| |
|
Fan Fight (Feb.
20-26): I.F.F.B.C.
Championship Fan Fight
"Which
trilogy was more thrilling? Gatti/Ward or Barerra/Morales?" |
|
Result at Time of Stoppage: Blue-Red:
19-19, 20-18, 20-18
Prisoner Ksc2 303
TKO 3 Neil1690 |
|
Blue Corner:
Prisoner Ksc2 303 (2-0, 2 KO's) - Gatti/Ward
Red Corner: Neil1690 I.F.F.B.C. CHAMP
(6-4, 3 KO's) - Barrera/Morales
Judges: "Threat"(Ref),
"The Real Meal", "Jr. Middle" |
|
-Round 1 - |
Blue:
"Before I begin, I'd like to say
something. I'd like to mention that both trilogies are masterpieces.
They are going to be talked about for decades to come. One day people
will look back on these fights as they do on the Ali-Frazier fights, and
talk to wide-eyed young boxers, about how they were there in person.
It's hard to pick which of these two were the best, however, that is
what we are here for, so let's do it.
Mickey Ward & Arturo Gatti came into the fight with less than perfect
records. At the time of the first fight, neither had the fame that the
trilogy would bring. Gatti had always been known as a brawler, and as
an accurate quote at the time said, his idea of defense was hiring a
good cutman.
In a sport where often, the fan does not get it's moneys worth, a recent
example being the fight where Antonio Margarito destroyed his opponent
in 74 seconds, the fans who were fortunate enough to witness these fight
firsthand, and those who saw them on television, were given their moneys
worth and more. There is no way you could possibly ask for more from
these fights.
The worst thing you can say about this fight is that there was not
enough defense. Even though after the first fight, there was an increase
in defense, especially on Gatti's part, a lack of defense isn't
something you tend to complain about in boxing. You don't wanna see a
bunch of missed punches, a bunch of grabbing, a bunch of dancing around,
avoiding the other man. You want to see two guys getting in the ring
and hitting each other. The point of a fight is to see who is the
best. Not just the best at delivering punishment, but also the best at
TAKING punishment. And let's not misunderstand anything here...these
two men took an INSANE amount of punishment. They also gave just as
good, if not better than they took.
In the first fight, Gatti and Ward dropped any pretense of defense and
just beat on each other with such force and such frightning power that
it was unlike anything I had ever seen up to this point. A buddy was
watching it with me and during the now legendary ninth round, he said,
without moving his eyes from the screen, "These guys are monsters". How
they took such punishment is beyond me.
These fights were filled with offense, offense and more offense. The
two men would get knocked down with tremendous shots and then proving
their heart would rise and continue taking and dishing out massive
amounts of pain.
Something else to think about is this: All three fights went the
distance. Both men had a never say die attitude, and refused to give up
despite suffering horrible bloody cuts, a broken hand (Gatti), and no
doubt, many rib injuries. In fact, I would venture to say that the
tremendous body shot that Gatti took in the ninth round was just as bad
if not worse than the one that De La Hoya took against Hopkins, however
Gatti got up at the 8 count and continued, not just pushing it another
round, but continuing to dish out punches and taking the fight to the
limit.
And the fact that these were not elite fighters, made it all the much
better. these weren't two guys who we had already put up on pedestal.
These weren't high profile guys such as De La Hoya, Hopkins or Pretty
Boy. These were two guys who while boxing fans knew them, to the mass
public they weren't as well known as the previously mentioned fighters.
Therefore, this was a much more intimate & personal battle. These were
guys we didn't know, but came to know. We saw them grow through their
fights, adapting to each other. Gatti realized he couldn't just stand
there and bang with Ward, so he adapted and began more defensive
fighting, and ended up taking the second and third fight.
These two guys walked into the ring above average fighters, and walked
out of the ring having cemented their place in boxing history forever,
regardless of whether titles were on the line, regardless of what their
records at the time were, and regardless of who they had fought up to
that point, or who they would fight afterwards. Their names will
forever be linked to each other, just as Muhammad Ali's and Joe
Frazier's still is today, as having taken part in one of the all time
great trilogies Boxing has ever seen."
|
Red:
"Alright, I take some of your points and am
glad you enjoyed the Gatti/Ward trilogy, but for me it falls short when
compared to the Morales/Barrera trilogy, the two finest Mexican boxers
of this generation. Every single point you make in favour of the Gatti/Ward
trilogy can all be attributed to the Mexican trilogy and then some.
