| |
|
Fan Fight
(April 24-30):
I.F.F.B.C.
Championship Fan Fight
"Which Great White Hope Was Better: Tommy Morrison or Gerry
Cooney?" |
|
Result at Time Of Stoppage: Blue:
20,
Red: 19
Prisoner Ksc2 303
TKO 3 Kobra-Kai |
|
Blue Corner:
Prisoner Ksc2 303 (4-0, 4 KO's)
I.F.F.B.C. Champ- Tommy
Morrison -
Red Corner:
Kobra-Kai (4-4, 3 KO's) - Gerry Cooney -
Judges: "Threat"(Ref),
"The Real Meal", "Jr. Middle" |
|
-Round 1 - |
|
Blue:
"Okay, good luck to Kobra Kai, and
hopefully this fight will be a good one for both of us.
Now, before I get going, let me state
for the record, that the "Great White Hope" Moniker was bestowed
upon Gerry Cooney as a way of hyping Cooney's fight with Larry
Holmes. In all reality this phrase smacks of racism and yet people
have no problem throwing that around to any white guy with a
smattering of talent. This wasn't Cooney's fault however, it was
King's. And it was the media who fed into the "Great White Hype"
and it's also the fan's fault who bought into it and fed the money
to the Holmes/Cooney fight in the first place based on the
manufactured racial aspect.
Throwing race into a fight like that
was a disservice to fights like Max Schmelling and Joe Louis, a
fight that was TRULY about race, that which no one can really
dispute.
Now, that we've recognized that the
actual idea of a great white hope is not exactly a warm fuzzy term
to use, let's look at two fighters that had that title bestowed upon
them by the media. Tommy "The Duke" Morrison and Gerry Cooney. I'm
going to address two aspects of the fighters in this round, and then
continue in the next. In this round I shall address the level of
competition and "Heart" of the fighters in question.
Both of these fighters were good, but
not great. Both of them faced not overwhelming hurdles as far as
competition. Cooney had a record of 28-3, but he only fought four
fighters of note, losing to three of them. Those were George
Foreman, Larry Holmes, Ken Norton and Michael Spinks. He fought Ron
Lyle too, but he's not quite in the league of the other four.
During the first half of his career
spanning 13 fights, there were only 2 that had a winning record. and
three of those fights came against people who had lost their last
six fights in a row (Gary Bates, Joe Maye & Bill Jackson). And four
of the others (Terry Lee Kidd, Quinnie Locklear, Jose Rosario &
Jimmy Robertson) had lost every fight they'd had, Kidd being the
'veteran' of the group at a whopping three fights, loser in all
three.
Tommy Morrison on the other hand
finished with a record of 46-3 and faced four fighters that were top
guys (five if you count James Tillis who Morrison KO'd in the first
round). They were Lennox Lewis (who he lost to), Ray Mercer (who he
lost to), Razor Ruddock (who Morrison KO'd in the sixth round), and
George Foreman (who he won a 12 round decision against).
So to sum up the top competition they
faced, Morrison was 3-2 and Cooney was 1-3.
Now let's go to the Heart category.
Here is where Morrison leaves Cooney in the dirt. Gerry Cooney had
NO heart. Don't get me wrong, he might have perservered through
some tough fights, but all three top fighters he faced, he lost to.
And what happened when he lost those? He either retired or took a
sabbatical for a year or more.
After he lost his first fight to
Holmes, did he dust himself off, get back to training and come back
stronger? No. He went over two years before getting back into the
ring against Philipp Brown. He fought again three months later
against George Chaplin, knocking him out in two. Then he goes over
a year before fighting again. Then he went ANOTHER year before
fighting Spinks and getting his ass handed to him. So after another
loss, he packs it in and climbs back in the ring a whole (almost)
three years later to get knocked out in two by George Foreman, who
no doubt made a stop off on his Foreman Grill & Casual Male Big &
Tall tour to spend a couple minutes to send Cooney back into
retirement. A fighter with heart does not drop out of sight after
his first loss. But then Cooney had never exactly faced tough
competition up to that point.
Morrison on the other hand, his heart
can be summed up in two words. JOE. HIPP. Now you may not think
Joe Hipp is much to brag about, but you know what? The man wasn't
anything to sneeze at. He wasn't a top guy, but he was a guy who
would test your heart in a second, and not everyone passed muster.
Tommy Morrison overcame a broken jaw, a broken hand and Hipp
suffered a fractured cheekbone as Morrison put him down in the 5th
and 9th rounds on the way to a knockout victory.
Now, say what you will about Morrison's
out of the ring lifestyle, and his acting ability in Rocky 5 (which
to this day I will never disown, no matter how embarrassing), but
what you cannot say about Morrison, which you CAN say about Cooney,
is that he doesn't have heart. Tommy Morrison defined Heart during
his career."
|
Red: "Thanks Prisoner.
I guess I'll start off by mentioning the era's both fighters were in.
You got Cooney in one hell of an elite era, and you got Morrison in a
whole different era, with some decent fighters, some not so decent.
Basically a devision that has net been the same since Ali left, not even
since Tyson was sent to prison. Lennox Lewis and Riddck Bowe and Evander
Holyfield were the 3 men who were left in control. 3 great fighters, but
none with the likes of Ali. Back in his era, you had to fight. Nowadays,
you can box, you can run, you can get paid 10 times as much for doing
very little which is why the heavyweight division is lacking big time
right now. Money played a big part in the fighters lives back then where
a win meant food, and more food, and takign care of family. Now it's
more like a win could mean a championship in your very next fight. Hack,
a loss could even mean that, so it doesnt mean the same to be a
heavyweight champion now than it did back then. Granted, Gerry didnt
fight Ali, but his era was 10 years prior, right around when another
white heavyweights career was nearing and end, Jerry Quarry. So it was
fairly close. Lennox Lewis wasnt even a professional until about 2 years
before Cooney retired. So that should give some sight on how different
the times were.
Gerry had an amazing record and the 3 losses were to some of the
greatest fights who will ever live in Foreman, Spinks and Holmes.
Morrison has lost to lesser greats in my opinion. I dont think Mercer,
although a tough and top name back then, really accomplished anything
near those 3 men. Cooney taking 1 round to dispatch Ron Lyle as well as
Ken Norton is no easy feat. Those are also two great names that get
mentioned when the Foremans and Ali's of boxing are mentioned. When
Morrison is mentioned I think of an older Foreman and of Lennox Lewis.
You got a guy who retires with 11 wins, losing his very 1st match,
ending up TKOing Morriosn in a single round, that can't be good going
into the hall of fame when matched up against Cooney's record. You have
to put Morrison in against the fighters of Cooneys era and imagine how
he would do, and see if he would do better or worse. I just dont see him
last 13 rounds with Holmes, and Im pretty sure Lyle and Norton would
give Morrison all he could handle, even at the age they fought Cooney.
Now don't get me wrong, Morrison was a fine fighter, one I enjoyed
watching and still do his 1 punch knockouts, but he was never a fighter
who had a plan B when he was in trouble and when it came down to the bog
boys of that era (remembering he only faced one of the 3 top guys) he
lost and was stopped in 6. You mentioned Cooney lost to 3 of the 4 top
guys, yet Tommy only fought 1 of the 3 top guys an lost to lesser than
"top" opposition. Imagine had he faced Holyfield who would have been in
his face like Mercer was, that's no way a win for Tommy. And Tommy
fought like Tyson and we all know Evander has his number. Then you got
Bowe. Bowe and Lewis are almost hand in hand as far as boxing skill and
jabs go. Those two are the closest comparison in Holmes I can think of
and that stylistically doesnt match up for a Morrison win. So already,
Cooney has surpassed Morrison's skill, experience and know how."
|
Wow! Absolutely tremendous start here by both men. Prisoner giving some
detailed facts, setting up his jab, landing at a higher percentage, but
Kobra not backing down, mentioning some detailed facts of his own. Some
small opinions of Kobra ring true. Big round by both.
"Threat": * 10-10 Round *
"The Real Meal": * 10-9 Round To Blue *
"Jr. Middle": * 10-9 Round To Red *
|
|
- Round 2 - |
Red: "Who has Morrison fought?
Lewis? Foreman? Mercer? Tommy got jacked up in that fight with Hipp. He
showed heart and come out with the win, but a heavyweight by the name of
Bruce Seldon managed to pitch a shut out win over Hipp in one of
heavyweights easiest fights. Wasnt that on a Tyson undercard? So we all
know who Seldon is, no one special, yet Hipp did some damage on The
Duke. Now move ahead to Ross Puritty. 19 Losses. Was 8-8 when he faced
Morrison at the time he was 41-2. How in the hell is an 8 win and 8 loss
fighter going to drop Duke twice in what turned out to be a 10 round
draw? Puritty couldnt even put down Michael Grant. Then came Razor
Ruddock who also knocked down the Duke, and before getting into the
Lewis and Mercer fights, are these really names of opponents a great
wants to be known by losing to or going down by? Of Foreman was able to
knock out Tommy then that's not a name anyone would question. It does
his career going the distance and even winning a close one with a great
like him. But had that been the Holem Cooney fought, Tommy would have
been in a big mess.
Ok, so Mercer. 18 less fights at the time they fought. Mercer just has a
stretch of quick knockouts, but no one really worth a mention except for
Bert Cooper, who he went the distance with. Man, this had to be one of
the most devastating knockouts and finishes to a fight Ive ever seen in
my life. This was worse than Tua vs Ruiz and Tyson vs Frazier. Tommy
took a beating while he was unconscious on the ropes. What did Mercer do
next? Lost a decision to none other than LARRY HOLMES. I like the irony
in that. Mercer pretty much went down hill after that Win over Tommy.
With the exception of his fight with Lewis 5 years later where I felt
Mercer got robbed. Other than that, he was merely a journeyman. A tough
opponent to see if you could beat, or help get yor fighter some
recognition, or a name on his record. So when you think about it, he
wasnt anything special, and Tommy has a few of those on his record and
honestly, I dont think anyone would know who Michael Bentt is."
|
|
Blue:
"It's true that Cooney fought in a better era than Morrison. That's
not saying anything. That's like saying, "people have it a little
better off now than during the Great Depression". It's not
debatable really. But even though Cooney WAS in a greater era of
Heavyweight Boxing, he didn't do anything really. It's not like he
went up against the greats of the history of Boxing during his years
in that era. You know? Some of the greatest fighters in history
fought during his time. Frazier, Ali, Shavers they all fought
during the late 70's when Cooney was fighting, but he never fought
them. In fact, he didn't fight ANYBODY of note until 1980 when he
fought Lyle and Norton.
You bring up that Morrison lost to Bennt,
and Mercer...yeah, that's true, but Boxing is a strange thing.
Lennox Lewis got beat by Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman. Now, true
he avenged those losses by winning the rematches, but does him
losing to those fighters make him not a good fighter? Tyson lost
to Buster Douglas. I mean, just about every fighter out there has
lost a fight. If Boxing has taught us anything it's that anything
can happen. Are boxers only supposed to lose to GOOD fighters?
Hell, the point in Boxing is to NOT LOSE AT ALL!
And Gerry Cooney sure took a run at
that by not fighting anybody. I mean, come on. Before fighting his
first real competition, he ran a protected streak of won fights to
23-0 against a bunch of stiffs. In fact he went 10 straight fights
to start off his career before he fought someone with a winning
record where he fought ST Gordon. After the fight following that
one, he once again went to the tomato can card and fought Charley
Polite who was 16-35-3. Now, this is what I don't get, and is what
partially drives my argument here that he wasn't as good as
Morrison. He had a total of 55 wins and 3 losses. 58 fights, and
yet when he steps up to the pro level and more skilled, in theory,
competition, he can't get a fighter with a winning record until his
11th fight? I mean, come on...I realize just about every boxer will
start his career with a bunch of puffs to get the fighter experience
and confidence, but come on. And then when you take into
consideration that both Lyle and Norton were both on the DOWNSIDE to
their careers, it adds even MORE suspicion on Cooney's record.
Yeah, it was a great record, but against WHO? Anyone he fought that
was even remotely still in possession of their skills beat him.
Let's look at Morrison's start to his
career. In his fourth fight, he fought Elvin Evans who was 2-1.
