Who do you think Won Hopkins-Taylor 1

[IMDAZED]

WRONG! Hopkins actually outlanded Taylor and threw less, but landed at an astonishingly high percentage.

Thank you. I don't know what these muthaphukkas are talking about. Hopkins didn't do anything early on? Umm...he was landing all the punches! Yeah, he threw about 12 per round early on but why not when you're landing 8 of them and your opponent is 2 for 30? I mean, give me a break.

Like I said, Taylor won no more than four rounds in their first fight IMO.

[dstew]

WRONG! Hopkins actually outlanded Taylor and threw less, but landed at an astonishingly high percentage.

True, but fortunately for fans, fights are not scored on total number of punches landed or at what percentage, but instead on who is performing better round-by-round.

That way we don't end up with guys bottling it for the first 10 rounds, waiting for the other guy to tire out, meanwhile putting the audience to sleep, only to try to land a slew of punches in the final rounds to win the punch count.

The current scoring method promotes action all the way through the fight.

[Walt Liquor]

Thank you. I don't know what these muthaphukkas are talking about. Hopkins didn't do anything early on? Umm...he was landing all the punches! Yeah, he threw about 12 per round early on but why not when you're landing 8 of them and your opponent is 2 for 30? I mean, give me a break.

Like I said, Taylor won no more than four rounds in their first fight IMO.

I second Dazed. Look at what connects. Taylor wasn't landing because of Hopkins DEFENSE and RING GENERALSHIP (which by the way are 50% of the criteria for judging rounds). You can also add the Jermain's aggression was not effective. Everyone thinks it is just punches thrown or landed. There is more to it. Plus, in my opinion, you have to eat a champion to take his bests and there is no way Jermain proved he was good enough to take Bernards belts.

[dstew]

Iin my opinion, you have to eat a champion to take his best

Now let's not get carried away...

[IMDAZED]

I second Dazed. Look at what connects. Taylor wasn't landing because of Hopkins DEFENSE and RING GENERALSHIP (which by the way are 50% of the criteria for judging rounds). You can also add the Jermain's aggression was not effective. Everyone thinks it is just punches thrown or landed. There is more to it. Plus, in my opinion, you have to eat a champion to take his bests and there is no way Jermain proved he was good enough to take Bernards belts.

Excellent, excellent post but, unfortunately - according to this board - 50% of the criteria is "effort." Obviously, Hopkins put in no effort in controlling the ring, making Taylor miss and (gasp!) making Taylor pay.

First Taylor fight was one of Hopkins' best performances IMO and I saw no way he lost that fight. The second one? Sure, I won't complain if you scored it for JT. But the first was clearly Hops, dismantling Taylor part by part until his body and confidence were damn near ruined at fight's end.

[Walt Liquor]

Now let's not get carried away...

whoops. need to have my assistant type my blog posts now?!?!?!?!?

[Walt Liquor]

Excellent, excellent post but, unfortunately - according to this board - 50% of the criteria is "effort." Obviously, Hopkins put in no effort in controlling the ring, making Taylor miss and (gasp!) making Taylor pay.

First Taylor fight was one of Hopkins' best performances IMO and I saw no way he lost that fight. The second one? Sure, I won't complain if you scored it for JT. But the first was clearly Hops, dismantling Taylor part by part until his body and confidence were damn near ruined at fight's end.

I thought Bernard clearly won the first fight as well. Second fight was probably a draw. Back to something I said before. Jermaine didn't do enough to takes Bernards belts in fight 1, while Bernard didn't do enough to take Jermaines belts in 2.

[IMDAZED]

I thought Bernard clearly won the first fight as well. Second fight was probably a draw. Back to something I said before. Jermaine didn't do enough to takes Bernards belts in fight 1, while Bernard didn't do enough to take Jermaines belts in 2.

Great minds.

I scored the second fight a draw as well but have no issues with JT taking it. I was impressed at his ability to adjust and the little things he did to keep Hopkins off-balance in that fight. Much better performance by him in the rematch. Come to think of it, it seems he always performs much better in the rematch (Pavlik). But the first fight was all Hopkins and his best performance since Tito IMO.

[Slater P Persin]

For those who say Hopkins didn't do jack **** for much of the fight...why not watch it again? With the sound off? Matter of fact...who won the first round? Damn sure wasn't Taylor.

I had it 3-3 after six and I might've given Taylor one more round after that. This absurd idea that he won the first six rounds or whatever then miraculously couldn't win one more is completely absurd and, for lack of a better term, ******.

I thought the same thing, Hopkins won the first. He actually landed a few punches while Taylor did ****. Taylor didn't land **** the whole fight,

[Slater P Persin]

Excellent point.

I scored the fight 7-5 for Taylor. I can see having it a draw, but you'd be hard pressed to convince me that Hopkins won more than six rounds of that fight. Even if you argue that Taylor wasn't landing cleanly or at all a lot of the time, there were rounds when Hopkins didn't do ANYTHING. If one guy is doing something but not very effectively, and the other guy isn't doing anything, I'm going to score that round for the guy making an effort.

Wrong! Hopkins actually LANDED the few punches he threw wich is more then you can say for Taylor.