First of all you mention that all three fights went the distance and
thus this was testamount to both competitors punishment threshold but
bear in mind that all three Morales/Barrera bouts went the championship
distance unlike Gatti/Ward which were only scheduled for ten. Secondly,
you mention Gatti's broken hands, bruising etc.. but Morales' face was
busted up in all three fights as well as a broken nose in fight III.
Barrera also suffered a nasty gash in fight I and both took a pummeling
to the body so arguably both
Morales and Barrera took as much punishment as Gatti/Ward if not more.
Thirdly, you mention the 'personal intimacy' of Gatti and Ward's
battles, well I think the Morales/Barrera rivalry was about 100 times as
great and to be fair there are few high profile trilogies that even come
close to the ferocity of this one in terms of each fighters dislike for
the other. Consider all of the antics which took place outside of the
ring and in Barrera's case some of his in-the-ring antics(low blows,
elbows etc..) coupled with the fact that both are proud Mexican warriors
known for their toughness and endurance in the ring and you have a
pressure situation which totally eclipsed Gatti/Ward. This is before you
consider that all three fights were for major championships (particulalry
important for Morales who had high regard for the WBC belt, seeing it as
the 'Mexican title'), coupled with the pound for pound status that
depended on each outcome then it could easily be argued that Morales and
Barrera had much more on the line and yet still produced three epic
contests. After fight I Gatti/Ward were guaranteed millions and although
this was also the case for Erik and Marco after their first fight, both
Mexicans were elite fighters who had far higher aspirations in the sport
than Gatti and Ward. The jr welterweights are intrinsically linked
because they produce a good stylistic matchup (and more importantly
brings them their biggest cheques) whereas Eric and Marco were forced
into battle to settle pound for pound differences along with the obvious
title of 'best Mexican' also on the line. The pressures on these two far
outweighed those of Gatti and Ward by the time of their rematches.
Throw in for good measure that all three Morales/Barrera fights took
place at different weights over a period of five years (unlike Gatti/Ward)
thus adding furhter intrigue and you have a trilogy that is arguably one
of the greatest non-heavyweight spectacles of all time."
|
"Threat": * 10-9 Round To
Red *
"The Real Meal": * 10-9 Round To Blue *
"Jr. Middle": * 10-9 Round To Blue *
|
|
- Round 2 - |
Red:
"O.K, time to break the trilogies up a bit.
I am not going to deny that Gatti/Ward was not a brilliant fight to
watch and the follow-ups weren't bad either, but to be honest, the
rematch and fight III did not mean that much to me, as in boxing terms,
the outcome of the fights were not particulary significant. This, for
me, detracts from the spectacle hugely. Couple this with the fact that
Gatti was and is, to most observers, far superior to Ward who, as you
pointed out earlier, is simply an 'above average' fighter who never
really threatened true championship class. Gatti fought the rematch like
he should (O.K, pretty much!) and thus the blueprint was there for fight
III. Everybody knew that if Gatti employed enough movement and used his
superior boxing offence effectively (coupled with his big advantage in
punching power), he would emerge victorious and that proved to be the
case in fights II and III. However, with Morales and Barrera things were
not as straight forward- both are pretty evenly matched in all
departments, both can fight on the front and back foot, both have decent
chins and similar power and both have their own signature punches. It
could be argued that Morales had a better armoury of weapons
offensively, but of course there was always the fascination of how
Barrera would approach the fight and to see if he could tactically
negate Morales' offensive arsenal. As it turned out, all three were
razor thin decisions adding spectacularly to the whole extravaganza
whereas the judges scorecard were pretty academic in fights II and III
of Gatto/Ward.