Now, after that he went on to fight some more guys who had not
fought a lot, or had losing records, but once he got to his 10th
fight, he fought only those with winning records (with the exception
of Mike Robinson who had a record of 3-4-1. Now you're probably
looking at this and thinking, "Prisoner, you're not making sense.
Their instances of fights against no account fighters are basically
the same." Well, you'd be right, except for one thing. TOMMY
MORRISON DID NOT HAVE AN AMATEUR CAREER!!!! He didn't have the
luxury of fighing 58 times to get his experience up as an amateur.
To end this round, let me say this. If
you're trying to argue that Tommy Morrison wasn't a top notch grade
A fighter who should be mentioned among the best ever...you're not
getting an argument from me about that. I have never said that
Morrison was a best ever type of fighter. Neither him nor Cooney
were really that good. Both had knockout power, but Morrison showed
better when he was put on the big stage, and that's what I'll
address next round."
|
"Threat": * 10-9 Round To Blue *
"The Real Meal": * 10-9 Round To Blue *
"Jr. Middle": * 10-9 Round To Blue *
|
|
- Round 3 - |
|
Blue:
"Now, let's look at their fights against winning record having
fighters. Tommy Morrison fought 36 fights against people with
winning records (a combined 767-224-14 win/loss/draw record) while
Gerry Cooney fought 20 (453-69-5). On the other hand Morrison fought
15 fights against those with a losing/even record (69-104-7).
Cooney? 11 fights where his opponents came into the fight at a
combined record of 41-97. What does this tell us? Well...not a lot
really. Morrison fought a lot more than Cooney did (as he didn't
keep retiring everytime he lost). Their fights against losing record
fighters are pretty close together. Close enough that they basically
negate each other.
However, when you compare two fighters
of two different eras who didn't face each other, usually what you
do is look for common oppoents. Who did they both fight, and how did
they fare against them? Well...the only fighter the two both fought
was George Foreman. Now, Foreman knocked out Cooney in two rounds.
Morrison defeated Foreman in a 12 round decision, winning the WBO
belt. Now you can say Foreman was over the hill when he fought
Morrison, but he wasn't exactly a spring chicken when he fought
Cooney.
Cooney's last two fights were both
losses. Morrison's final fight WOULD have been a loss but after
being diagnosed with HIV following his knockout loss at the hands of
Lennox Lewis, he went on to fight Marcus Rhodes in Japan, winning
that fight.
Now, here's another point to make.
Potential. Cooney pretty much ran his course. He didn't leave with
any questions to be answered. I think anyone that ever saw anything
he did, or read anything about the man wasn't left with, "what if he
had just ONE more fight...what could have happened? What if...".
That's not happening.
Morrison however, had his career cut
short because of HIV. He was set to fight Tyson before the loss to
Lewis. You can argue that a couple more quality wins and he woulda
probably fought Tyson. You mentioned their styles were similar, and
you're right. Tyson had that killer right, and Morrison had a
devastating left hook.
So to sum up all that, Morrison fought
in a weaker era, but you know something that needs to be said
though. You talk about how Cooney fought in that better era...He
fought primarily in the 80's. The BIG TIME era in boxing was 60's
and 70's. He fought three years in the 70's. It's not like he was
going up against Ali and Frazier and all that in their prime. While
he was fighting in the 70's did he face Ali? No. Ali wasn't even in
his prime then, he was on the downward spiral and would end up
losing to Trevor BLEEPING Berbick. You telling me that Cooney can't
take a break in between fighting the Powder Puff Girls to take on a
fading legend like Ali?
Morrison did more in his career with
less (no amateur career).
Now, Championship Fights.
Did Gerry Cooney ever win a belt? Did
he ever FIGHT for a belt? In fact he fought one time for a belt,
and that was a fight against Larry Holmes. True, he lasted 13
rounds with an all time great like Holmes, but when he was put on
the big stage for the first time, really, he shrunk. He got
penalized THREE TIMES for low blows. Does this mean, that Andrew
Golota owes him a check everytime his punches wander south? Then
Cooney got knocked out in the 13th round.
Gerry Cooney was on the big stage,
pressure mounting, all the world watching and he faded. He punked
out. He choked. There's no shame in losing to a great like Holmes,
even if it was near the end of Holmes career, but he lost. And the
fact that he lost control and nailed Holmes three times below the
belt, well...fighters train. They know where the belt line is. You
telling me that "Gentleman" Gerry Cooney just accidentally hit him
enough to be deducted three points? You don't get a point taken
away the first time, so that means he hit him AT LEAST four times
below the belt.
Morrison, however, knocked out Razor
Ruddock to get the IBC belt, and he won a 12 round decision in a
career defining fight against George Foreman to get the WBO Belt.
Make no mistake, that fight showed that Morrison could hang in there
with some big time punchers. Foreman wasn't exactly mobile or
anything, but he wasn't that far removed from the non-mobile guy
that knocked Cooney the BLEEP out in two rounds.
So in Morrison's career, while he
didn't always get to fight the big guys, he fought journeymen
fighters who while not top level guys, were definitely tough
fighters. And with the exception of Mercer, Bennt and Lewis (who is
considered the best of recent years) he beat everyone. Cooney
fought a buncha bums and good fighters that were past their prime.
He didn't fight ANYBODY in their prime except for Spinks who knocked
him out. Look back over his record. He fought so many tomato cans,
you'd think he was saving UPC symbols for a mail-in prize or
something."
|
|
* Ladies And Gentlemen, This Fight Has Come To And End In Round 3 After
An Early Assault From Prisoner Was Just Too Much For Kobra-Kai
Who Had No Answer. The Referee Has Called A Hault To This Bout
At 1:13 Of The 3rd Round, Your
Winner By TKO, AAAAANNNNNNNND SSSSTTIIIIIILLLLLLLLLL
CHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMPPPPPIIIIIOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN...
PPPPRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNEEEEEEERRRRR!!
Prisoner, you're now 5 and 0 with 5 KO's, very impressive. Rob Quijano,
who has gone idle since December of last year is the only other
undefeated Fan Fighter, and Jas as well as Enzo have shown an eager
interest in taking on the champ. What are your thoughts on that?
Prisoner Ksc2 303:
First off, once again thanks go out to everyone at
Boxing2006.com not to mention Hurley.com and Boxingvideos.net for
providing the prizes. Big shout out to Sweetchuck once again for
introducing me to the site.
This was a good fight. I had to work
for this one, as it wasn't a clearcut answer. Both fighters were
decent, but not overwhelmingly so. There was no absolute answer
either way as far as one being better than the other. I think as it
went on, Kobra knew that I had him on the facts, and the numbers
don't lie.
I give him credit for hanging in there
with me as long as he could, but hey...you all gotta go down
sometime. It's not a matter of IF, but WHEN.
I'm gonna take a small break,
recuperate, yada yada yada, and think of a topic. Then I shall take
on Rob Quijano. So, as soon as I know what I'm gonna do, and when I
am gonna jump back into the ring, Rob shall be my first opponent.
Once again, thanks to everyone
involved.
Kobra, you had a tremendous start to
your Fan Fight career, now you have lost 5 in a row, notably against
the current top 4 fan Fighters, and now to the champion. Where do
you go from here??
Kobra-Kai:
Another fellow Fan Fighter was to
be in attendance last week and had a few things to say:
Jas "The Executioner:
Prisoner, I notice that you have
called out Rob, who hasn't been in the ring since December
and is most likely rusty. For the record, I won't be taking part
in a Fan Fight for a good few weeks and you also said that
you're having a break. "Threat" mentioned my name and Enzo's but
you declined to call us out, and me and Enzo both agree that
we're the best two fan fighters. After a couple of months, why
don't you go up against a formidable opponent like myself if you
beat Rob? "Threat" did say that Rob is an undefeated opponent
but, as you may know, if things had gone different in my first
fight with Enzo, I would have been 6-0.
Just look at my record and look at
yours. Beside Neil, you've fought lesser opponents, which in
boxing are referred to as 'bums'. And you were level with Neil
after two rounds on Threat's scorecard and you only won because
he didn't respond - a scenario which has occured two times more.
Look at my record, I've had two fights that were candidates for
2006 'Fan Fight of the Year' and one that, if finished,
definetly would also have been. I anticipate that you're going
to say that you forced some of your opponents to quit but so
have I with Goadenteef and Kobra-Kai. That's why you got five
knockouts.
You can face Rob first and after
that, I'll be waiting in a few weeks at least, to take your belt
which you have defended by fighting bums. It's good to see that
you say that you'll be fighting a good opponent in Rob but you
know that I am more formidable. I've called out Enzo and I am
calling out Neckodeemus if he wants to come out of retirement.
Neckodeemus has actually hinted that me and him may fight and
while that is happening, it will be business as usual for you
beacuse you will probably will be going against another bum.
You say that Kobra-Kai going down
was not a matter of if, but when - I would like to see you drop
me - I'm sorry but it won't happen. Fight someone like Warrior
who is hungry and up-and-coming. I noticed that after your close
Fan Fight with Neil that you weren't too keen on a rematch,
citing the fact that he didn't respond as a reason!!!!!!!
Just ask the fans of boxing2006 and
Fan Fight and anybody who has seen some Fan Fights - the
majority of them will say that the fights that I am involved in
are more exciting.
Prisoner Replies To Jas
Prisoner Ksc2 303:
Jas, a lot of what you say is
correct. However I have not chosen my opponents. My
opponents have been chosen FOR me.
I selected Rob first because he
is undefeated. That's it. If you had a perfect record,
than you would have been the first I had chosen. My plans
are to fight Rob, then you, then Enzo (since you have
actively called me out here).
I agree my competition hasn't
been all that, but as I said...I supplied the topics and
then my opponent stepped up.
You will get your shot at me,
even if you are going all Clubber Lang on me and trying to
embarrass me into a fight. lol...
|
|
* |
|
- Round 4 - FINAL ROUND! |
|
Red: |
|
Blue: |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan Fight (April 17-23):
"Who
Should Floyd Mayweather Jr. Fight Next:
Judah Rematch, DeLaHoya, Margarito, Other?" |
|
Result at Time of Stoppage: Blue:
17,
Red: 20
Warrior TKO 2
Nelson |
|
Blue Corner:
Nelson
(Fan Fight Debut) -
Judah Rematch
Red Corner: Warrior (Fan Fight Debut) -
Margarito |
|
-Round 1 - |
Blue: "Why should Mayweather be
allowed to move ahead when he barely made it past Judah? The judges
scores lead one to believe it was a dominant performance, when in fact
it wasnt. The fight was closer to a draw than a clear Mayweather win if
anything. A knockdown in round 2 that wasnt scored. No it wasnt a big
knockdown, but the fact Judah was able to do it plays a big part in it.
It was in round 2, so Mayweather would have a lot of spring cleaning to
do before he fights the big guns in Hatton, DeLaHoya or Margarito.
Mayweather's a good fighter, but he can be beat and Castillo as well as
Judah showed us how. He's not ready for Margarito. Judah had lost to
Baldomir just before, who say's the he should have been allowed a fight
with mayweather? Gatti was in a similar situation which Floyd also
called him a C grade fighter. Shows what he thinks about them, but why
fight those guys? Because that's the best he can beat at the moment.
Judah didn't win the fight, but he showed us that Floyd isnt ready for
the big boys. The 1st Judah fight was so close, and was actually a good
fight that deserves an encore. In reality, the fight should have been
scored a DQ in favor of Judah when Roger jumped in the ring. It would
have left a sour taste in our mouth, but it would have called in the
Floyd that would have been similar to Jones Jr. when he had to overcome
his DQ loss to Montell Griffen. When he came back, he came back with a
vengeance and looks superb and despite a 1 round fight, it was well
worth it. Lets see it. BUT, if Floyd can't do that, then he can't beat a
Margarito or other big boy. Floyd couldnt even drop Judah who is
relatively known for having a weak chin. That's not good. Baldmoir had
him dancing all over the ring. Floyd didnt. Tszyu had him out in 2, 1
punch caused two knockdowns in fact. Terron also dropped Judah. Who
else? Not Floyd. Sur he isnt known as a one punch KO artist, but when a
guy looked horrible in his last fight and goes up against who is
supposed to be the number 1 p4p guy and the fight is close, that doesnt
tell me he is really p4p status, and it tells me he isnt ready for a
tougher challenge. It tells me he needs to fix his mistakes, and correct
the and a rematch would be doing just that."
|
Red:
"I will start off by addressing the
Mayweather-Judah fight. The fight should have been closer on two of the
three judges scorecards. I agreed with Dave Morretti giving it to Floyd
by four points. Judah was competitive for the first four rounds maybe
even winning three of them as Floyd struggled with his southpaw style
and speed. By the fifth round Mayweather had figured out Judah's style
and started to take over with his speed, skill and superior technique.
