Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bernard Hopkins took calculated risks, he is 1 of the most overrated modern ATG

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by b00g13man View Post
    Calzaghe? Really? What had he done up until then? If you think Hopkins career is overrated, but somehow rated Joe's prior to the Hopkins fight, I don't know what more needs to be said.
    what are you talking about

    All i said was Calzaghe was a bigger risk than Tarver

    Tarver was erratic, had up and down performances. He gave away the first fight with Jones, and often fought to the level of his opposition

    Calzaghe was the ibf/wbo and ring champion in 2006...the man..it was just prior to him beating kessler, but he had wins over champions lacy, sakio bika, byron mitchell, charles brewer, robin reid and chris eubank. He wasnt Joe SCHMO he was the super middleweight champion

    Calzaghe had a style that was unfavorable until he HAD to face him.....a southpaw, with good movement, speed, high punch output and a good chin


    what attributes trouble Hopkins the most? speed, movement and activity forcing the pace


    its not rocket science why he didnt go after Joe....he was a stylistic nightmare

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by djtmal View Post
      Hopkins:

      middleweight run is overrated

      175 run was respectable (best win was tarver)

      loyal following makes tons of excuses for why he was a shrunk down lightheavy to begin with, and all his losses


      couldn't resist.....


      well, lets be real...does anyone see shawn Porter (who worked his way down as well) being a successful middleweight? i think not

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by ИATAS View Post
        What dirty tricks did he use against Pavlik? Pavlik had a fight at 165 pounds against Taylor II before. Hopkins was 43 years old there wasn't a size advantage since he doesn't use his size, he boxed pavlik.

        Regardless at the end of the day, you're trying to downplay a great win for Hopkins, at age 43 coming off a loss, against an undefeated in his prime champion. No need for that.

        And I don't know what you're talking about that he doesn't adapt like "other ATGs". Hopkins was a notorious slow starter. Why is that? Because he's adapting as the fight goes on. He usually takes 4-5 rounds to figure out his opponent (see Jean Pascal 1 as an example of adapting, and that was at age 45!).
        basic straight up and down guys are tailor made for hopkins, guysa like tito, pavlik, echols,etc....rhythm fighters with speed, not so much, or high output

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by therealpugilist View Post
          who was more dangerous...calzaghe or tarver
          I'd say Tarver at 175 was more dangerous than Zags at 68.

          But he fought Calzaghe too so it's a moot point.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by IMDAZED View Post
            Tarver was a top three p4per at that time. Knocked the great Roy Jones off his pedestal. And Hopkins leaped two divisions for that fight. Really that's all that needs to be said.
            pound for pound to who? ring magazine


            boxing was totally stacked back then and Tarver definitely wasnt top 3 p4p with anyone who had sense, if he was he wasnt their long

            his performances were inconsistent

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by therealpugilist View Post


              well, lets be real...does anyone see shawn Porter (who worked his way down as well) being a successful middleweight? i think not
              you bring up some legit points that Hopkins boys would never acknowledge in a million years...

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by IMDAZED View Post
                Tarver was a top three p4per at that time. Knocked the great Roy Jones off his pedestal. And Hopkins leaped two divisions for that fight. Really that's all that needs to be said.
                I personally think Hopkins didnt want to deal with certain styles until he had to.....i.e. the Jones rematch took almost 20 years to make...why? Jones was older, slower, got ktfo, and didnt have the reflexes, speed, movement, counters, or combos that saw Hopkins lose clearly

                Calzaghe was a stylistic nightmare for a fighter like Hopkins who fights at 2 gears....he warms up and fights a steady pace.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by therealpugilist View Post
                  what are you talking about

                  All i said was Calzaghe was a bigger risk than Tarver

                  Tarver was erratic, had up and down performances. He gave away the first fight with Jones, and often fought to the level of his opposition

                  Calzaghe was the ibf/wbo and ring champion in 2006...the man..it was just prior to him beating kessler, but he had wins over champions lacy, sakio bika, byron mitchell, charles brewer, robin reid and chris eubank. He wasnt Joe SCHMO he was the super middleweight champion

                  Calzaghe had a style that was unfavorable until he HAD to face him.....a southpaw, with good movement, speed, high punch output and a good chin


                  what attributes trouble Hopkins the most? speed, movement and activity forcing the pace


                  its not rocket science why he didnt go after Joe....he was a stylistic nightmare
                  You said "Cazaghe the ATG" or Tarver....

                  Calzaghe sure as hell wasn't deserving of the ATG moniker then, and he probably doesn't deserve it now. Especially since by far his best win is an "overrated" ATG who also happened to be past his prime.

                  Oh, Tarver was the much bigger threat at that point. By the time he fought Tarver, Calzaghe only had the Lacy win to his name. I'll take the much bigger guy who KO'd superman over that.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    everyones overrated, just a bunch of bums with gloves on.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by therealpugilist View Post
                      Roy was the only elite talent middleweight he faced for years until he fought Holmes, Trinidad and taylor

                      I know losses happen, but the thing is certain fighters have your number or were just the better man that day....everytime Hopkins lost sense taylor its...he old doe....then he wins, OH HE is the greatest......thats weird

                      I agree losses dont undo the past, but loses also indicate a fighters limitations and what troubles them.....Hopkins had trouble when he didnt dwarf guys and didnt have the edge in speed and movement

                      common sense, you're gonna look unbeatable vs guys like Joe Lipsey and washed up simon brown

                      bro Hopkins won no more than 3-4 rounds...their are no moral victories in boxing

                      I remember when idiots said he was green.....what 28 year old you know with over 90 amatuer fights and 20 pro fights is green?
                      Was'nt saying it was a moral victory, just saying the fact he did as well as he did speaks to his skill level. By Roy standards it was a competitive fight. Roy destroyed pretty much everyone outside of him and Griffin, in the first fight, up until Tarvar.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP