I said, we'll agree to disagree because I think the first Echols fight was a more complete defensive performance from him than he showed prior to that fight.

[UnDeniable]

Floyd

I don't buy into the "All Floyd does is hit then run" as in the lower weight classes he had a higher workrate than he does now and was still the least hit fighter in the sport. Mayweather's on a level with Pernell when it comes to defensive boxing ( Not as good but on the same level) Hopkins is also more dirty

[THRILLA77]

Better defense goes to money
better boxer goes t b-hop

[!! Shawn]

That is your opinion and you're entitled to it, as I said, we'll agree to disagree because I think the first Echols fight was a more complete defensive performance from him than he showed prior to that fight.

Where do you live good friend?

[Burner]

who's the better boxer?

who's better defensively?

and why

Everything Hopkins does..Floyd does better.