From the start of the fifth round to the end of the eleventh Floyd did
dominate. Judah went on the defensive and wouldn't let his hands go as
he did earlier on as he knew at this stage Mayweather had his number and
was now able to block and counter the shots that Zab landed earlier and
he had also found his accuracy and range. It was not until the twelveth
that Judah knowing he needed a knockout to win went on the attack again
as Floyd knowing he was ahead was content just to defend and showboat.
As for the knockdown in the second, yes it should have counted but that
was the referee's mistake. Just as I believe he made a mistake in the
tenth for not deducting Judah a point for a blatant low blow and
dangerous shot to the back of the head.
Regarding the question of whether Floyd should have been disqualified
after Roger Mayweather entered the ring. You yourself said it would have
left sour grapes so don't really seem to be arguing that point. I think
it would have been extremely unfair for Floyd after dominating the
previous five rounds to have gotten disqualified and think the right
decision was made in removing Roger from the corner and now in
suspending him. You criticise Floyd for not knocking Judah out but seem
to answer your own argument by saying he is not a big puncher, which is
true as he wins more on his speed and technical ability. Also it was
obvious that Judah was much more fired up and in better condition for
this fight than he was against Baldomir. Just because Floyd didn't
completely dominate Judah it doesn't mean he should have to go into an
immediate rematch. He proved the main point that he is a better fighter
than Zab. It is pointless having a rematch just to see if he can beat
him more convincingly and it would just delay Mayweather from having the
really big fights. The question has to be asked who would really want to
see a rematch anyway. The ppv buys for the fight were much lower than
expected and although it was good fight, there are much more exciting
fights out there for Floyd. I think that fans know that there isn't
anything Judah can to differently from the first fight to win. He wont
have the advantage of his style confusing Mayweather for the first few
rounds and Floyd showed he can take Zabs power as he was caught flush a
couple of times without ever looking in trouble. The most likely thing
to happen would be for the fight to mirror what happened from rounds
five through to eleven. Floyd has proven he is a better fighter than Zab
no matter about the scoring discrepancies and who should or should not
of had points taken off.
The topic is who SHOULD Mayweather face next. Since Floyd is considered
the most talented and generally recognised best pound for pound fighter
in the world, what he SHOULD do is take on the best opposition available
to him and have the fights the fans want to see. I'm sure if you asked
boxing fans which fight they would want to see the overwhelming majority
would pick Mayweather-Margarito over a Judah rematch. Not since the
second Castillo fight three and half years ago has he fought an opponent
were fans were split over who would win. You have criticised Mayweathers
opponents and rightly so. In accepting a fight with Margarito who you
even thought would beat Floyd it would open a debate over who would win
with fans split and this would be the first time in three and a half
years this has happened. If Floyd agrees to fight Margarito next he will
get a lot of respect for going up against a bigger opponent who many
people think can beat him. Floyd said he always wanted to take on the
best and now is his chance."
|
*
10-9 Round To Red * Good Round By Both!
Countering Round For Warrior Gave Him The Edge.
|
|
- Round 2 - |
Red: "The truth is that there is
nothing really preventing a Mayweather-Margarito fight from happening.
Margarito is signed with Bob Arum who is Floyd's promoter. Arum has even
set aside a date in the summer and reserved the Thomas and Mack centre.
It has also been reported that he offered Floyd around eight million
dollars, needless to say the biggest purse of his career to take the
fight. For a fighter who once referred to an hbo contract he was offered
as a "slave contract" you think he would jump at this sort of money.
Margarito wants the fight, the fans want the fight and all we now need
is for Floyd to agree to it.
I remember a quote Mayweather made in an interview early in his career.
He said "I want to fight the best now so that fifty years from now
people will look back at Floyd Mayweather and say, 'that Floyd
Mayweather fought everybody, he was a heck of a fighter.'" Floyd showed
he meant that point in beating an experienced and good champion in
Genaro Hernandez, then taking on the challenge of Angel Manfredy in his
first defence. He also showed it when he faced up to Diego Corrales and
again with Jose Luis Castillo. Their first fight was close and warranted
a rematch unlike the case for Judah. He stepped up to the challenge
again with Castillo in the rematch. However since then he seems to have
ignored the statement he made years ago. Over the last three years he
has faced clearly inferior competition and didn't seem to want to take
on the biggest fights he could. Nobody is saying that he should have
four superfights a year but the list of Sosa, N'dou, Corely, Bruseles,
Gatti (a great warrior but exposed everytime he stepped up in
competition) Mitchell and Judah over the last 3 and a half years isn't
the resume that the top pound for pound fighter should have especially
considering the opposition available as he is moving around boxings most
talented divisions. You said Mayweather is not ready for Margarito,
which is nonsense, as the best pound for pound fighter should be able to
take on anybody in or around his weight class. He is now in his prime
years and should be looking to build on his legacy. A rematch with Judah
would just make fans groan on hearing the news and would give the
impression he is trying to avoid the top fighters. If Judah wants a
rematch it is up to him to build himself up again. He didn't deserve the
Mayweather fight in the first place coming off a defeat to a fighter
with nine losses on his record. While he did better than most people
expected against Floyd, the rematch he should be looking for is against
Boldomir. He should have a warm up fight and then tackle Boldomir if he
comes through against Gatti. Even if Gatti wins he should go after
Carlos. You talk about Floyd needing to put things right against Judah
even though he proved he was better in the fight. Well Judah certainly
needs to put things right versus Carlos Boldomir. If Judah can do that,
put some consistence together and beat one of the other top welters out
there then maybe he can call for a rematch with Floyd.
I see on boxing 2006 a poll that took place which backs up my previous
argument that fans would be split on who would win between
Mayweather-Margarito.
Who Would Win: Mayweather Jr. vs. Margarito?
Margarito by KO 40.4%
Mayweather by KO 31.9%
Mayweather on Pts 25.5%Margarito on Pts 2.1%
This is what makes genuine superfights when you have fans debating over
who would win and with the most skilled fighter in the world going up
against maybe the most exciting. If Floyd refuses this fight then the
months will drag on until it will be over four years since his last
superfight. He surely doesn't want to turn into the new Roy Jones who
had all the skill in the world but didn't go out of his way to get the
big fights. He like Mayweather had some big wins early in his career but
then went into a rut for years fighting lesser fighters and not taking
on the best challenges available. Now we will always look back on his
career with some confusion as to exactly how great he was. Floyd has the
opportunities to stop this from happening to him. He is now in his
prime, everything is set, and its time for him to step up to the
Margarito fight just as he did in his big fights in the past.
The great fighters sometimes need to be really challenged to produce
their best and nobody represents a bigger challenge than Margarito. For
the sake of boxing and the fans Mayweather needs to agree to this fight,
which would probably be the biggest and maybe best fight this year. This
is what Mayweather SHOULD do next."
|
Blue:
"Just because the fight MAY be happening
doesnt mean it should, or would be best. Im lookign at the from a
Mayeather benefit stand point. Not what fight would be most exciting or
other stand point. Sure, Margarito vs Floyd may be what most want, say
Margarito knocks him out, does that still mean it was what Floud 'should
have' done? Of course not. It would be a big mistake. Floyd just moved
up once, 1st fight in and already talk of taking on the man in Margarito.
By no means an easy fight and I recall Delahoya never wanting that
fight, so Mayweather had better be careful as well. He narrowly beat
Judah. Hurt hand or not, he was down in the 2nd round and I know he
didnt hurt his hand that early, and you dont go down from a punch when
you have a hurt hand, so it was Judah who put on a good show. Of course
Mayweather pulled it out, but it was tough, so why go even tougher? Two
rounds to Judah and he would have won. Margarito would most certainly
have beat Floyd on that night, so I say he must take the rematch, come
back better than before and learn and fix his previous mistakes and then
take on the man, if not another fight before infact. And when a fighter
says they want to fight the best, doesnt always mean they do, it's just
to get their name in the news and make it seem like they mean it. Floyd
wants the best, yet fought Gatti who he called a rank c fighter, and
then Judah who lost to tuneup Baldomir in just his previous fight. No,
that doesnt sound like the best to me."
|
Round 2 between these two debuting fan fighters and right away Warrior
comes right out of his corner, bulling Nelson to the opposite corner
with some big shots. Warrior keeps him there and attacks the body with
left and right hooks. Nelson caught a bit off guard, isn't throwing any
punches. He looks more upset than anything and a right uppercut from
Warrior comes right up through Nelsons defense and lands flush on the
jaw. Nelson staggers across the ropes. Warrior presses and throws a
straight right and DOOOOOOOOOOOWNNNNNNNNN GOOOOOOOOOEEESSSS
NNNNEEEEEEEELLLLSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOONNNN! Nelson up to one knee.
"4...5...6", and he's up. Gloves get wiped off and the fight resumes.
Warrior goes right in looking for the knockout once again. Warrior
holding his guard in tight, not throwing much and appearing to get a bit
frustrated. Warrior lands a left to the body and Nelson gasps. Ding
Ding!
* 10-8 Round To Red * Nelson Down Once!
|
|
- Round 3 - |
|
* Ladies And Gentlemen, This Fight Has Come To And End As Nelson Has
Refused To Come Out And Begin Round 3. The I.F.F.B.C. Rules Your
Winner By TKO, WWWWWAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIOOOOOOOOORRRRRRR!!
Warrior, a good showing in your Fan Fight debut, give us your thoughts
and when can we expect to see you again?
Warrior:
"I wasn't exactly up against "Battling Nelson" but he knew
there was no
point coming out for the next round as he was going to get knocked out.
He
was like a club fighter making his debut while I was like an Olympian.
Still
im sure he can beat some of the other bums on here. On my march to the
title
I want to take out that welsh wally Enzo and I would like, if
Neckodeemus
can crawl out of retirement to whip him too. Anyway I should be ready to
take on this Prisoner chump in a few more fights providing he is still
the
champ. In the meantime everyone else on here should come in with a great
defence to go up against me cause im looking to knock all you punks out.
I
will be back in action in a few weeks so see you then. Your future
champ."
Nelson, was he just too much for you?
Nelson:
"I just felt my argument wasn't really being heard." |
|
Red: |
|
* |
|
- Round 4 - FINAL ROUND! |
|
Red: |
|
Blue: |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan Fight (April
10-16):
"Is
Bernard Hopkins Underrated?"
Enzo vs. Jas II |
|
Final Result: Blue:
39,
Red: 38
Jas "The Executioner"
W 4 Enzo Macaroni |
|
Blue Corner:
Jas "The Executioner" (4-1, 3 KO's) - Yes -
Red Corner:
Enzo Macaroni (9-4, 5 KO's) - No - |
|
-Round 1 - |
|
Blue:
"Enzo, we have some
unfinished business. This time I am going to leave no roomfor any
error to occur. Your argument will revolve around the fact that
Hopkins was ranked number 1 in most, if not all, pound for pound
lists before 2 judges in his first fight against Taylor and 3 judges
in his second fight with Taylor went against the view of the
majority of people that watched the fight and gave Hopkins two
losses. Enzo, the question says IS Hopkins overrated, meaning that
the question is referring to the present. So if you do come up with
the argument that Hopkins was ranked the p4p king before the 5
judges gave him 2 losses, it’s irrelevant. But if you want to look
at the p4p lists at the PRESENT, Hopkins is number 10 on many lists
and is now number 8 on Boxing2006.com’s p4p list. Given that most
people and most of the media thought that Hopkins won his fights
against Taylor, a p4p ranking of 10 is too low and that will be
found out when Hopkins meets Tarver on June 10. And speaking on the
Tarver-Hopkins fight, much of the media and so-called ‘experts’ are
saying that it is a easy fight for Tarver because Hopkins is coming
to light-heavyweight since his first fight and Hopkins doesn’t have
much power. Isn’t this a clear indication and example that Hopkins
is underrated? If the judges in the first fight agreed with what the
majority of the people and media said about Hopkins winning his
first fight against Taylor, Hopkins would not have been number 10 on
the p4p lists so why was he when the judges gave him a loss? This
clearly shows that he is underrated.