Also each subsequent fight between Morales and Barrera brought
something new and different to the trilogy. Fight I was an epic with
both showing tremendous heart and skill whilst displaying their immense
talents at the same time. Fight II was a more passive affair, but still
riveting all the same as both looked to counter each other with flashes
of fight I appearing at certain intervals. Fight III was a mixture of
both and a tale of two halves as Barrera started well with Morales
dominating at the finish and nearly getting his man out of there. Put
quite simply, the Gatti/Ward trilogy could not match this variation and
in no way was the outcome of any of their fights as significant as any
of the Barrera/Morales battles. These are key fundamental reasons as to
why the Gatti/Ward trilogy, as entertaining as it might have been,
simply did not quite compare to the Mexican battles in my humble
opinion."
|
Blue:
"Neil, you made some decent points, and now
allow me to address some of those.
First of all, I believe you meant "tantamount" or "testament" not "Testamount",
but that's neither here nor there. I got what you were saying.
1..The MAB & Morales trilogy were for belts. That's all well and good,
but I believe that lends a little more credence to Gatti-Ward because
due to the fact that there were no belts to be had, they had to fight
not for some fake B.S. sanctioning organization, but for their own
pride.
True, they didn't hate each other like MAB & Morales, but does that
really take away from what Gatti Ward did? Does that somehow elevate
the MAB/Morales trilogy to higher status because of the fact that the
guys hated each other? I don't think so. It makes for a little bit
more drama, but that's basically it.
2. Although the fight was for the titles, the phony sanctioning bodies
that I mentioned before, stepped in and basically deducted from the
trilogy's meaning by reversing the decisions. In the first fight,
Morales was declared the winner by split decision, but then the WBO took
the belt away from Morales, and gave it and the recognition of champion
to Barrera.
Then again two years later in the rematch, after the two bodies refused
to work with each other AGAIN, the WBC, perhaps in a jab at the WBO,
took the belt from Barrera and gave it to Morales, along with the
championship recognition.
I mean, this was about as big a detraction to a championship fight as
you can have, next to some crazed nut paragliding down onto the ropes.
Now, some might say that adds to the appeal, but no one wants to see
fights and have to deal with shady so-called sanctioning bodies deciding
who they think won, rather than the judges.
3. The MAB & Morales fights went twelve rounds rather than the 10 that
Gatti-Ward went. So is that detrimental to Gatti-Ward? These two men
let it all hang out, and just piled on the pain for thirty rounds total,
and yet it's somehow not good enough because they didn't fight six more
rounds?
If the fights had been twelve, none of us can sit here and say that they
would have went the full twelve, anymore than we can say they would NOT
have went the full twelve. I'm not going to insult the FF system here
by alluding that they would have gone the full twelve. I'd like to
THINK they would have, but we will never know. Just like we'll never
know if the MAB & Morales fights would have gone the full fifteen like
they did back in the day.
4. The different weights. That doesn't really matter to most boxing
fans. They don't give a damn if boxers are fighting three fights at one
weight, or three fights at three different weights. What matters is
what goes on in the ring, and while those two definitely did deliver,
the outside influences tarnished what should have been, and in some ways
still was, their crowning achievement.
Now let me address the Gatti-Ward trilogy.
According to an HBO.COM article just prior to Gatti's fight with
Daamgard, Nat Gotlieb commented on the trilogy, and used several quotes
from Compubox in relation to the trilogy. I shall mention just a few,
but the link is here so if you want to check the facts, feel free: note:
the caps and whatever, belong to the compubox, not me http://www.hbo.com/boxing/columns/gottlieb/012406.shtml
1. "Round 5 was a classic. They combined to throw 179 punches, they
landed 98, 54 by Gatti and 44 for Ward. The CompuBox average (of all
fights) for connects in a round by a single fighter is 20. Of those 98,
88 WERE POWER PUNCHES. Not pitty-pat no-jabs, these warriors were
unloading on each other..."
2. "Erik Morales and Marco Antonio Barrera landed a combined total of
75 punches in Round 5 in their first meeting."
3. "Round 9 should be in everyone's top five of greatest three minutes.
They LANDED 110 TOTAL PUNCHES - 102 WERE POWER PUNCHES. They threw 168
total punches. Which brings us back to the 110 combined punches they
landed. The combined average landed per round (for all fights) is 40
punches, 20 each. Do the math. THEY LANDED ALMOST THREE TIMES AS MANY
PUNCHES AS THE COMBINED AVERAGE!!!"
