Boy was I wrong....

[tracylee]

What's with all the personal attacks on this site?
Doesn't americans have any kind of decency?

lol...sure we do, most of us anyway..some just dont know how to debate with others!

[Atman]

Eastman was aggressive and did fight his "normal" fight. Y'all are showing your reluctance to give Hopkins props by saying "well, if Eastman would've done this, it could've been a draw".. no, it couldn't have, because ultimately Hopkins is the more skilled fighter and would have adapted to whatever Eastman brought to the table.

Eastman gave it his all, but as Roy Jones pointed out, he got entirely too close to Hopkins and smothered his own punches (and smothered Hopkins' counters in the process). He'd miss with a jab, dive in with a right hand and miss, and it would always result in a clinch. That's part of the reason why it wasn't a crowd pleasing fight. But this is exactly the way Eastman generally fights; look at his fights with McCracken and Joppy. He wants to dive in close because half of his offense is predicated around getting in a big uppercut, and as you saw, Hopkins didn't allow him to do that.

Eastman gave just as much of an effort against Hops as Tito and Echols did, but those fights were more exciting because Tito and Echols didn't smother their own punches.. they made damn sure to give themselves the proper spacing to unleash their blows with maximum leverage. In turn, they gave Hopkins enough space to **** them up with counters all night. If Eastman cut off the ring and gave himself space to operate, the fight wouldn't have been any closer, there just would have been more action. Hopkins would've bounced off the ropes and countered the **** out of the slower Eastman for 12 rounds.