..ENRIQUE ORNELAS Didn't Do Better Than KELLY PAVLIK...

[THe TRiNiTY]

I just recently watched both fights, and realistically, Ornelas only did better in one aspect. He won about two or three closer rounds.

This isn't much new.

Better fighters often give a few rounds again against lesser opponents for several reasons. One, they get a bit lazy and underrate the fighter mid-fight. And two, they take off rounds in hope of saving up for a later round in hopes of being able to stop the lesser opponent.

Pavlik was whiped out. Ornelas won a few rounds. Other than that, it's not much BETTER. Hopkins hurt Ornelas more times then he hurt Pavlik. He could have stopped him with 30 more seconds and you could tell that the rounds that Hopkins lost, he was practically giving them away. He visibly slowed down, but was able to come right back.

Hopkins looked fresh, ESPECIALLY for a 45 year old. He didn't lose the footwork or the speed and he rarely swung wild. Not to mention, Ornelas isn't the worst fighter you'll ever see on this planet.

Hopkins essentially dominated both.

I think Hopkins is still on par with the version of himself that beat Hopkins. One step behind the version of himself that beat Tarver. He could still make a few moments possible in the twilight of his career.

Your thoughts.

[Spray_resistant]

I just recently watched both fights, and realistically, Ornelas only did better in one aspect. He won about two or three closer rounds.

This isn't much new.

Better fighters often give a few rounds again against lesser opponents for several reasons. One, they get a bit lazy and underrate the fighter mid-fight. And two, they take off rounds in hope of saving up for a later round in hopes of being able to stop the lesser opponent.

Pavlik was whiped out. Ornelas won a few rounds. Other than that, it's not much BETTER. Hopkins hurt Ornelas more times then he hurt Pavlik. He could have stopped him with 30 more seconds and you could tell that the rounds that Hopkins lost, he was practically giving them away. He visibly slowed down, but was able to come right back.

Hopkins looked fresh, ESPECIALLY for a 45 year old. He didn't lose the footwork or the speed and he rarely swung wild. Not to mention, Ornelas isn't the worst fighter you'll ever see on this planet.

Hopkins essentially dominated both.

I think Hopkins is still on par with the version of himself that beat Hopkins. One step behind the version of himself that beat Tarver. He could still make a few moments possible in the twilight of his career.

Your thoughts.

He did do better than Pavlik regardless of why, whether it be Hopkins being older or him not taking it as seriously as the Pavlik fight. winning a few rounds by a slight margin > getting beaten up for a full 12 and barely landing a clean punch.

[jrosales13]

He did do better than Pavlik regardless of why, whether it be Hopkins being older or him not taking it as seriously as the Pavlik fight. winning a few rounds by a slight margin > getting beaten up for a full 12 and barely landing a clean punch.

Co-sign bro...

[THe TRiNiTY]

He did do better than Pavlik regardless of why, whether it be Hopkins being older or him not taking it as seriously as the Pavlik fight. winning a few rounds by a slight margin > getting beaten up for a full 12 and barely landing a clean punch.

To an extent, you make a valid point. However, neither was close to winning the fight. Neither hurt Hopkins. Neither convinced anyone during the fight that it could go either way. Neither challenged the legs of Hopkins.

Other than the round thing, which is more of a moral victory than anything else, they both were beaten. Badly.

[Easy-E]

He did far better than Pavlik, though he lost clearly, he had some competitive rounds and even won one or two. Pav got shut out and embarassed.

[Freddy Krueger]

He did far better than Pavlik, though he lost clearly, he had some competitive rounds and even won one or two. Pav got shut out and embarassed.

Yup, Ornelas did much better then Pavlik who got his ass whooped and stomped on.

[THe TRiNiTY]

A lot of the reason people make the claim is because they expected more than what pavlik offered. If Pavlik put up the fight that Ornelas did, would you guys HONESTLY give him any more credit and would his superstardom be in the same amount of damage control?

Realistically, I think we can all say that he'd have been under the same level of criticism.

[Slotff]

Yup, Ornelas did much better then Pavlik who got his ass whooped and stomped on.

HAHAHA! When he says "He got beat by Jermain Taylor twice... I beat Jermain Taylor- twice!" you can hear someone say "Oh god..." which is exactly my feeling about that sentiment. Styles make fights, Kelly!