Hopkins has been an
inmate in the Graterford penitentiary for 5 years, as well as
achieving record-breaking middleweight title defences and being an
outspoken advocate for fighters – considering that Hopkins has done
all this, Hopkins is underrated and under-respected.
First of all, you
have to look at what Hopkins has done outside the ring and how this
element of Bernard Hopkins is underrated. Hopkins received the Al
Buck Award as Manager of the Year for 2004 and this was
under-reported within the media and this achievement was not
recognised enough. This is especially the case given that Hopkins
was branded a ‘fool’ (a word that springs to mind when I see your
name!) and a bad manger by the HBO team after Hopkins’ knockout win
against Hakkar, and many people took into account what the HBO team
were saying. And then Hopkins receives a prestigious and respected
award by the Boxing Writer’s Association of America as Manager of
the Year and yet Hopkins does not receive the recognition equal to
the criticism that was directed towards him in instances such as
when Hopkins didn’t accept the Roy Jones fight for $6million and
then Hopkins earns $8 million plus a percentage of the pay-per-view
revenue to fight De La Hoya!
You have also got to
look at Hopkins’ achievements inside the ring. I anticipate that
you’re going to say that Hopkins hasn’t really thought anybody and
that Trinidad was a blown-up fighter but Hopkins was the underdog
going into the match-up with the previously unbeaten Trinidad and he
dominated Trinidad. Many say that Hopkins is a dirty fighter but
Hopkins kept his discipline and didn’t do anything dirty against
Trinidad. In fact, in the fight against Trinidad, George Foreman
seriously doubted Hopkins’ ability to keep moving and not become
tired in his legs. Larry Merchant and the media didn’t rate enough
Hopkins’ ability to box in the early stages of his fight against De
La Hoya even though many said before the fight that Hopkins is just
a fighter on the inside. In fact, in the post-fight interview,
Hopkins said that he thought he did box well and he wanted to box
with De La Hoya and Larry Merchant said that he didn’t think he did
that successfully even though Hopkins was ahead on two of the three
judges scorecards.
Hopkins is 41.
Instead of praising Hopkins of still fighting at the world level at
this age, the media seems to be criticising him for not stopping in
fighting. In fact, Hopkins has been questioned on why he wants to
fight in a high-risk fight against Tarver. Why shouldn’t Hopkins be
commended for fighting in a higher-risk fight against Tarver instead
of people questioning the decision of facing a big challenge like
Tarver by saying it is not a smart thing to do in his last fight?
And if Hopkins does beat Tarver, you can bank on the result being
downplayed and both the result and performance will be underrated.
If Hopkins does beat Tarver, people and the media will make excuses
by saying that Tarver had to do a Rocky 6 movie so he had to move to
heavyweight meaning he had more weight to lose for the fight.
Hopkins has had 20
middleweight defences and to achieve this he has had to maintain a
high level of focus and motivation, and not underrate his opponents.
You will probably say he hasn’t fought that many big threats and
many others say this but Hopkins can only beat those that are there
in the middleweight division. And now that he has accomplished
records in the 160lb division, he’s willing to step up to fight the
current light-heavyweight king Antonio Tarver, yet that decision is
criticised by some. Look at fighters who have lost in fights which
they were quite strong favourites in – Judah lost to Baldomir, some
say Mayweather lost to Castillo in their first fight, Juan Manuel
Marquez lost to John and Brewster, who you said was the best
heavyweight, lost to
Lyakhovich. Having said that, doesn’t this show what a
great achievement 20 middleweight defences is, some of which were
against tough opposition and some against average opposition, but
yet people criticise the fact that Hopkins hasn’t fought that many
tough opponents. Given that fighters have lost in fights where they
were strong favourites shows that Hopkins’ achievement of 20
defences is underrated, especially given the fact that none of the
20 defences were close contests.
And what is also
underrated of Bernard Hopkins is his defence within the ring. The
fact that he hardly gets hit flush largely contributes to his
longevity in boxing. Just ask Jermain Taylor who will tell you that
Hopkins is very hard to hit flush. Given the fact that Hopkins is
not gifted with super quick footwork, Hopkins’ defence is definitely
underrated. Jones’ used to be hard to hit because of his quick feet
but now he doesn’t have that quickness, he is easier to hit and his
recent fights against Tarver and Johnson show this. This shows that
Hopkins does have an excellent defence and you can look at the
statistics to show this – Taylor landed 19% of his punches thrown in
their first fight."
|
Red: "You seem an intelligent
guy, but you remind me of a politician. One of those people who talks a
lot, or in this case writes a lot, and dazzles others with a loose grip
on the subject in hand. But to them it doesn't matter because of the way
it was delivered.
First of all let's get the question right Jas: "Is Bernard Hopkins
underrated?"
So you got that wrong for starters, and yes, I'm aware we're talking
about the present and not the past, but there was really no need to
tackle my argument for me, I'm very aware Bernard topped the p4p lists
before losing to Taylor. At that point he could not have been underrated
because of where he was, sitting pretty at the very top, the most
respected boxer in the world, especially by purists and critics who
admired Hopkins for keeping hold of his titles for so many years, and at
such an age as well. The point is, Bernard has lost twice in a row to a
young hungry fighter. Most people (I'm sorry but it's the truth) feel
Taylor won the first, albiet close, including Boxing2006. The second was
a lot tighter and more controversial, but the point is, he lost, he
didn't do enough to win his titles back. The overall opinion is that
Hopkins may have sneaked it but didn't go in with enough passion and
fire, he did what he often does, he did what he felt was "just enough"
to win, he never stamped his authority on the fight, no matter how much
he thinks he did. If we're going to nit-pick I'd argue that until
beating up on two much smaller men - Trinidad and De La Hoya - in very
impressive performances, he'd beaten a collection of extremely average
opponents, except the possible exception of a faded Joppy. Your entire
opinion is that Hopkins won the Taylor fight so he should be ranked
higher in the P4P lists and therefore is underrated? That's ridiculous.
Nobody has underrated Hopkins, we all know him like the back of our hand
by now. His dominance of the middleweight scene, a scene that was pretty
barren until certain fighters moved up a weight, was impressive, and he
was deserving of the acclaim. But he's lost twice and is now further
down the chart. Simple. He's not underrated, he'd still give any fighter
a great challenge and we'd never write him off, but he's not as
respected or well-thought of because he's been beaten. His record is
tainted, and beating a lazy, albeit talented, money-hungry big mouth
like Tarver won't take that away I'm afraid.
You're on of these people that tells other people what to think without
having anything to back it up. An example:
"If you do come up with the argument that Hopkins was ranked the p4p
king before the 5 judges gave him two losses, it's irrelevant."
How can you say that? Is it because you've realised your argument is so
weak and are trying to divert the judges attention? Do you have a
problem with judges Jas, you gave them a raw deal in your first round,
because I don't know many fight fans who thought Hopkins won that first
fight. I think Taylor was one of the few surprised by the result! It was
close, but be honest, Taylor rightly sneaked it.
And if you want to take Boxing2006's P4P lists as an example that's fine
with me. So Bernard is at number eight and that's a problem for you? I'd
like you to tell me which of the top 7 - Wright, Mayweather, Barrera,
Castillo, Rafael Marquez, Corrales, Pacquiao - you would drop in favour
ofHopkins? Indeed, would you not say that Taylor himself (12) or even
Hatton (9) and Cotto (18) are a little hard done-by given their recent
accomplishments? Heck, Jeff Lacy is at number 22 and Joe Calzaghe is
nowhere to be seen, perhaps he might be regarded as underrated, but not
B-Hop. For him to be even still in the P4P top 10, which is the argument
YOU raised, shows what respect people have for him. As a result of this,
we can say he's not underrated. He's not overrated either, he's just
Bernard, and we know what he's capable of.
By the way, I don't know anyone who thinks Tarver is so good that this
is an "easy fight" for him, you'll have to prove that, and for every
"FAN" you bring up that thinks that's the case I'll show you 10 who
disagree. I personally think Hopkins will win it and then bow out, and
many people I've spoken to in boxing circles say the same.
By the way, Hopkins's prison sentence shouldn't give him quite as much
respect as you think! His transformation since is commendable, but that
has nothing to do with his boxing achievements. Well done Bernard for
getting yourself straight all those years ago, but we've heard you talk
about it a thousand times, we all feel like we were there with you!
And you called me "a fool" then said Bernard was a "bad manger" - was
Jesus not comfortable with Bernard then Jas, or did you mean MANAGER?!
His achievements as a manager were surely documented fully by the
appropriate people, I don't think Bernard Hopkins could ever be
described as "underrated" when it comes to self-publicity.
Who says Tarver is a high-risk fight by the way? Only Tarver thinks
that. Where do you get your facts? Can you back some of this stuff up or
are we just going to play imaginary Fan Fight. Come on let's have a
little substance Jas."
|
WOW! The rematch is here and right away these two men come out blazing.
Neither giving the other any room and they decide to fight this one in a
phone booth. Two of them trading shots, neither backing away. Both
trying to show that their first fight ended in their favor. Tremendous
round here by both men. Enzo doing a great job countering where he feels
Jas is making mistakes, yet Jas is non-stop here, matching Enzo in punch
stats. This is either going to come down to the slightest of errors, or
who punches himself out first.
* 10-10 Round * Great Round!!!!!!!
|
|
- Round 2 - |
Red:
"To be honest I find this argument a little
unbelievable. Who thinks Hopkins is underrated anyway? Larry Merchant
and George Foreman you say? George did when he fought Trinidad but we're
talking about NOW. Nobody thinks he's a pushover, and anybody who knows
boxing knows his defence and foot movement are superb, and that's why
he's still fighting at 41. (Off the record, do you not find it a little
sad that after years of telling us how he'd retire at 40 because of his
mother, he's still trying to make a few extra bucks, and that's exactly
what the Tarver fight is about by the way).
Hopkins, if anything, was slightly lucky to have met Trinidad and De La
Hoya when he did, because up until that point he had no huge names on
his record, nothing that would have ensured him a sufficient legacy. I
mean, Robert Allen, Carl Daniels, he just did enough against these guys
and ground out wins, that's what he's about. Nothing spectacular, just
solid. Props to B-Hop for being that way, it gave him 20 defences, and
he beat good fighters like Eastman and Holmes along the way, but when I
the crunch, he was too late in showing up for the Jermain Taylor fight.
He gave the guy three rounds off the bat and was playing catch-up
throughout. If we're going to be brutal, the first time Hopkins fought a
REAL somebody at their best was Jones, and he lost that one. The second
was Taylor, he lost that one. Fighters like Hakkar were just defences,
stiffs, the guy fought Phillipe Cazeaux five times, and he had a losing
record!! Talk about padding! And this got him a title shot. He fought
Daniels when he was 31, Holmes when he was 31, Glen Johnson in 1997 when
he was a green as a four-leaved clover, and Allen when he was 35, and
after Allen had earlier lost to the majestic Brian Barbosa. Joppy had
already been battered by Trinidad when they met. And you have to ask how
guys like Steve Frank and William Bo James even got a title shot in the
first place. 20 defences is very impressive bvy anyone's standards, and
that's why he's recognised as one of the greatest middleweights of any
era, so let's stick to the question, the question is NOW and the answer
is no, no matter what spin you put on it.
You place great emphasis on the tools Bernard has, and how they're
underrated. It's fair to say that he's not the biggest puncher because
he isn't, his two most impressive knockouts are against two blown up
welterweights, Oscar and Tito. That said, they were mightily impressive
stoppages all the same, and Bernard was treated as an almost God-like
figure after stopping them. Thus, he was rated, not underrated, and
remained P4P King despite the likes of Tszyu and Jones clicking at his
heels.