4. "Where does Round 9 Gatti-Ward rank in the Greatest Rounds category?
Riddick Bowe and Evander Holyfield combined to land a total of 69
punches in the 10th round of their first fight."
5. "In what was considered one of the greatest rounds in history, Marvin
Hagler and Tommy Hearns combined to land 106 total punches in the first
round of their classic. Gatti-Ward (110) tops them all."
Their first fight was voted Fight of the Year, with the aforementioned
now legendary 9th round "Round of the Year", and some experts calling
the 9th round, "Round of the Century".
Morales & Barrera fought their first fight in 2000 and won Fight of the
Year honors. Their second fight in 2002 was not deemed fight of the
year. What fight won that, I wonder? Oh yeah, Gatti-Ward I. Then
Barrera and Morales fought again in 2004. Surely this masterpiece
trilogy, equal to or superior to Gatti-Ward in all ways, won it that
year, right? Wait..no they didn't. However, Gatti-Ward won the Fight
of the year honors for 2003.
In fact, I'll argue that the only reason that Gatti-Ward's second fight
didn't get fight of the year honors was because it occurred the same
year as their initial legendary fight.
So to sum it all up, Gatti Ward fought two fights that got Fight of the
year, and another that would have possibly won if it hadn't been in the
same years as their first fight, and Morales Barrera got one fight of
the year.
In fact, Lou DiBella was quoted upon the final fight's finish that the
thirty rounds would live forever in Boxing History.
The three Gatti/Ward fights were fairly clear, albeit close at times, in
who won the fight. There were no fake sanctioning bodies to muddy the
picture, no phony belts to get in the way of a good fight. Too often,
fighters take opponents because of the fact that the WBO, WBC, WBA, Boyz
II Men, ABC, BBD, or whatever alphabet group is doing fights this week,
may take the belt away if they don't fight the mandatory. So the
fighter goes on and instead of fighting the guy everyone wants to see,
they fight some third rate Rocky wannabe who has no business being in
the top ten, much less the top 110.
In this case, Ward and Gatti were not fighting for some belt, some
tangible proof that they were a top caliber fighter, no they were
fighting for the fans, and for the respect of the other fighter and of
their selves.
And in the end, what more could you ask for in a fight? For two boxers
to leave everything they came with in the ring, to not hold back on
anything. To not run from the other guy like De La Hoya did against
Trinidad, to not hug and hold like John Ruiz, and to not devolve into
illegal and dishonest tactics such as Andrew Golota, and to not
blindside your opponent like Barrera did Morales when Morales turned to
his corner early, thinking the round was over. Two warriors standing
toe to toe and letting it all hang out, so that when they finally do
exit the ring, they can know in their hearts that there was nothing more
they could do.
The fighters knew it, the judges knew it, and the fans knew it. This
was the greatest trilogy since Ali-Frazier."
|
"Threat": * 10-9 Round To
Blue *
"The Real Meal": * 10-9 Round To Blue *
"Jr. Middle": * 10-9 Round To Blue *
|
|
- Round 3 - |
|
Blue:
"I'll try to keep this one short and sweet. In the first Gatti-Ward
fight, the two fighters combined for 1,329 punches (connecting at
46%) , 907 of those were power punches (connecting at 57%) . MAB &
Morales threw 1,207 punches (34%) 663 of which were power
punches(37%) nearly 300 LESS than Gatti-Ward.
In the second fight, Gatti-Ward threw
1,418 (32%) punches with 847 (48%) coming by power punches. MAB &
Morales threw 1,206 (34%) punches and combining AGAIN for 663 (37%).
In the third fight, Gatti-Ward
threw 1,484punches(32%), 862(41%) being power punches. MAB &
Morales by comparison came with 1,573 punches(33%) with 1,023 (39%).
The trilogy of Gatti-Ward
combined for 4,231 punches thrown out of which 2,616 were power
punches. For Morales & MAB, 3,986 punches were thrown, out of which
2,349 were power punches.
