Comments Thread For: Kovalev-Caparello Early Fight Results

[the secret]

Not really. He beats Hopkins and he holds 3 titles. Only one he wouldn't hold is the one that the guy who ducked him to a lawsuit holds


Sounds like a win to me.

Look at Kovalev's record: http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...5927&cat=boxer

Now look at his titles, they don't mean anything. The combined records of his first 17 opponents is pathetic.

[Ravens Fan]

Look at Kovalev's record: http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...5927&cat=boxer

Now look at his titles, they don't mean anything. The combined records of his first 17 opponents is pathetic.

I imagine his early record is no different then 95% of all fighters.

[King_]

Look at Kovalev's record: http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...5927&cat=boxer

Now look at his titles, they don't mean anything. The combined records of his first 17 opponents is pathetic.

You're joking, right? By the time of his 19th fight, Kovalev fought a top 5 LHW. Most guys.... Floyd, Canelo, GGG, Etc... Are fighting burger flippers at McDonald's at that point. Please. Stop yourself.


On top of that. The two titles he would win woule be from Hopkins so wtf are you even talking about?




Ahahahahahaah....did you really just say the combined record of his first 17 opponents are pathetic?


LOL @ you

[rzagza]

Hopkins will be a substantial betting underdog in this fight.

[animalfan10]

Hopkins ain't loosing to some Honkey ass motha****er!!!

[Levity]

When Pavlik fought Hopkins, Pavlik had a 34-0 record with 30 knockouts. He had gone the distance a number of times and had faced off against a higher level of opposition.

Most notably, Pavlik had two victories against Jermaine Taylor (one by knockout), the same Jermaine Taylor who won two decisions over Bernard. It's convenient to play the triangulation game, but your Murat-Cleverly-Hopkins triangulation has as much predictive value as Taylor-Pavlik-Hopkins (read: none). Styles make fights.

Kovalev is obviously not Pavlik. But here's what you ignore: Kovalev has never gone more than eighth rounds and has faced fairly limited opposition. I like Kovalev, believe he has a promising future and don't think there's any doubt that he has legitimate power. But going into a fight with a living legend, the Kovalev unknowns still far outnumber the knowns.

For Kovalev to beat Bernard, he's going to have to knock him out. He's not going to be able to figure out how to outbox a master boxer in the first 12 round fight of his entire career. Yet interestingly, when interviewed with The Alien standing right next to him tonight, Kovalev couldn't answer how he planned to beat Hopkins other than to suggest he would box and not focus on the knockout.

Kovalev needs a Plan A, B and C for November. The problem is that nothing in his professional experience has required him to make significant adjustments in the middle of a fight and his quick knockouts have given him few real learning opportunities. You can be sure this isn't lost on Bernard.

Pavlik had faced a higher level of opponent based solely on bouts with one fighter, Jermain Taylor. Going into those bouts he was significantly less proven than Taylor and had never beaten anyone like Hopkins, as Taylor had. This is just one example of a less proven fighter beating a more proven fighter (also see Taylor-Hopkins), so I don't place much value on the isolated claim that someone has beaten better opposition than their opponent has, at least when people conflate that with superior ability. What is more important is accounting for level of opposition within an analysis of other factors, such as the styles, attributes, and recent efforts of each fighter. It is particularly important to consider recent opposition, because the form a fighter shows against them is more relevant to an upcoming bout than the form they showed years ago.

In this case, Hopkins and Kovalev have recently beaten opponents of similar quality. The single best win was Hopkins' decision over Pascal, but I also think that Cleverly and Campillo are superior to Murat and Shumenov, as is evidence by their fights with them. I was not using triangle theories in the Hopkins-Murat-Cleverly comparison, but I was trying to highlight that while Kovalev gets criticized for his opposition (1) Hopkins is facing similar opponents at this point (2) it's nonsensical to criticize Kovalev's recent opposition but not Hopkin's when the latter's wins have come against fighters who were gotten the better of by Kovalev foes, and (3) Hopkins is probably not as good as he was.

There are still questions about Kovalev, such as his chin (unlikely to be tested against someone without a stoppage in a decade) and stamina, but I think he's established a number of things, including his power, offensive diversity, and solid combination punching and timing. These qualities have consistently been evident and I don't think he'd lose them just because he's facing Hopkins rather than someone like Cleverly, Campillo, Agnew, or Sillakh (who is faster than Hopkins perhaps more difficult to time as a result). Kovalev's also beaten his opposition more thoroughly than Hopkins has similar opponents.

I disagree that Kovalev must knockout Hopkins to beat him, and I'm not sure why you'd think this unless you're assuming you know the answers to the questions you suggest that Kovalev still has to answer. Hopkins is a slow-paced, low output fighter and I think there is a realistic chance that Kovalev outworks him over the distance, not landing many great shots but making him weary and putting him into a shell that he rarely comes out of.

Kovalev may not need backup plans to win, but he may have plenty of them. It shouldn't be assumed that he wouldn't simply because his plan A has always worked.

[BoxingFan82]

Hopkins will be a substantial betting underdog in this fight.

Hopkins was a 3-1 underdog against Trinidad. Hopkins took the $100,000 from a sponsorship and bet it on himself for a nice return.

He was a 3-1 underdog again against Tarver. Tarver also bet Hopkins $250,000 (for charity) that he'd knock him out before the 5th round. Hopkins cashed in on that.

Hopkins was a 4-1 underdog against Pavlik, a 3-1 underdog the first time he fought Pascal and was even a slight underdog against Winky Wright.

Hopkins is probably the best investment in the sport as an underdog.

[newcastleking]

Kovalev is 100% wrecking machine but I think the Alien will find a way

[Iceta Lives]

Hopkins beats every come forward fighter he fights, but Kov can punch so we'll see. I can't for the life of me figure out why Hopkins lost to Dawson and Jermaine Taylor up to this day. Lol those guys are B- fighters.

[Comeback]

Hopkins ain't loosing to some Honkey ass motha****er!!!

Just nailed the shit like it is.

Black A leveled boxer even though he's like 50 cannot lose to a non-black lowskilled brawlers especially ***s unless he gets robbed.

Another white-hope fake chumpion is going to get exposed by a real deal legendary black champion.