His footwork is good, always has been. His chin is very good, so is his
defence, which is why he is a great overall boxer, a reall all-rounder
who does everything well and uses his mental ability to stay sharp and
out of trouble, coasting to easy decisions by outboxing his opponents
more often than not, We know this and we appreciate it. But you can't
deny his skills are on the slide, age does that to you, and
his punch resistance, while Eastman really let his hands fly when he had
B-Hop hurt the fight could have been different, but like many of
Hopkins' opponents, too much respect was shown.
And you said I should look at what Hopkins has done outside the ring and
mention that he won an Al Buck manager award in 2004! That's not the
present is it Jas? If we're talking the present we'll discuss this:
"The new undisputed middleweight champion of the world, Jermain Taylor,
has stepped in to assist the American Cancer Society following a snub of
the charity by former champ Bernard Hopkins. Hopkins recently asked that
The Ring withhold recognition of Taylor as middleweight champion and
continue
to recognize Hopkins. When The Ring refused the request, Hopkins refused
to keep an earlier promise to a Ring Magazine staff member to sign a
pair of gloves for an American Cancer Society fundraiser. In the
presence of more than one person, Hopkins stated, "#%&* the American
Cancer Society. Get Jermain Taylor to sign them." No problem! When
Taylor, the favorite son of Little Rock, Arkansas, learned of the
situation, he readily agreed to donate an autographed glove and trunks
to aid the charity. "I will do everything I can to help the American
Cancer Society," said Taylor. "It's a great cause and a great charity."
When he lost to Taylor he acted like a spoilt little brat and threw his
toys out of the pram, he's acted like an immature bully too many times
for this to be a coincidence. Coupled with his 5 years in prison it's
hardly role-model status, no matter what slant you put on it.
By the way, thanks for pointing out what a dirty fighter Bernard can be,
and boy he can dish it out and not take it in return. Joppy looked like
a gargoyle after Bernard spent the entire 12 rounds butting him, it was
sad to see.
And this is the creme de la creme: "Hopkins is 41. Instead of praising
Hopkins of still fighting at the world
level at this age, the media seems to be criticising him for not
stopping in fighting. In fact, Hopkins has been questioned on why he
wants to fight in a high-risk fight against Tarver. Why shouldn't
Hopkins be commended for fighting in a higher-risk fight against Tarver
instead of people questioning the decision of facing a big challenge
like Tarver by saying it is not a smart thing to do in his last fight?"
Are you one of these people that thinks Evander Holyfield should be
commended for still fighting? A lot of critics say these things for the
good of the fighter, not for the sad voyeuristic likes of you Jas.
PS Your nickname obviously shows who your favourite fighter is, shame
you're so blinkered. I bet you'd let Hopkins fight on until he's 50 to
give you something to do.
....your entire argument is flawed. 20 defences is a terrific
achievement, that's why he was p4p number one. He lost two fights is
still in the top 10 p4p so he's therefore still highly rated. Simple.
nobody worth their salt thinks Bernard Hopkins is a poor fighter, and
he's had more than his fair share of accolades when he was at the top.
Sad thing is, he isn't anymore, let it go."
|
|
Blue:
"Enzo, in the first round you tried to counter my arguments and some
of your comments were about some minor spelling mistakes such as
where I missed out an ‘a’ accidentally. Well, this isn’t a spelling
contest. I mean you also made some minor spelling mistakes such as
spelling albeit wrong.
Anyway, now it’s
time to counter some of your arguments. You said that “Most people
(I'm sorry but it's the truth) feel Taylor won the first, albiet
close, including Boxing2006”. Where did you get that from? The
Boxing2005 poll showed that most people thought that Bernard won
their first fight:
Bernard
Hopkins vs. Jermain Taylor
|
Who Did You
Have Winning? |
|
|
Hopkins |
 |
48.1% |
|
Taylor |
|
33.3% |
|
Draw |
|
18.5% |
And out of 20 media
members scoring the first fight, 3 thought Taylor won, 4 had it a
draw and 13 had Bernard as the winner! These are facts so I don’t
know how you came up with the argument that “most people (I'm sorry
but it's the truth) feel Taylor won the first” fight.
You said that “most
people (I'm sorry but it's the truth) feel Taylor won the first,
albiet close, including Boxing2006.” In fact, Boxing2005 scored the
fight a draw and I quote from Boxing2005.com – “WORTHY OF NOTE:
Judge Duane Ford gave the 12th and final round to Taylor! Hopkins
clearly won that round and that would have brought the final scores
to a DRAW, which is how Boxing2005.com scored it.”
You even admit that
in reference the second fight “the overall opinion is that Hopkins
may have sneaked it”.
You also question me by saying “Who
says Tarver is a high-risk fight by the way? Only Tarver thinks
that. Where do you get your facts? Can you back some of this stuff
up or are we just going to play imaginary Fan Fight. Come on let's
have a little substance Jas." I quote from a Rick Reeno article –
“There are plenty of people in the sport, fans and experts alike,
wondering why Hopkins would take this kind of risk at this late
stage of his career” and “Some pundits and experts in the sport have
criticized both men for making the bout. There are those that feel
Hopkins is too small, Tarver is too big, among other observations
from the critics.”
You also say that Hopkins’
“achievements as a manager were surely documented fully by the
appropriate people”. How were they? You say “surely” as if you are
just speculating.
In your round 3
comments, you say that Hopkins is fighting Tarver “to make a few
extra bucks”. In fact, Hopkins is all about legacy and history. He
wanted to do what Sugar Ray Robinson didn’t do because of heat
exhaustion and that’s become the Light-Heavyweight Champion of the
World. Hopkins pointed out that he wanted to do this February last
year after he beat Eastman for his 20th title defence so
he has always had a fight with the light-heavyweight champion in his
plans. He hasn’t suddenly thought that there is a chance “to make a
few extra bucks” if he fights Tarver! In fact, this is another area
where Hopkins is underrated, under-respected and under-recognised.
You criticise the opponents that Hopkins has fought but look at the
fighters who have lost in fights where they were favourites but
Hopkins has remained hungry. The fact that Hopkins’ opponents always
seem to be criticised shows that Hopkins’ achievement of achieving
20 defences, which has only been done by 4 other fighters, is
underrated.
You say that money
is “exactly what the Tarver fight is about by the way” is not true.
Hopkins has shown in his behaviour that if the deal is not right and
fair whether the deal involves a few million dollars or not, Hopkins
walks away from the deal – look at when Hopkins didn’t accept the
fight with Jones. And speaking on that, the media and HBO reported
that Hopkins had the lottery ticket and didn’t cash it in. In fact,
the HBO network wanted Hopkins to fight at 190 pounds, largely
because Roy Jones said that the weight loss put him in a situation
where he almost got knocked out by losing a lot of weight. However,
on TV, the challenge to fight Roy Jones was issued at 168 pounds and
that is what more writers need to write. When people heard that the
talks for the Hopkins-Jones fight broke after Hopkins beat Trinidad,
everyone in the boxing world was criticising Hopkins by saying that
he lost another big fight. Isn’t Bernard Hopkins so under-respected
and underrated that people would have wanted Hopkins to go up to 190
pounds but yet people wanted to keep De La Hoya and other
light-middleweights away from Hopkins. Hopkins is underrated now
given that he has had to withstand the criticism that wasn’t
labelled so extensively to any other fighter. Merchant actually said
“Why are you calling out the little guys, I never heard of a
middleweight calling out the little guys." and “Well, you won't
fight a guy like this on HBO again” – this was criticism towards
Hopkins and yet he withstood that. Merchant said this after
Hopkins’ knockout win against Hakkar. In your second round comments,
you say “Fighters like Hakkar were just defences, stiffs, the guy
fought Phillipe Cazeaux five times, and he had a losing record!!
Talk about padding! And this got him a title shot.” In fact, Hakkar
was the WBC mandatory challenger and not fighting him would have
resulted in the stripping of Hopkins’ WBC belt – that’s why Hakkar
got a title shot. Stop criticising Bernard Hopkins – this criticism
is what I’m talking about when I say Hopkins is underrated. Did
Hopkins make Hakkar the mandatory challenger? You brought this
argument up and that is why I’m talking about it. Why not blame the
WBC president Jose Sulaiman. Hopkins is underrated and Merchant, who
has rightly been accused by Boxing2006 on some occasions, tried to
make Hopkins look bad on TV like he and Lampley did before and
during the first Hopkins-Taylor fight. They made Hopkins look bad
and treated him badly about issues such as what Hopkins was alleged
to have said about a former colleague. If Hopkins was rated like you
say he is, why does he receive this criticism? How many radio
announcers, TV announcers and reporters stood up and say that
Merchant was in the wrong?
You say that against
“Robert Allen, Carl Daniels, he just did enough against these guys
and ground out wins” but he didn’t just do enough against them – in
fact, in the first fight against Allen Hopkins was ahead on two of
the scorecards until the No-Contest in the 4th round, in
their second fight he knocked Allen out in the 7th and in
their third fight Hopkins won by 12 points on two of the scorecards
and by 8 points in the remaining scorecard so your statement isn’t
true. Have you watched the fights? I have and Hopkins never looked
like he was going to lose. And in the fight against Daniels which
you mention, Hopkins won every round up until the 10th
round when the corner stopped the fight. And you say that “he just
did enough against these guys”?! Hopkins’ 20 defences were not close
fights. Hopkins’ most recent fights were closer fights. You say that
Hopkins “was too late in showing up for the Jermain Taylor fight. He
gave the guy three rounds off the bat and was playing catch-up
throughout”. But this was part of Hopkins’ strategy, which was
perfect for Jermain Taylor and was actually carried out to
near-perfection. To show this, in the 1st round Taylor
landed 9% of his punches thrown and in round 3 he landed 13% of his
punches thrown. You say he that “he gave the guy three rounds off
the bat” but the statistics that I’ve just given you show that
during the early rounds, Taylor was landing very few of his punches
and he got tired in the latter stages of the fight, which was
Hopkins’ strategy. This is another area of Hopkins that is
underrated. I am talking about his mind. Hopkins isn’t gifted with
the talent that Sugar Ray Robinson was gifted with or the speed that
Leonard was gifted with so therefore Hopkins has to use his mind and
intelligence and knowledge to win. This part of Hopkins is
underrated. Instead of criticising Hopkins’ start in the Taylor
fight, this strategy was very good and the stats and how the fight
went later on in the fight show this. Look at Hopkins’ fight against
Trinidad. Hopkins was expected to fight inside and fight a dirty
fight but it was Trinidad who turned to dirt tactics such as when he
pushed Hopkins’ chin back with his elbow. A lot of people including
yourself even now say Trinidad was just a “blown up welterweight”
but before the fight Trinidad was favourite.
You said that
Bernard was hurt in his fight against Eastman- no he wasn’t. And
you say that Eastman should have really let his hands go but Bernard
is a really good counter-puncher. I think his counter-punching
ability and speed is underrated. Jermain Taylor was surprised at
Hopkins’ speed in their first fight. Look at Bernard’s
counter-punching ability and speed in his fight against Trinidad and
he still has those assets which are underrated.
You also say that
Hopkins being awarded Manager of the Year by the BWAA (Boxing
Writers Association of America) and the lack of recognition for this
is not the present but I’m making the point that Hopkins is still
not now recognised and rated enough as a manager.. You contradict
yourself by saying that Hopkins does just enough to win and then say
that he was “coasting to easy decisions by outboxing his opponents
more often than not”.
You question of
whether I commend Holyfield to carry on fighting – the answer is no.