So, to sum up, Gatti Ward
threw more punches, threw a higher percentage of power punches, and
over the course of the three fights, often landed at a greater rate.
And the end result of the
Gatti Ward trilogy left a clear cut example of who was the better
fighter. Arturo Gatti. At the end of the Barrera & Morales
Trilogy, they were no closer to deciding who was the better fighter,
than they were when they started. As you so graciously pointed out,
the fights were razor think decisions, so what outcome was there?
There was no difference in people's opinions of the two fighters
than when they began. Both were considered great fighters, and
proved it.
In the case of Gatti-Ward, the two guys
were elevated to almost royalty with fans. I mean, look at how many
fans came to watch Gatti get annihilated against Mayweather (after he
had to struggle to make weight, I might add). Gatti's career was made
on that trilogy, and Ward cemented his place in history with those three
brutally fought bouts, even though he won only the first one. He
retired soon after the third, and rightly so, and now has occasionally
worked Gatti's corner.
The two fighters are not regarded the
same as they were when they fought the first time. They're now more
highly regarded, at least in the aspect of being total warriors,
having an immeasurable amount of heart, and determination.
Morales & Barrera?
Well...we knew how good these guys were going in, and our opinions
haven't changed, other than to say that was a hell of a trilogy
(which may end up being a quadrilogy, and thus negate this whole
debate)."
|
|
* Ladies And Gentlemen, This Fight Has Come To And End As Neil1690 Has
Refused To Come Out For Round 3. The I.F.F.B.C. Rules Your
Winner By TKO,
AND THE NEEEEEEEEEEEEWW FAN FIGHT CHAMPIOOONNNNN...
PRRRRRIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRR!!!
Prisoner, congratulations on becoming Fan Fight Champion. Tell us about
this fight and would you be willing to give Neil a rematch?
Prisoner Ksc2 303:
Well, First off I'd like to say thank you to the entire
Boxing2006 staff for allowing me to participate. Thank you to
SweetChuck for introducing me to the website in the first place.
In reference to the fight, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand I'm
happy to get the win, although I hate that I got it the way I did. I
feel kinda like Paul Newman's opponent at the end of the Hustler when he
packs up his stick and forfeits. The guy standing there looking around
saying, "I don't wanna win like this...not like this".
Going in I felt a bit wary that I was going up against the champ so
soon, but now that it's over, I just feel cheated because although I no
doubt earned a win, and would have without a doubt have won no matter if
he had come back out or not, it pisses me off that it ended the way it
did.
As you said this is the third time that this has happened with him, and
I see no reason to give him an immediate rematch. Further down the
line, perhaps, after he has proven that he can go more than a match or
two without throwing in the towel (Whether the issue is in his control
or not). Before I commit myself to going a full four rounds, I wanna
know that my opponent is in it for the long haul as well.
That being said, Neil put up a good fight, he was just overmatched
here. It's not his fault he drew me. Maybe he was just tired of being
on top and decided to go out to an obvious winner. He saw my history,
he saw the two fights I had before, and he knew that losing to me would
be an easy way out. No shame in losing to someone of my stature.
However, as with all good things, his reign has come to an end. He may
have been good at one time, but he's gone. He has nothing left. He's
like Frank Thomas with the White Sox, skills diminished. He should ride
off into the sunset and market outdoor cookware or something, because he
doesn't want to get back in the ring with me.
Once again, thanks to everyone that has supported me. As for my future,
I'll sit back a little while, take care of some personal issues, and
when I make my return, you'll be the first to know.
Neil, this marks the 3rd time you have lost the title due to being
unable to reach the 24 hour time limit. Tell us what happened and
would you like to force an immediate rematch?
