Is Hopkins a coward?

[Guest]

Remove user from ignore listSlipx
This message is hidden because Slipx is on your ignore list.

Still bliss!

[tyson]

Why not stop being racist? If you stick up for a US fighter do I accuse you of bias? What, because I'm English, I'm not allowed to say anything positive about English fighters otherwise I'm biased?

You can call me biased if you like. I'm from Norway anyway...
You can say as much positive things as you like about the english fighters. I don't mind that. But you shouldn't critise a great champion just because one of yours lost to him. I know Eastman is a great fighter, no doubt in my mind, but Hopkins beat him fair and square. That, in my book at least, would have to make Hopkins the better man, right?

[Guest]

You can call me biased if you like. I'm from Norway anyway...
You can say as much positive things as you like about the english fighters. I don't mind that. But you shouldn't critise a great champion just because one of yours lost to him. I know Eastman is a great fighter, no doubt in my mind, but Hopkins beat him fair and square. That, in my book at least, would have to make Hopkins the better man, right?

I'm not criticising Hopkins because "one of mine" lost to him. Yeah, Hop beat him fair and square, and, boxing-wise, he was the better man.

BUT... I would have preferred him to make the bout at least a little competitive. There's a difference between just trading from a boxing stance and an all-out war. The way Hopkins won that fight was without honour.

[FrankJack]

Wait a sec. "a little competetive"? Bro, don't tell me that your making all of this fuss because it looked like Howard wasn't any competition for Hopkins.

[tyson]

I'm not criticising Hopkins because "one of mine" lost to him. Yeah, Hop beat him fair and square, and, boxing-wise, he was the better man.

BUT... I would have preferred him to make the bout at least a little competitive. There's a difference between just trading from a boxing stance and an all-out war. The way Hopkins won that fight was without honour.

I see what you mean. And I felt he should have tried to close the show, making for some excitement. But I can't blame him for being cautious at the age of 40, and certainly not when it was his 20th defence.
But if he fights like that in every outing, I reckon he will lose most of his fans.
There's not many people out there like me, who enjoy true mastery of the opponent. I like the fact that Hopkins can win easily without having to really dig deep to do it.
It shows class. A class that few fighters in this era have.

[MWCOFSU]

People said the same thing about Leonard when he fought Hagler. They said that he was scared of Hagler and that he did not fight him toe to toe. Of course he did not fight him toe to toe. Leonard would have been knocked out thus loosing the bout. Instaed he foguht cautious and out pointed Hagler to get the win. Both Leonard and Hopkins won their match against their much stronger opponent. they didn't win pretty, but non the less they won their match and in the end that is all that truly matters right?! winning!

Leonard = welterweight - Hagler = THE middleweight champ

Hopkins = THE middleweight champ - Eastman - a "bigger" middleweight

I'm on Hopkins side on this argument. but this is a silly comparison. Hopkins fought a fellow middleight. Yea I guess he was a bigger middleweight, but still! Hopkins fought more cautiously than Leonard did and Sugar Ray was moving up to fight THE middleweight champ after a short retirement.

so i would expect Hopkins to catch more flack for being cautious against Eastman than Leonard did against Hagler.

sorry dont mean to jump on you, palma, but i can't imagine how cautious Hopkins is gonnga fight against another "bigger" middleweight in J.Taylor and Lt Heavies in Johnson/Tarver winner.

HOPKINS ISNT A COWARD. I get what you're saying, anorak, its just a bad word choice.

[marvdave]

Okay, okay, - LAST Hopkins thread from me for now.

But I don't like how the guy gets little weeners from lower classes and beats up on them (Tito, DLH), but when he gets a guy his own size he gets on this:



Is Hopkins a coward?

yes, and so is that ***** Hagler

[Dr.Depravity]

Hey anorak. If you could walk down Hopkins hometown street after dark, without pissing your pants in fear. Ill buy ya a beer. Hopkins is in no way a coward. Sometimes the guy fights a boring fight, I'll give ya that, but a coward??? come on man...

[Kimmy]

Gotta agree with Tyson here. I agree it would have been....more fitting for Hopkins to add glory to his fight plan but allot of fighters do the same. Oscar fought chicken **** against Tito. Now, he still lost the fight ( not in my eyes ) but if he had gone to war with Tito and got Ko`ed he`d have lost with the honnor of giving it a go. Hopkins respected Eastman`s power and knew sods law says he`d lose if he took a risk.

[+= El Jefe=+]

Yes

your a whiny idiot *******, its cld strategy, and no he didnt bullrush delahoya, he fought the same way, ofcourse he was more aggresive against trinidad, you have to be, trinidad is constantly in your face asswipe, you dont know boxing you are finally showing your true colors and you should keep your mouth shut about stuff you dont understand, like BOXING. what you want him to stand there with his chin out so your boy can clock him? no chance moron

agree %100