Holyfield and Hopkins are different. Tarver is going to be Hopkins’
last opponent in the ring – win, lose or draw. I said in our first
fight that “I and many others would not want to see Castillo get
seriously hurt” so your claim that “A lot of critics say these
things for the good of the fighter, not for the sad voyeuristic
likes of you Jas” is ridiculous and not true. Hopkins said before
his second fight with Taylor that the fight with Taylor wasn’t going
to be his last fight so your claim that Hopkins is just fighting for
money, which I’ve already addressed is not true. Hopkins has put
his money where his mouth is by building up abandoned and run-down
houses in East Philadelphia. Hopkins should be praised more for what
he does outside the ring. He wanted a real estate business, then
wants shopping malls to lease out and then wants to put more back
into the city by then building health and fitness centres. Hopkins
is also a promoter for Golden Boy Promotions and he wants to clean
up the boxing business. I mentioned that Hopkins spoke in 1999 of
the Muhammad Ali Act and he spoke then when he didn’t make a million
dollars when he was willing to risk and he has been questioned by
people such as Merchant of why he is continuing in being a crusader
but Hopkins has continued to speak openly if he feels something is
wrong. He has not openly spoke about the treatment of fighters,
wages for fighters, challenging the big promoters when he wasn’t as
popular but he has continued to be an advocate for fighters – not
many fighters do this. Some fighters can’t afford to challenge the
powers in the boxing system and some don’t know how to express
themselves like Hopkins, which brings me onto my next point which is
that Hopkins is underrated as a speaker. He is enlightening and
interesting and speaks at length about history, not only the history
of boxing but history in general."
|
* 10-9 Round To
Blue *
Another Heated, & Close Round Between These Two. Slight Edge In Counters
To Jas!
|
|
- Round 3 - |
|
Blue:
"I’m going to expand things further. I mentioned that
Hopkins
has fought for fighters’ rights and he has actually used his status
as a world champion to make aware of the injustices for fighters by
appearing before Congress. Not many fighters do this and that is why
I think Hopkins
should be commended more for this element that is underrated.
Hopkins
is a self-manager and promoter and yet while doing that, he has
still been successful in the ring. Others fighters such as p4p
number 1 Floyd Mayweather don’t focus on the business side of boxing
because it might affect their performances in the ring but
Hopkins
has managed, promoted and fought at the same time with success.
Don’t forget that
Hopkins
lost his first fight. I’m not saying that this is better than
Hopkins
winning his first fight but it shows that he overcame further
adversity and yet still became the Undisputed Middleweight Champion
of the World.
And expanding on
Hopkins’ excellent strategies, I’ve already mentioned his very good
fight strategies against Taylor and Trinidad but look how he took
away Eastman’s strengths like he does so well to his opponents and
this is underrated. He turns his opponent’s strengths against them.
You criticise that
Hopkins
went to prison and that isn’t role-model status but
Hopkins
doesn’t brag about going to prison. In fact, he said he “is not
proud of it”. Hopkins
often visits
Philadelphia
juvenile detention centres to help others. And Bernard doesn’t go to
the charity events that I mentioned in the last round just to show
his face and smile for the cameras. He speaks at length to help
other people especially young people and treats the charity events
of being more than just a function.
Hopkins
gets asked by Commissioner Mr. Johnson in Philly to speak to kids
and top DA Mr. Abraham also phones him for help with the high
homicide rate in
Philadelphia. And
speaking of prison, the odds were against
Hopkins
not coming back but he didn’t come back.
If anything,
Hopkins’
story can inspire people all over the world especially those that
are in the position that
Hopkins
was in. Hopkins
spent five years in prison, then had 7 years of probation in which
he had to stay disciplined or we wouldn’t be having this fan fight.
He then became a four-round fighter and lost his first fight, then
he became a six-round fighter, then a eight-round fighter, then a
ten-round fighter, then a twelve-round fighter and then the
Undisputed Middleweight Champion of the World. Having said that
Hopkins
has done this, that is why I say he is underrated because he
overcame all the adversities that I have mentioned.
Hopkins
said that he is the perfect example in the word of the ‘American
Dream’.
Bernard never had an
American Olympic history like other top American fighters such as
Lacy, Taylor,
Tarver and Jones. He values his legacy tremendously and trains at 5
or 6 in the morning and is in bed by eight when he is training for a
fight. He doesn’t get distracted and doesn’t drink or smoke and
that’s why the preserved Hopkins is still fighting at 41 years old
and taking this into account, I think Hopkins is underrated.
Now to Hopkins’
court cases which he has received some criticism for by people such
as Lampley who said that Bernard’s relationships in the business
world have gone wrong one way or the other. Yes, him and DiBella did
go into court and it was Bernard who won a counter-claim.
Hopkins
has previously been in court cases when he wasn’t as rich,
continually risking money, effort and his career by going against
powers in the system. And now he wants to become a Hall of Fame
promoter and clean up boxing and that shows the tremendous endurance
of Hopkins.
But Lampley if you’re out there,
Hopkins’
business Golden Boy Promotions with De La Hoya has not gone wrong!
And to back all my
talk of Hopkins
and the system and how the system has screwed
Hopkins,
I’ve got to mention that
Hopkins
defended his middleweight crown 12 times and still didn’t earn a
million dollar pay day!!!! This part of Hopkins standing up against
what he feels is wrong in boxing is definitely underrated. He’s done
a lot in history and I told you that he’s only the 5th
fighter ever to defend his title 20 times or more but he was the
first middleweight the WBA, WBC and IBF belts at the same time since
Hagler in 1987.
Hopkins hasn’t
given in to a promoter. Look, if
Trinidad
had beat Hopkins,
Jones would have fought him but Jones didn’t want to fight
Hopkins
when he won but look how that situation was presented – “He had the
lottery ticket but didn’t cash it in”. Jones was reluctant and
didn’t want to fight at a realistic weight but this wasn’t told to
the people as much! Also, there is a given time to cash lottery
tickets and the time for
Hopkins
to move out of the middleweight division to fight Jones had not come
then. Hopkins
wanted 20 defences and that is what he got in the end. When I say
that Bernard Hopkins is underrated, you’ve got the compare him to
other fighters. Look at the attention that other fighters get such
as the attention that Tyson got, for example.
You said that
Hopkins
“acted like an immature bully too many times”. Immature? Bernard
respects the fans and the media and you will find that he knows a
lot of the names of media personnel. He carries himself with dignity
and self-respect. Look at the press conference Tarver vs
Hopkins
video from Boxing2006 –
Hopkins
didn’t trash talk. He did in his press conference against
Trinidad
but that worked.
Hopkins wanted to
anger Trinidad
and when you’re angry, you susceptible to do stupid things such as
when Trinidad
pushed Bernard’ chin backwards with his forearm.
And speaking of the
Hopkins-Trinidad fight, this fan fight is going in the pattern of
that fight. After an even first round, I have dominated the middle
part of the fight and there is a going to be a late knockout!
Whether your chin will resist my blows in this round, we’ll see but
I have made countless points that, unlike your points, are actually
relevant to the fan fight question!!"
|
|
Red:
"You can see the way this is going can't you little man, you bitched
so much last time that you'll be handed this one and we'll be even,
at least in the judges eyes, but not mine.
I notice you didn't explain to me why
Hopkins was so abusive towards the charity? You just passed it by,
and I also notice how you've given up on Bernard's limited boxing
skills to get you through this and are relying on his stance as a
promoter, manager and voice for other boxers!? Hysterical. Even
funnier is the fact you're winning! I NEVER said anything about him
saying it was good that he'd gone to prison, I just mentioned it as
a fact. No matter what he says now it's a fact he spent five years
there, whether you like it or not.
I'm not interested in who he talks to
outside the ring, this is a boxing website and a Fan Fight not a
political forum, so keep to the point. You didn't even know the
question in the first round and had the nerve to say that I strayed
off the subject.
I'm going to talk BOXING, I hope that's
ok, because for a man to be p4p for so long he needs to have beaten
quality opposition in dominant style. Did Bernard do that? did he
f***.
You stress how good his wins were over
the likes of Hakkar, Allen, Joppy, Daniels et al, but none of these
guys will even make it to the car park at Cantastota, he's only
beaten two WORLD-CLASS operators and they were both blown up
welters. If Hopkins wanted a real legacy he should have moved up to
super-middle or light heavyweight sooner. Twenty defences in a very,
very poor middleweight division isn't as impressive as you make out.
I'm sorry, but it isn't.
And you say he's all about legacy!! I
nearly fell off my chair laughing Jas. You think he's fighting
Tarver for his legacy?! What a joke. He's a businessman now mate,
and a good one, as you mentioned, but let's not forget he's only
JUST become a player in the promoting game, he's not as established
as you make out. Do you think he'd be anywhere near as successful if
not for De La Hoya? Of course he wouldn't have.
Back to the ring. Hopkins is not a big
puncher, not a world class finisher, has a decent chin but whether
you like it or not he was rocked in the Eastman fight, you obviously
weren't watching. Eastman has gone on to lose twice since Bernard,
in more clinical fashion than he lost to Bernard, yet he could have
beat Hopkins had he turned up and let his fists fly rather than
being cautious and letting Hopkins steal the rounds.
But I want to go back a little further.
When Hopkins beat William Joppy via unanimous decision, it was a
Joppy who was totally destroyed by Trinidad within four rounds, yet
he fought gallantly against Hopkins and finished on his feet.
Other than Trinidad and William Joppy
you would have to go to BoxRec.Com to find out who are these other
guys he has fought are. And then came Oscar, who outboxed Hopkins
before getting inot a fight with him and losing on a body shot.
I think Hopkins is a true Champion yet
to just take a win over Trinidad and DLH is not enough. Trinidad is
a fighter who comes to fight, meaning I get you or you get me,
which may have also lead to the numbers of knockdowns he has faced
in his career. He fought Hopkins Mano-Mano, and he was the smaller
guy and got overpowered.
De la Hoya started to mix it up and the
same thing happened. If De La Hoya could have kept it long he amy
well have outboxed Hopkins, and perhaps should have.
So we're alking about IS not WAS he
underrated. Coming off two losses how can he possibly be rated as
highly as you think, or even he thinks he should be?
Hopkins talent snowballed to an
impressive late-peak in 2001 when he turned in a near-perfect
domination of Felix Trinidad before stopping him under the moonlight
of the 12th-round. Since that time, the crafty Hopkins has been
slowly and incrementally declining. He was never a murderous
puncher, nor a high-output punching machine. By his own admission,
he has always been a patient technician, and he made his name, and
his legend, as such. Accordingly, the gradual, and natural, erosion
of time did not show as vividly. Especially because he was cleverly
put in some fights that made him look deceptively good. William
Joppy was already almost-shot by the time Hopkins took him apart,
which was long before Taylor took his turn at whacking stuffing out
of the piñata that Joppy has become. And Hopkins’ body-blow-besting
of Oscar De La Hoya had everyone forgetting that “The Golden Boy”
had no business fighting at middleweight, and thinking that Hopkins
stalked and killed a fighter at or around the level Oscar maintained
when he ruled lower weight-divisions. All the while, Hopkins was
getting older and slowing down behind the façade. It seemed obvious,
perhaps for the first time that he was a different fighter when he
expended too much effort, and did too little damage, on his way to
decisioning Howard Eastman.
Hopkins appeared less impressive in his first fight with Taylor, and
then slightly less impressive again in this most recent debacle. And
in both fights Taylor got the nod in fights that could have
conceivably been judged on either side of the line. That is, not to
take anything away from Taylor. He fought the fights he had to in
order to win, but to win over a somewhat diminished Hopkins. It is
not hard to imagine a prime “Executioner” fresher and freer-swinging
in the late rounds of his first fight with Taylor, and perhaps
getting the eleventh-hour stoppage. In the second fight, the Bernard
Hopkins of yesteryear would have had a much better chance of
dictating the pace and cruising past a sharp and smart, but
unspectacular Taylor.
So Taylor beat Bernard Hopkins at two-thirds of his former
pay-grade. If that makes Taylor the universally regarded, and
unquestioned, champion, then a marginally-diminished B-hop must be
better than any other middleweight in the ranks. And that may not be
a fact. Make no mistake; it is ultimately impressive that Hopkins is
sharp as he is at forty one. But could no one other than Taylor have
beaten him? I think he'd lose to other guys now as well, so he's
moving up taking on Tarver, who is garbage, and taking the money."
|
This fight is non stop! Another top notch, close round in the books.
* 10-9 Round To Red * Slight edge in
counters to Enzo.
|
|
- Round 4 - FINAL ROUND! |
|
Red:
"So when it comes to boxing we've discussed Bernard. You left boxing
in the second round and tried to paint BH out to be some super guy
who never argues (?), cares about other fighters (??) and is all
about legacy and not money (???). On the last point, if he was that
great in the first place why is he still trying to secure his legacy
at the age of 41 against a man whose great claim to fame is knocking
out a Roy Jones when he was a shadow of his former self.
