Who do you think Won Hopkins-Taylor 1

[IMDAZED]

Yeah...if Hopkins didn't do ****...then what would you say about Taylor's performance?

Oh wait...he threw punches and Jim Lampley slobbered all over them.

A few punches that land >>>>>> A bunch of punches that miss.

[Slater P Persin]

Excellent, excellent post but, unfortunately - according to this board - 50% of the criteria is "effort."

What else do you expect from Calzaghe fans. Their trained to NOT go by clean effective punching!

[dstew]

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

Yeah...if Hopkins didn't do ****...then what would you say about Taylor's performance?

Oh wait...he threw punches and Jim Lampley slobbered all over them.

A few punches that land >>>>>> A bunch of punches that miss.

So you honestly believe Taylor didn't land anything in the first 7-8 rounds of the fight? ANYTHING?

I mean, I know the HBO crew was going overboard, but seriously, you guys are being more than a bit biased in the other direction.

Not to mention that even if Hopkins did land a few punches in the earlier rounds, he wasn't landing more than Taylor and he definitely wasn't hurting Taylor at that time. Not that Taylor was hurting Hopkins, but still, you're giving Hopkins way too much credit for doing very little, trying to pass it off as "ring generalship".

I said you could score it a draw, but stand by my statement that Hopkins didn't win more than 6 round of the fight, and that's being a little generous.

[IMDAZED]

So you honestly believe Taylor didn't land anything in the first 7-8 rounds of the fight? ANYTHING?

I mean, I know the HBO crew was going overboard, but seriously, you guys are being more than a bit biased in the other direction.

Not to mention that even if Hopkins did land a few punches in the earlier rounds, he wasn't landing more than Taylor and he definitely wasn't hurting Taylor at that time. Not that Taylor was hurting Hopkins, but still, you're giving Hopkins way too much credit for doing very little, trying to pass it off as "ring generalship".

I said you could score it a draw, but stand by my statement that Hopkins didn't win more than 6 round of the fight, and that's being a little generous.

I have no bias for or against either fighter. Maybe if I had one of them in my profile pic or something ....I kid,I kid.

But seriously...I had Hopkins winning 8 to 4 and stand by everything I said...STRONGLY. Someone post the fight...or post all the clean punches Taylor landed.

[dstew]

I have no bias for or against either fighter. Maybe if I had one of them in my profile pic or something ....I kid,I kid.

But seriously...I had Hopkins winning 8 to 4 and stand by everything I said...STRONGLY. Someone post the fight...or post all the clean punches Taylor landed.

Only a nuthugging jackass would put a fighter in his avatar!

Someone linked to the fight earlier in the thread.

I watched it again a month or two ago. I'd be interested in seeing how many people who've voted haven't seen the fight since it aired almost four years ago. I'd bet that would slant the votes in favor of Hopkins, since the first time you watch a fight, especially if you're not really scoring it, you tend to give the guy winning at the end of the fight the edge. I think that's why so many fans were outraged at the time and still contend that Hopkins won, because they are still going off their emtions at the end of the fight and haven't gone back to rewatch it and score it round-by-round.

But regardless, the polling is close, and it's been four years. Fans are never going to reach 100% concensus on this one.

[IMDAZED]

Only a nuthugging jackass would put a fighter in his avatar!

Someone linked to the fight earlier in the thread.

I watched it again a month or two ago. I'd be interested in seeing how many people who've voted haven't seen the fight since it aired almost four years ago. I'd bet that would slant the votes in favor of Hopkins, since the first time you watch a fight, especially if you're not really scoring it, you tend to give the guy winning at the end of the fight the edge. I think that's why so many fans were outraged at the time and still contend that Hopkins won, because they are still going off their emtions at the end of the fight and haven't gone back to rewatch it and score it round-by-round.

But regardless, the polling is close, and it's been four years. Fans are never going to reach 100% concensus on this one.

LOL - love your first line.

I have it at home and watch it quite frequently. Truth be told, I've probably seen it about 20-30 times. I just shake my head every time I hear the scores...ridiculous.

[El Dominicano]

B-Hop won the 1st and 2nd fight against Taylor.

[-Antonio-]

I cant remember which I had, but all I know is I scored one fight a draw and one fight 115-113 for Taylor. I really dont want to watch either fight again. Waste of two hours of my life that would be

[-Antonio-]

In all of Hopkins' close losses he didn't do enough. I felt he fought enough against Wink to win 8 rounds. But against Calz and Taylor I just remember him being too negative.

[dde91]

i watched the second fight again and i scored it a draw which meant that taylor should have kept his belts, the first fight i had it for taylor, he took alot of the first rounds and although hopkins came back late on in the fight it was too little too late.

what i dont understand is when people say hopkins in his rpime would have beat taylor and calzaghe because he threw more punches - imo thats a flawed argument. i think against fighters like calzghe and taylor if hopkins had thrown more punches he would have only succeeded in getting countered more often by the quicker guy.

Hopkins had to study the two fighters and see which punchers he could time well without getting countered. but thats the point he would only throw single shots and occasionally a double shot. ppl say that if he had fought like he did against johnson/pavlik against calzaghe and taylor he would have won, no pavlik/johnsons style allowed hopkins to be the aggressor and allowed him to fight like that if he had adopted the same approach vs calzaghe or taylor he would have played right into their hands.

a 40-43 year old hopkins is slower then himself when he fought Tito, Echols, Holmes, Allen. Have you ever watched him against Tito? Tito has fast hands, and Hopkins outgunned him. Glen Johnson has fast hands, Hopkins outgunned him.

A prime Hopkins would beat Calzaghe and Taylor convincingly. Maybe even KO/TKO. You are underrating his handspeed if you think that Taylor and Calzaghe have faster hands prime for prime.

And a flawed Hopkins threw more JABS that led to his over right, upper cut, and left hook. He lost his jab these last couple years, but it showed up against Pavlik.