Hopkins says you dont become great off of sympathy, is GGG great middleweight?

[robertzimmerman]

Easter was considered the most dangerous challenger at the time.

Taylor was considered his heir.

He moved up two divisions after and you have no proof or right to discredit it. It was a risk, a huge one, like it or not.

I was a fan of Howard Eastman. But that wasn't taking a big risk. To me, that was a lack of ambition. He'd already become the undisputed champ, he'd already had his big pay day against Oscar, and he'd already broken Monzon's record. What was there left to achieve? Yet there's people who's criticising GG for not having moved up, whilst at the same time supporting Bernard's comments.

Taylor was a very good fighter and he had a lot of hype surrounding him. But going into the fight with Bernard, he'd only really beaten William Joppy. It's not as though he was a proven fighter at elite level.

No, I obviously haven't got any proof as to what he'd have done had he not have
lost to Taylor twice. But looking at how he handled his career, I'm confident he'd have remained at MW. People give him huge credit for fighting Kovalev etc, and rightly so. But again, he didn't take those kinds of challenges when he was younger. How can you give him credit for fighting guys like Eastman and Joppy, after he'd priced himself out of a rematch with Roy?

In 2008, he admitted that he could have moved to LHW years earlier, but he didn't want to give up his advantages. Yet he's implied that GG's a fraud for not having moved up as yet. The guy's a hypocrite. I respect what he did in his career, but I can't respect his recent comments. I think they're a joke.

[IMDAZED]

I was a fan of Howard Eastman. But that wasn't taking a big risk. To me, that was a lack of ambition. He'd already become the undisputed champ, he'd already got his big pay day against Oscar, and he'd already broken Monzon's record. Yet there's people who's criticising GG for not having moved up, whilst at the same time supporting Bernard's comments.

Taylor was a very good fighter and he had a lot of hype surrounding him. But going into the fight with Bernard, he'd only really beaten William Joppy. It's not as though he was a proven fighter at elite level.

No, I obviously haven't got any proof as to what he'd have done had he not have
lost to Taylor twice. But looking at how he handled his career, I'm confident he'd have remained at MW. People give him huge credit for fighting Kovalev etc, and rightly so. But again, he didn't take those kinds of challenges when he was younger. How can you give him credit for fighting guys like Eastman and Joppy, after he'd priced himself out of a rematch with Roy?

In 2008, he admitted that he could have moved to LHW years earlier, but he didn't want to give up his advantages. Yet he's implied that GG's a fraud for not having moved up as yet. The guy's a hypocrite. I respect what he did in his career, but I can't respect his recent comments. I think they're a joke.

A hypocrite who didn't take any risks. And here I thought you were being objective.

[robertzimmerman]

A hypocrite who didn't take any risks. And here I thought you were being objective.

Look, it's hypocritical for him to imply that GG's a fraud for not having moved up yet, when he spent 14 years in the division.

It's hypocritical for him to say that GG should challenge the winner of Andre-Kovalev, when he would never have done that in GG's current position.

I'm being objective.

I appreciate Bernard's circumstances, and I do respect what he achieved. And his longevity and discipline were extraordinary. But he's no right to criticise GG, when he swerved Roy and fought Robert Allen 3 times.

If you can't see how he's been hypocritical and how he didn't take the risk that he's asking GG to take, then it's you who's not being objective.

[IMDAZED]

Look, it's hypocritical for him to imply that GG's a fraud for not having moved up yet, when he spent 14 years in the division.

It's hypocritical for him to say that GG should challenge the winner of Andre-Kovalev, when he would never have done that in GG's current position.

I'm being objective.

I appreciate Bernard's circumstances, and I do respect what he achieved. And his longevity and discipline were extraordinary. But he's no right to criticise GG, when he swerved Roy and fought Robert Allen 3 times.

If you can't see how he's been hypocritical and how he didn't take the risk that he's asking GG to take, then it's you who's not being objective.

Nah, it's you.

First you said he took no risks. When I pointed out the kind of risk he took, you amended it to he took no risks within a certain period. You'll just keep moving the goalpost.