This excerpt from June 2004's BLACK ATHLETE is
what BH is all about. A bully, a cry baby, an arrogant child, a
racist, disrespcectful and not deserving of the praise yuo gave
him...and if taking articles from others is how you're doing things
Jas, then why shouldn't I do it?:
"Veteran
referee Joe Cortez said he wouldn't step down. The Nevada State
Athletic Commission stood its grounds refusing to substitute Cortez;
so I suppose it's fair to say that Bernard "The Executioner" Hopkins
gave up on his latest cry for attention, finally agreeing to fight
under the fair but firm Joe Cortez. What was the compromise, you
ask? Would you believe additional cameras focusing on the referee
only throughout the bout? Perhaps a more real concern should be how
many fans are going to be interested enough in this farce of a card
to pay to see it...
Just when I thought we had a new and improved version
of Bernard Hopkins, the old demons re-surface, with Hopkins making a
mad dash for the airport Friday afternoon, close to twenty-four
hours before fight time, threatening to sabotage not just this
promotion, (and a reportedly two million dollar paycheck), but the
ultimate ten million dollar showdown with Oscar de la Hoya (assuming
Hopkins beats Allen and Oscar takes care of Sturm) already penciled
in for the fall.
What is Bernard Hopkins dealing with? What is he
thinking? Why does he insist on making such an ass out of himself?
We won't re-hash Hopkins' disrespect of Puerto Rico, Puerto Ricans
and Latinos world over but it just seems as though Bernard's
paranoia keeps getting the best of him. Having protested Cortez
twice before, (in Hopkins vs Trinidad and in Hopkins vs Joppy),
Bernard now decides that Cortez could be harboring some sort of
animosity against him and therefore, he attempts to strong-arm the
Commission and the promotion, (strong-arming got him a hefty jail
sentence years ago), into eliminating Cortez from this fight.
Let me see if I'm following the plot correctly...
Bernard Hopkins protested against Joe Cortez when he fought Trinidad
because of the referee's Puerto Rican ancestry. He then protested
against Cortez in the Joppy mismatch because since Cortez is of
Puerto Rican descent he may have been offended by Hopkins'
disgraceful antics against Puerto Ricans, and, Hopkins now protests
against Cortez because Cortez may hold a grudge against him for the
two prior protests.
I've said this before and I'll say it again...
Bernard Hopkins is not now, nor has he ever been the draw. He was
thrust to the limelight in 2001 by Felix 'Tito' Trinidad and he now
stands a chance to make a stab at a huge payday because Oscar de la
Hoya has granted him sidekick status.
Hopkins' insatiable thirst for attention during the
Trinidad promotion prompted him to disrespect the Latino fans who
-by all accounts- are the lifeline of the sport; the same need for
recognition now puts him in what many consider a no win situation.
If we are to buy into Bernard's theory, it would then
be a foregone conclusion that Joe Cortez should really be hating
Hopkins now, along with the Nevada State Athletic Boxing Commission;
the HBO and MGM Hotel suits too, since he has now ticked all of them
off, right? Should Hopkins be requesting a change of venue? A change
of city and state as well, since perhaps the officials will remember
this latest faux pas and score his fight accordingly? I mean, how do
you allay all the possible negatives now?
To go a step further, what are the implications of
Hopkins' outrageous behavior? Are we saying that fighters won't get
a fair shake unless the person who referees their bouts is of the
same ethnic background? This is as ridiculous as it is offensive,
and if I had been inclined to pay to watch this show -which I never
was- I certainly would have canceled my order by now.
Bernard Hopkins' behavior has done nothing to enhance
the overall picture, quite the opposite. I can't help but wonder how
Hopkins antics will go over should he and Oscar de la Hoya meet as
seems to be already decided? Could Hopkins be concerned about having
Joe Cortez in the ring because he knows Cortez won't tolerate his
dirty antics? If anything goes wrong tonight in the Hopkins-Allen
bout, Cortez will probably come under fire, not to mention the
officials and who knows, even the commission may face Hopkins'
wrath. Too much drama...
Boxing fans, don't be fooled for a minute, the truth
of the matter is that had Hopkins' refusal to face Robert Allen
forced the cancellation of tonight's show, Hopkins would have faced
huge law suits and a possible long-term suspension from the NSAC for
refusal to fight, which in effect, would have executed Bernard
Hopkins' career."
......
I went on Google and typed in: "Bernard Hopkins is
overrated" and got four pages of articles. I typed in "Bernard
Hopkins is underrated" and there wasn't one page..there were just
three articles and one was about a footballer!!
Few agree with this topic, nobody feels that NOW he
is deserving of so much credit. He was a great fighter, maybe still
is a pretty good one, but his best days are gone and I'm not
convinced he's Mr Nice Guy now either....it's only a matter of
months sicne the Cancer Charity debacle and he's ben disrespecting
others for years.
And how is Hopkins' lack of a decent amateur
background to be lauded? He was in prison while others were grafting
and carving out careers. Sure he did well to come back from losing
his first fight but look at his record. He's the ultimate coaster.
He can't really of believed he beat Roy Jones. He pranced about and
never took the inititiative in that fight. He just coasted, he was
beaten by Jones' speed, as he was always troubled by speed. It was
Taylor's workrate and speed that did for Hopkins in the first fight.
He finished stronger but you don't leave it to chance, not when the
undisputed title is on the line.
And this line is great Jas:
"now he wants to become a Hall of Fame promoter
and clean up boxing and that shows the tremendous endurance of
Hopkins. But Lampley if you’re out there, Hopkins’ business Golden
Boy Promotions with De La Hoya has not gone wrong!
And to back all my talk of
Hopkins and the system and how the system has screwed Hopkins, I’ve
got to mention that Hopkins defended his middleweight crown 12 times
and still didn’t earn a million dollar pay day!!!!"
That's because he wasn't a SUPERSTAR Jas, many
of Hopkins' fights were so dull (Joppy an example) that people would
not pay to see him. He couldn't draw flies to a dump, he was never
flash and is renowned as a dirty fighter. the only thing he did that
was vaguely entertaining was wear an executioner's costume to the
ring and that's a bit ridiculous now at his age!! Incidentally, how
do you think the families of those boxers who lost their lives feel
when Saint Bernard draws his thumb across his throat, isuing a death
threat? I'm sure they're over the moon aren't they? Not.
And you're really scraping the barrel when you
say "Bernard knows a lot of the media personnel!!!!""" So what!!!
He's a bloody SELF-PUBLICIST..how could you bring such a dire and
dour fact into the argument? Could you not think of anyone else he'd
fought and revert to going through his address book?
You've done well in this fight Jas and I respect
your opinions but let's get down to the nitty gritty. Hopkins was
p4p King without the skills of much better fighters around him,
including Jones Jr, Lewis and Tszyu. Now he's lost wice and while he
still has the respect of purists, he's not as deserving of praise as
you'd like to think he is. His is not unerrated. He is still
respected and by showing the stats of Boxin 2006 and other websites,
including the recent p4p fiures, it could even be argued that he's
now OVERRATED."
|
|
Blue:
"Enzo, I’m am going to touch gloves going into this last round and I
respect you for lasting this long but I’m going to knock you out or
at least dominate you by countering your punches and coming out with
powerful leads of my own.
More than half of
your last round was an article from Black Athlete!!!!! That means
most of your 4th round comments consist of a quote from
an article!! Anyone can put an article from a website on their Fan
Fight to make it look like you’ve got more points. By the way, the
article is just one point of view of Hopkins!!!!! And come to think
of it, the article’s criticism of Hopkins actually shows that he is
underrated!!
You say that “if
taking articles from others is how you're doing things Jas, then why
shouldn't I do it?” but I gave you a quote of 62 words from an
article in round 2 because you asked for some evidence in round 1!
Whereas you gave me 761 words of an article from which you made
ridiculous comments including “This excerpt from June 2004's BLACK
ATHLETE is what BH is all about. A bully, a cry baby, an arrogant
child, a racist, disrespcectful and not deserving of the praise yuo
gave him”.
And what does how
many results from a search you get from Google got to do with
anything? It seems that you’re getting desperate!
You said that “And
how is Hopkins' lack of a decent amateur background to be lauded? He
was in prison while others were grafting and carving out careers.”
Stop putting words into my mouth. I never said that his lack of an
Olympic Amateur background was to be praised. My point is that he
never had that Olympic amateur experience like Tarver, Jones and De
La Hoya did but still went on to achieve what he did.
You said that “He
can't really of believed he beat Roy Jones. He pranced about and
never took the inititiative in that fight. He just coasted, he was
beaten by Jones' speed”. By the way, Hopkins didn’t say that he
thought that he beat Jones so stop making up stuff!! And speaking of
that fight, it was Jones who was circling the ring and Bernard was
holding the middle of the ring for much of that fight. There were
very few punches landed in the fight and Jones said after the fight
that Bernard is very hard to hit. And Bernard lacked experience –
back to my point about Olympic amateur experience where there are a
lot of fighters with speed which is what Jones had a lot of. If
Hopkins and Jones were to fight now, Hopkins would be the favourite
to win and because he now has the experience of 20 defences, he will
fight on the inside more.
You said that “It
was Taylor's workrate and speed that did for Hopkins in the first
fight”. Work rate and speed? What is more important that how many
punches are thrown is how many punches are landed which is what most
judges look for. And this is a fact from the first fight – Hopkins
landed 28 more power punches than Taylor in the first fight and he
landed 29% of his punches instead of 19% landed by Taylor. And I
notice that you didn’t mention the second Taylor-Hopkins fight where
Hopkins landed 41 more power punches than Taylor. You even admitted
in a previous round that “the overall opinion is that Hopkins may
have sneaked it” so given that, and the stats also reflect that,
most people thought that Hopkins won the first and second fight
against Taylor, shouldn’t Hopkins be rated higher in the p4p lists?
If the judges went with the overall opinion that Hopkins won the
fights, I don’t think Hopkins would be ranked 10 in the p4p lists,
he’ll be ranked higher so why is he ranked that low even though most
thought he won both fights. And Enzo I’ve already given you the
opinion poll and the quote from Boxing2005 that proved your talk
about most people thinking that Hopkins lost the first fight,
including Boxing2006 was rubbish!! In fact, one thing I haven’t
mentioned is that the reporter who is most likely “Thrill”, who
conducted an audio interview for Boxing 2005 with Bernard Hopkins,
said that he thought “Bernard did enough to win the fight” in
reference to the first fight. The Tarver-Hopkins fight is on
pay-per-view but the Taylor-Wright fight isn’t – this is partly due
to the fact that even though Wright is ranked first in Boxing2006’s
p4p list, most people don’t see Taylor as the real and legitimate
champion.
You’ve said that
Hopkins “was too late in showing up for the Jermain Taylor fight”
and I have already told you the strategy of Hopkins but the first
punch landed in the first fight was a left hook by Hopkins and he
threw two left hooks in the first minute.
You said that
Hopkins is “a cry baby” and disrespectful but he respects the media
and in the post-fight press conference of the second Taylor-Hopkins
fight, he was gracious. He thanked everybody such as HBO, Marc
Ratner and the referee even though Jay Nady said in the fight that
he will take a point from Taylor if he kept holding and yet Taylor
kept holding Bernard and a point wasn’t taken off. Also, in the
second fight Hopkins was hit 5 times on the back of his head in the
early stages of the fight.
You also say that
“Incidentally, how do you think the families of those boxers who
lost their lives feel when Saint Bernard draws his thumb across his
throat, isuing a death threat? I'm sure they're over the moon aren't
they? Not.” Hopkins didn’t wear his Executioners mask before the
bell rang against De La Hoya because he didn’t think it would be
suitable or appropriate given what was happening in the Middle East
so Hopkins does think of others! Hopkins doesn’t wish on his
opponents to be seriously injured. In the post-fight press
conference of the second Hopkins-Taylor fight, Hopkins said that “I
want to enjoy everybody came out safe, nobody is sitting in the
emergency room myself or Jermain Taylor”.
