Jermain Taylors opponents for the last 4 years.

[Dan...]

That's biasism and it should be left out of here.

Its flat out ******ed is what it is.

Seriously, to believe that you would have to be one seriously ****** individual.

[street bully]

Jermaine taylor is a nice guy, I didn't like the special treatment he recieved coming up, kind of like Berto, but he was much better. I also didn't like the Hopkins and Wright decisions I believe were given to him. I actually wanted him to lose yesterday, but to be honest, I am starting to feel for the guy now. No man should have to get KOed like that with his kids and wife probably watching.

[ßringer]

That's because nobody is measuring Jermain Taylor to the all time greatness of Bernard.

When you want to talk about one of the "ATG's" then Bernard is going to be more scutinized, as he should... nobody is talking about Jermain as an ATG. Just someone who didn't duck or dodge anybody, regardless if he had what it took to win.

Bernard is a better fighter, and has a better legacy than Jermain, he has a case to be made for top 50 or under, of all time. His legacy is going to be more closely scrutinized because of the other top 50 ATGs he is often compared too.

I can agree with that. Hopkins is in a hallowed hall and everybody in said hall is heavily scrutinized with the exception of very few.

I was just saying ; if you're going to call out one guy for fighting "smaller men", you need to do that **** accross the board.

And that wasn't directed at you, it's just that I find a lot of cats who play "favorites" around this ***** when it comes to issues of that nature.

and the tasteless hop huggers should get the **** out this thread..........that includes you, michael

hopkins didnt ruin ****.......it was the ****** baseless criticism for "gifts"(that even hopkins hugger warp knows the first fight couldnt be scored better than a draw for clinchman hopkins) on the hopkins fights that started a little bit of a downfall in taylor though...

"Once you fight Bernard Hopkins twice, you're damaged goods."

"I take something from them, that they can't get back. Where's Winky? You seen Winky? I take they souls, man!"

This is all just a ploy to turn this into a debate about Bernard, BTW.......

[Dan...]

You know what, I'm not sure BHop should get much credit for beating Tarver.

Personally I think Roy ruined Tarver.

What's that? Tarver beat Roy twice before he fought Hopkins? No matter, Roy still ruined him. Took his soul he did. Just believe it.

[Iceta]

I want to make this clear. I have nothing but respect for Taylor's courage, but the fashion that he won the title from Hopkins was piss poor. Only hardcore Taylor apologists don't admit it. You have to snatch the title from the champ when he's had that many title defenses. If it was a guy who hasn't been established that holds the title I could see a guy getting decisions like that.

[-Hyperion-]

I have to disagree with that.

Defending your Middleweight crown against the likes of Wright, Ouma, and Spinks is pretty damn ******ed, to me.

I always find it funny that the same people who **** on Bernard for fighting "smaller men", never say anything about Taylor's impressive "reign" at 160.

I mean, yeah, Bernard had Tito and Oscar @ 160. But at least he beat the **** out of every other viable contender in his own division, first.

who was there at middlewight???arthur was busy fighting bums, not to mention he had a paper bet vacated by taylor......wright was p4p#2 and clearly a middleweight when he fought taylor.....how the **** can you say he wasnt a viable top level contender??ouma and spinks were 154lb, but they were good fighters, ouma was on a good run, dominated rubio(a top 10 middleweight not long ago )-powell...jermain pretty much ruined him, kassim has looked like **** ever since....and spinks went on to win a 154lb title from karmazin and was ranked #1 by the ring at 154 by his very next fight.......

[Spray_resistant]

Goes to show, B-Hop ruined him.

All while barely touching him in 24 full rounds.

[-Hyperion-]

I want to make this clear. I have nothing but respect for Taylor's courage, but the fashion that he won the title from Hopkins was piss poor. Only hardcore Taylor apologists don't admit it. You have to snatch the title from the champ when he's had that many title defenses. If it was a guy who hasn't been established that holds the title I could see a guy getting decisions like that.

you need to learn boxing........boxing is scored by rounds, not status......tell me which 7 rounds you gave hopkins in the first fight so i can expose your ignorant ass

[THE REED]

I can agree with that. Hopkins is in a hallowed hall and everybody in said hall is heavily scrutinized with the exception of very few.

I was just saying ; if you're going to call out one guy for fighting "smaller men", you need to do that **** accross the board.

And that wasn't directed at you, it's just that I find a lot of cats who play "favorites" around this ***** when it comes to issues of that nature.



"Once you fight Bernard Hopkins twice, you're damaged goods."

"I take something from them, that they can't get back. Where's Winky? You seen Winky? I take they souls, man!"

This is all just a ploy to turn this into a debate about Bernard, BTW.......

When comparing to Jermain Taylor, you don't NEED to bring up Bernard fighting "smaller opposition" to make a case for Jermain being a "better" fighter than Bernard. It's a given. Bernard is a better fighter, and has a better resume than Jermain. Hell, moving up two divisions and beating Tarver is better than anything Jermain has ever done... there's no need to dig into Jermain fighting smaller fighters as Bernard did.

When comparing Bernard to Roy, as we have... there is reason to dig deeper into their resume`s because they are so closely compared. You have to dig deeper at that point, because it is who you are being compared to, and trying to figure out who ranks higher all time.

When you compare Jermain's resume of the last 4 years, he is often above most active fighters when the last 4 years are compared...

And also, he fought smaller fighters in the sense of Spinks and Ouma, but he also fought bigger or just as big fighter in the sense of Hopkins twice, Pavlik twice, Froch, and Abraham.

And to think he only has 29 fights.

[street bully]

you need to learn boxing........bosing is scored by rounds, not status......tell me which 7 rounds you gave hopkins in the first fight so i can expose your ignorant ass

A great number of people think Hopkins beat Taylor, matter of fact most people may think so. Anyways what is clear is that Todays Taylor is not that Taylor. That Taylor would have kicked Frcohes ass all over the ring.