Bernard Hopkins is the greatest middleweight in history

[Guest]

I'm Canadian blokes, stop calling me a Yank.

I don't know what to tell you Anorak, but I'm hoping boxing fans in the UK that HAVE seen the majority of Hopkins fights fall more to the side of theironone and not you and Martin, otherwise I'm going to start asking questions about contamination to your water supply.

This guy's been a Cannuck all along? **** me, let's talk about some great Canadian boxers then...




....

















... still thinking...












... give it time, it'll come...

[theironone]

well ive seen about 25 or so of his fights have about 20 on disc so ive seen how hes improved to his prime then as hes got old evovled into a slick, thinking hustling veteran

[Guest]

Nobody dare say Lennox Lewis!

[Guest]

well ive seen about 25 or so of his fights have about 20 on disc so ive seen how hes improved to his prime then as hes got old evovled into a slick, thinking hustling veteran

So he's a hustle, is that what you're saying?

[theironone]

This guy's been a Cannuck all along? **** me, let's talk about some great Canadian boxers then...




....

















... still thinking...












... give it time, it'll come...

Lennox lewis (so ive heard)

[theironone]

So he's a hustle, is that what you're saying?

Lick my balls

[Guest]

Lick my balls

It was there in black and white.

[Mike Tyson Jr.]

gerald mcclellan was.

[vze2hhvj]

Once betting opens all my points wil be placed on Hopkins UD 12

[Bozo_no no]

You see, I'm still not sure I should be playing as you said you had no interest in my opinion.

But as you're keeping on, then I agree - in terms of paper achievements, alphabet soup, the quality of opposition within the time frame, etc. then he has achieved, and can possibly be considered top 10.

But it's the way you want to win, isn't it? His mighty 20th defence (or his 19th, as one was a NC) was against Howard Eastman. A guy he'd put on hold for around two years even though he was in mandatory position (correct me if I'm wrong there, I'm prepared to be wrong on that point) and a guy he spent the entire night running from.

Now I don't give a **** if Eastman is a Brit (though he originally comes from Nuff Tumper country anyway) so let's not go there. All I'm saying is that there's a lot of people on this site who talk about him "schooling" or (horror!) "pwning" Eastman. If your idea of greatness and success and "pwning" is running like a twat and pot-shotting to win rounds then that's fine, but it ain't enough for me. Watch my megamix. That's how I saw the fight.

He clearly beat Eastman, and that's the bottom line. Again, just as you and Martin neglect when you talk about Taylor, HOPKINS IS FORTY. What was wrong with him cautiously outpointing Eastman when breaking the record was on the line?

No, preformance is not even close to the bottom line. It's winning, and winning consistantly.

You seem to have some sour g****s about the Eastman fight. I thought it was boring, but Bernard put on an intelligent and savvy preformance. He did what he needed to do at FORTY and clearly beat Eastman.

I see nothing wrong with that at all.