By the way, Hopkins
has a publicist called Kelly Swanson so he isn’t a self-publicist
like you say he is and I notice that you continue to contradict
yourself. You said in round 1 of this Fan Fight that “He's not
overrated either” and now you’re saying “it could even be argued
that he's now OVERRATED."
You said that he’s
racist and the article that, which makes over half of your comments,
refers to the “disrespect of Puerto Rico”. You never said what you
are referring to when you’re saying he’s a racist so I’ll presume
that this is a referral to Hopkins throwing the Puerto Rico flag
down. I’ve told you why he did this and that’s because he wanted to
anger Trinidad and this is was shown, for example, when Trinidad
pushed Hopkins’ chin backwards with his forearm in the fight. But,
in fact, Hopkins went to Puerto Rico months after the fight and
publicly apologised to Trinidad but that wasn’t reported in the
media as much.
You criticise who
Hopkins has fought and many others also criticise the quality of
opponents that he has fought so far. But what you got to realise is
that Hopkins wanted to defend his middleweight crown 20 times and he
done that. He could only beat those that were in the middleweight
division at the time and if he had stepped out of the middleweight
division the options were Jones and Calzaghe. First let me clear up
the Jones scenario. What wasn’t written about the potential
Hopkins-Jones fight right after Hopkins beat Trinidad was that Jones
wanted to fight at 190 pounds as I have explained earlier in this
fan fight. With regards to Calzaghe and Calzaghe’s claim and what
some writers wrote that Hopkins ducked him, would Hopkins want to
fight abroad where there is a risk of a bad decision? George Foreman
said after Hopkins beat Hakkar that fighting Calzaghe abroad at
super-middleweight wasn’t that good of an option because of the risk
of a bad decision and Lampley agreed that Hopkins wouldn’t want to
fight Calzaghe – these are facts. And when Hopkins accomplished 20
consecutive middleweight title defences as a middleweight, he
elected to fight Taylor by asking the IBF for an exception to not
fight mandatory challenger Sam Soliman. And after he fought Taylor
twice, he stepped up to fight the best light-heavyweight who is
Antonio Tarver. And to address some of the criticism that Hopkins
received of allegedly not fighting Winky Wright, it was Wright who
took the Mosley fight when the two had the chance to fight each
other a couple of years ago.
You have also
criticised Hopkins for fighting after 40 but his plan was changed
after the bad judging decisions in the fights against Taylor. He
said that he feels that he could fight for even longer to try to
break Joe Louis’ record but he isn’t. The Tarver fight is his last
fight – win, lose or draw.
You said that “On
the last point, if he was that great in the first place why is he
still trying to secure his legacy at the age of 41 against a man
whose great claim to fame is knocking out a Roy Jones when he was a
shadow of his former self.” Hopkins already has his middleweight
legacy but now he wants to add to his legacy and secure another
feather in his cap by doing something that Sugar Ray Robinson didn't
do because of heat exhaustion and that is beating the best
light-heavyweight.
You said that
“Hopkins was p4p King without the skills of much better fighters
around him, including Jones Jr, Lewis and Tszyu”. I think that
Hopkins isn’t gifted with skills such as lightning hand speed but
this makes his accomplishments even more difficult. Hopkins’ mind
and ability to manufacture very good strategies such as against
Trinidad are underrated. You mention Jones Jnr, Lewis and Tszyu but
all these fighters lost in fights where they were overwhelming
favourites in and that’s why Hopkins’ achievement of 20 defences is
underrated. Lewis lost against Rahman and Jones was disqualified
against Montell Griffin in a fight where he was behind on two of the
three scorecards. Lewis didn’t keep the hunger he needed against
Rahman. He looked overweight and he attended a movie premiere two
weeks before the fight. Jones was frustrated in his first fight
against Griffin. Tszyu lost to Vince Phillips in Ring Magazine’s
1997 Upset of the Year, whereas when Bernard lost to Taylor, the
betting odds were very close. The point is that Hopkins kept hungry
and motivated during his 20 defences even though some of the
defences were against average opposition whereas other fighters such
as the fighters that you mentioned like Lewis, Jones and Tszyu
didn’t. Hopkins’ smartness inside the ropes is underrated given that
he isn’t gifted with the speed and power that some other fighters
have.
In this Fan Fight,
all the rounds have been won because of successful countering and I
have done that in this 4th round and I have delivered
some powerful lead shots of my own!
To summarise all this, Hopkins is a great speaker, has been a
tireless advocate for fighters, is a promoter, a self-manager, has a
record 20 middleweight defences in a period of over a decade, is
going to build houses from previously derelict houses and build
fitness centres in Philadelphia and has done this after spending 5
years in prison – given that he has done all this and as I’ve
already explained throughout this fan fight, BERNARD HOPKINS IS
UNDERRATED!!!!"
|
|
* Ladies And Gentlemen, Please Give These Two Men A Round Of
Applause In What Has Been A Fan Fight For The Ages.
The Final Score Reads As Follows.
39 To 38, To Your Winner.......And Exacting Revenge In The
Rematch, JJJJJJJJAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!
Jas, a great and tough fight with Enzo. Give us your thoughts on this
fight and are we going to see a 3rd?
Jas "The Executioner":
Enzo is a great
fighter. I won't be involved in any Fan Fights for a few weeks at least
but after a couple of months at least I'll give Enzo another fight in a
'rubber' match but I believe I didn't lose the first fight so a third
encounter wouldn't be a rubber match in my eyes. Thanks to Boxing2006,
the fastest growing boxing site which gives fans a say!
Enzo, what are your thoughts, and like
Jas was offered after the first fight, would you like a rematch now
that it's 1 to 1??
Enzo Macaroni:
Another tough fight, I just ran out of steam a little in
the last round, but Jas has proven himself to be a top fighter. I'd
love a rematch as we're pretty evenly matched, but give me a chance
to rest first as I've had three Fan Fights in three weeks! Good luck
to him in the future.... |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Fan Fight (April 3-9):
"Who Wins The
Possible Rematch: Hasim Rahman vs. Oleg Maskaev II?" |
|
Result at Time of
Stoppage:
Blue: 10, Red:
9
Jas "The Executioner
TKO 1 Goaden Teef |
|
Blue Corner: Jas "The
Executioner" (3-1, 2 KO's) - Rahman -
Red Corner: GoadenTeef (2-2) -
Maskaev
-
|
| -Round
1 - |
|
Blue:
"OK, first of all, I have to say that Rahman was AHEAD ON
ALL SCORECARDS going into the 8th round when he
was knocked out. In fact, on one scorecard, he was up by 7
points and he was 3 points up on the other two scorecards.
Rahman had the upper hand in the early stage of the fight.
Maskaev was slower and Rahman was able to land his very good
jab. Rahman can hurt Maskaev and this was shown in the first
fight when Maskaev was stung by a left hook to his chin in
the very first round. The easiness in which Rahman could
land his jab was shown by the fact that Maskaev had quite
considerable redness under his eye.
Since the win against Rahman,
Maskaev has had 3 losses – all by knockout. Since his fight
with Maskaev, Rahman has beaten Lewis, Barrett and has been
in the ring with a great- Evander Holyfield. The point is
that Rahman has more experience. Most people thought he won
his most recent fight against Toney and Boxing2006.com’s
poll, where 59.8% of people thought Rahman won the fight
compared to 19.6% of people thinking that Toney won the
fight,clearly showed this. Rahman knows that most people
thought he won the fight and this will give Rahman more
confidence because he did win the fight.
I mentioned that Maskaev has
had 3 losses since his fight against Rahman in addition to
his two losses against McCall and Tua before the fight with
Rahman. One of the 3 losses came against Kirk Johnson. In
this fight, Maskaev again retreated in the early stages of
the fight, where Johnson was aggressive, like he did against
Rahman. So I think that Rahman will use his very good jab
that proved successful in the first fight and use his
extremely powerful right hand to force Maskaev to retreat.
Maskaev does have a good chin but so does Rahman and this
was shown in their fight against each other. Rahman can take
quite a solid punch before going down.
MASKAEV IS PREDICTABLE. His
main offensive weapon is his right hand and that is the
punch that he looks to land. Maskaev definitely needs
another offensive weapon to add to his arsenal. Maskaev
doesn’t have great counter-punching abilities and this was
shown in Maskaev’s fight against Kirk Johnson where in the 4th
round Johnson threw a huge and slow right hand which missed
Maskaev by quite a big margin but Maskaev did not counter.
Instead, Maskaev adjusted his footwork and was squared-up
for a moment which was when Johnson threw a wide left hook
which hit Maskaev’s jaw, sending him out of the ring.
The fact is that RAHMAN IS
QUICKER. He was quite easily able to connect with his jab
which kept Maskaev off balance. When the two exchanged,
Maskaev at times was the one who retreated – you just have
to look at the 7th round to know this. Yes, I do
realise that Maskaev did sometimes exchange powerful blows
with Rahman but Maskaev did also retreat at times. One of
the reasons why Rahman was able to land his jab against
Maskaev was his greater reach of 3 inches. This will factor
into the possible rematch also. The jab will allow Rahman to
control the fight at a distance."
|
Red: "Being up on the
scorecards doesnt mean anything. Toney was ahead going into the
12th round the other night vs Rahman and had he won the final
round he would have pulled out the victory, in a fight I saw
Rahman clearly winning. So those judges don't know anything.
2ndly, despite Rahman beating Toney in my eyes, I could not
believe he did not take Toney out. He took out Lewis with a
single shot, yet Toney, who is a real middleweight took his best
shots. I think Rahman isnt what he used to be. The heavyweight
in whole arent, but Maskaev is a guy who has been over looked
for a long time now. And he used to be one of the most
destructive fighters out there. Not only beating Rahman, but
putting him through the ropes at that. Rahman does get careless
in every one of his fights, even when he's winning. I dont know
if he jus gets tired, bored or just lazy, but Maskaev is the
fighter who takes advantage of those opportunities, instead of
let them go by which is what Toney did. Maskaev will no doubt
come into this fight in top form. I have NEVER, EVER, seen him
come into a fight lackadaisical or out of shape. Ive never seen
him take an opponent lightly, whether it be a tuneup, or against
the top guys. His losses were odd and the two after Kirk Johnson
were because he did not take the time off needed to heal, so his
chin was still suspect, much like Vargas in his fight with
Rivera after his fight with Trinidad. He still wasn't healed.
Maskaev is now completely ready to fight for the heavyweight
championship and you have Rahman who is constantly known for
showing up out of shape or taking an opponent lightly. Even with
the draw, he was so nice about it and that's not the guy I can
count on. It's the guy who will accept nothing but a win and go
in there and risk it all. Not the guy who says "oh well, a draw
is fine with me". I want the animal and Maskaev is the animal in
this bout."
|
We're off to a great
start here as Jas and Goadenteef meet and exchange throughout
the round. Jas picking apart the fight's history and the
fighters in detail with precision punching. GoadenTeef using
more opinions, but showing a big heart for what he believes in.
* 10-9 Round To Blue * Great round,
edge to Jas
|
| - Round
2 - |
|
* Ladies And Gentlemen, This Fight Has Come To And End As GoadenTeef Has
Refused To Come Out For Round 2. The I.F.F.B.C. Rules Your
Winner By TKO,
JJJJJJJJAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!
Jas, give us your thoughts here and for your upcoming match next week.
Jas "The Executioner":
My focus is now on Enzo. He better be prepared because I just
might inflict the worst and most punishing loss he has received to date.
The loss that he may receive when we meet for the second time may even
be worse that the loss that he received last year from the greatest ever
fan fighter to date in my opinion who is Neckodeemus. This time I am
going to leave no room for error. I wouldn't have been this abrasive and
would have been more gracious like I have been in all my previuos fan
fights but the heat has been turned up by Enzo's comments. Everyone,
follow 'Enzo vs Jas II' because it will be a great fan fight. Everyone,
keep supporting Boxing2006.com, which gives boxing fans a say and has
the EXCLUSIVE fan fight feature.
GoadenTeef, what happened??
GoadenTeef: My
Bad
|
|
Blue: |
| * |
| - Round
3 - |
|
Blue: |
|
Red: |
| * |
| - Round
4 - FINAL ROUND! |
|
Red: |
|
Blue: |
| * |
| |
| |
| |
|
Click Here To
View March 2006's Fan Fights |
|
