Can you imagine what Pavlik would do to Canelo?
Collapse
-
Comment
-
Pavlik lacked finesse and caved when faced with it. Old man Hopkins schooled him and ruined his career. There's no way a 43 year old should be able to beat a 26 year old champion. Canelo would have worked Pavlik over.Comment
-
Murder him early? More like have trouble landing any flush punches on him over twelve rounds, I think.Comment
-
I see.
So the oddsmakers were clueless when they made Pavlik a 4-1 favorite, yeah?
Hey jackass, do you know what that fight is famous for?
Bernard Hopkins staring down press row from inside the ring in the immediate aftermath of the fight because almost NOBODY thought he would win.
Here's how one observer put it at the time:
"It was one of the most remarkable sights in Boxing history."
25 of Boxingscene's writers and analysts picked Pavlik - many of them picked Pavlik by KNOCKOUT.
2 Picked Hopkins.
You and the other boxing noobs in this thread making comments like this look like ****ing morons. Just so you know.Comment
-
You don't know how to debate a subject without resorting to childish name calling. Grow up. I said there's no way a 43 year old should beat a 26 year old champion, so obviously I agreed with the odds makers and just about everyone else. Hopkins was good, but Pavlik had weaknesses which he exploited. Canelo would have beaten Pavlik too, which is what this thread asks. What point are you trying to make?I see.
So the oddsmakers were clueless when they made Pavlik a 4-1 favorite, yeah?
Hey jackass, do you know what that fight is famous for?
Bernard Hopkins staring down press row from inside the ring in the immediate aftermath of the fight because almost NOBODY thought he would win.
Here's how one observer put it at the time:
"It was one of the most remarkable sights in Boxing history."
25 of Boxingscene's writers and analysts picked Pavlik - many of them picked Pavlik by KNOCKOUT.
2 Picked Hopkins.
You and the other boxing noobs in this thread making comments like this look like ****ing morons. Just so you know.Comment
-
lol I'm done with this. Whatever you want believe.You don't know how to debate a subject without resorting to childish name calling. Grow up. I said there's no way a 43 year old should beat a 26 year old champion, so obviously I agreed with the odds makers and just about everyone else. Hopkins was good, but Pavlik had weaknesses which he exploited. Canelo would have beaten Pavlik too, which is what this thread asks. What point are you trying to make?Comment
-
Pavlik would force Canelo to engage. He was always active and busy. It would be a good fight.
While I admit Canelo has nice (cute) moves and a level head, I am unimpressed with his victories. Period. His decent opponents (e.g., Lara, Trout), he just managed to edge on the cards -- or in the case of Golovkin, sc**** out a draw against an old man, thanks mostly to having the usual judge on his side. His great opponent (Floyd) completely outclassed him. Canelo has no butt kicking wins against strong opponents in their real weight class, in their prime. Nothing approaching this.
Certainly Canelo never faced anybody remotely like Kelly Pavlik.Comment
Comment