Like it or not, Hopkins is an all-time great who will one day walk into the HOF. He holds the middleweight record for title defenses, unified the division with four belts, destroyed the consensus top pound for pounder in a huge upset, moved up two divisions and destroyed the lineal LHW champ in a huge upset and also became the sport's oldest world champion. He's earned the right to say what he wants.

[robertzimmerman]

Nah, it's you.

First you said he took no risks. When I pointed out the kind of risk he took, you amended it to he took no risks within a certain period. You'll just keep moving the goalpost.

Like it or not, Hopkins is an all-time great who will one day walk into the HOF. He holds the middleweight record for title defenses, unified the division with four belts, destroyed the consensus top pound for pounder in a huge upset, moved up two divisions and destroyed the lineal LHW champ in a huge upset and also became the sport's oldest world champion. He's earned the right to say what he wants.

I'm happy to acknowledge that he took a risk signing with King. When I initially said he didn't take risks, I didn't mean it literally. Every fighter takes a risk whenever they fight. I respect every fighter in the game, amateur or pro. What I meant was, that he didn't take the risk that he's currently asking GG to take, and he didn't take the risks/challenges that he took later in his career, when he was in his prime. And I stand by that.

Yes, he's earnt the right to say what he wants. It's still hypocritical. And me and a lot of other people are going to call him out on it.

[IMDAZED]

I'm happy to acknowledge that he took a risk signing with King. When I initially said he didn't take risks, I didn't mean it literally. Every fighter takes a risk whenever they fight. I respect every fighter in the game, amateur or pro. What I meant was, that he didn't take the risk that he's currently asking GG to take, and he didn't take the risks/challenges that he took later in his career, when he was in his prime. And I stand by that.

Yes, he's earnt the right to say what he wants. It's still hypocritical. And me and a lot of other people are going to call him out on it.

Not hypocritical at all for him to suggest that Golovkin should take a risk in order to secure a big fight. There's more than one way to skin a cat. If Canelo is slow in making a fight then you do something else. No need to get all whiny because he suggested moving up. He, like many others, wants to see Golovkin in a big fight. Or GGG can just sign with Golden Boy.

[robertzimmerman]

Not hypocritical at all for him to suggest that Golovkin should take a risk in order to secure a big fight. There's more than one way to skin a cat. If Canelo is slow in making a fight then you do something else. No need to get all whiny because he suggested moving up. He, like many others, wants to see Golovkin in a big fight. Or GGG can just sign with Golden Boy.

It's not just a suggestion though.

It's: "Why won't he do what I did?" said in a certain tone.

And that was after he'd said:

"Time will reveal all of the frauds in boxing"


Anyway, it's been fun, but we've come to the end of the line here.

There's nothing else to say.

I'll catch you later.

Nice debating/arguing with you.

[IMDAZED]

It's not just a suggestion though.

It's: "Why won't he do what I did?" said in a certain tone.

And that was after he'd said:

"Time will reveal all of the frauds in boxing"


Anyway, it's been fun, but we've come to the end of the line here.

There's nothing else to say.

I'll catch you later.

Nice debating/arguing with you.

Was hoping you'd close with a point. Too much to ask for, I guess. You're entitled to your opinion.

[robertzimmerman]

Was hoping you'd close with a point. Too much to ask for, I guess. You're entitled to your opinion.

I made a point.

Go and reread the post.

I've made many points all throughout this debate.


Too much to ask for?

Ha!

Go and look at post number 162.

Go and look at what you responded with.

NOTHING!


Whatever man.

It's 3am in the U.K.

I'm done.

It's pointless to take this any further.

[IMDAZED]

I made a point.

Go and reread the post.

I've made many points all throughout this debate.


Too much to ask for?

Ha!

Go and look at post number 162.

Go and look at what you responded with.

NOTHING!


Whatever man.

It's 3am in the U.K.

I'm done.

It's pointless to take this any further.

You're entitled to your opinion. And Bernard Hopkins is entitled to his.