Neil1690:
Sorry for not getting in touch sooner. I
was away for the weeken and was
pretty much cmashe the whole time and did not find a computer. Sorry
about
that but all credit to the opponent who was doing well. Sorry again.
|
|
* |
|
- Round 4 - FINAL ROUND! |
|
Red: |
|
Blue: |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
Fan Fight (Feb
13-19):
"Who
is the Greatest in the Last Decade?" |
|
Result at Time of Stoppage: Blue:
20,
Red: 17
Jas "The Executioner"
TKO 3 Kobra-Kai |
|
Blue Corner:
Jas "The Executioner" (2-0, 1 KO) -
Bernard Hopkins
Red Corner: Kobra-Kai (4-2, 3 KO's) - Roy
Jones Jr. |
|
-Round 1 - |
Blue:
"There
are two ways to approach this topic – by looking what the fighters have
done inside and outside of the ring. I’m going to firstly focus on
Hopkins’ accomplishments outside the squared circle. Hopkins overcame
the adversity of spending 5 years in one of the toughest penitentiaries,
the Graterford Penitentiary. He was only 17 when he stepped into prison
and he had to overcome spending 5 years in a place where he saw rape and
people committing suicide. Hopkins could well have spent 12 years in the
prison but the sentence was reduced to 5 years with a lengthy probation
time, in which Hopkins had to stay disciplined or otherwise he wouldn’t
have had a boxing career. So when you look at “Who is the Greatest in
the Last Decade?” you have to look at each fighters accomplishments
inside and outside the ring. Roy Jones has not overcome the level of
adversity that Hopkins has had to. Hopkins nearly died due to getting
stabbed and Hopkins overcame that to accomplish what he has. Hopkins
lost his first fight by a four-round Majority Decision against Clinton
Mitchell who’s from Yonkers, New York but this did not discourage
Hopkins. Jones has faced some adversities such as sometimes not having a
good relationship with his father but Hopkins didn’t haven’t a father
for much of his life because his father was an alcoholic and used drugs.
Jones did get robbed in the 1988 Olympics final which Jones described as
the worst day of his life but Hopkins did have many tough days himself
such as almost dying and spending 5 years in prison. The judges did give
Hopkins his last two losses against
Taylor
but most people thought that Hopkins won both the fights. In those two
fights against
Taylor,
the contests were much closer than the Jones fights against Tarver and
Johnson, and particularly the instances when Jones got knocked out by
Tarver and Johnson. In these fights Jones didn’t look sufficiently
motivated and this asks the question of how much Jones thinks of and
values his legacy. On the other hand, Hopkins overwhelmed Taylor on the
power punch count by landing 69 more power punches than Taylor over the
course of the two fights between Hopkins and Taylor. Jones didn’t even
believe that he could beat Tarver the third time they met. In fact,
Jones said after he fought Tarver the third time that he couldn’t go out
by getting knocked out by Tarver, he had to go out in a better way. It
seems to me that Jones therefore already had a losing mentality going
into the ring with Tarver for the third time. And that’s the boxer who
you pick to be the greatest in the last decade? You even said in your
last Fan Fight that “the Taylor wins were controversial” and “the Tarver
wins over Jones…were by KO and by beat down”. Also, it has been argued
that Jones has ducked some opponents such as Joe Calzaghe. And is also
known that Jones didn’t want to fight Tarver when Tarver was the number
one ranked light-heavyweight across the board but eventually Jones did
fight Tarver and Jones put up a lacklustre display in the first
Tarver-Jones fight which most people thought Jones didn’t win. On the
other hand, Hopkins has not dodged anybody. This is shown in the fact
Hopkins fought Taylor instead of fighting the IBF mandatory Soliman
because Hopkins asked the IBF for an exception to not fight Soliman.
Hopkins has also called out Tarver. I believe that Jones was going to
fight Trinidad at one point but would Jones have done the job on
Trinidad that Hopkins did? I don’t believe so. Hopkins is not a
one-dimensional fighter and this was shown in Hopkins’ fight against
Trinidad and in Hopkins’ fight against De La Hoya, whereas Jones is a
largely one-dimensional boxer. Hopkins proved he could box against De La
Hoya and Hopkins has displayed his fighting qualities in fights such as
the Trinidad fight in which Hopkins out-boxed Trinidad on the outside
and then knocked out Trinidad. Many people expected Hopkins to exercise
dirty tactics and possibly get disqualified but Hopkins stayed
disciplined. And speaking on disqualification, I recall Jones getting
disqualified in a fight against Montell Griffin in which Jones was
losing on two of the three judges scorecards. Jones looked frustrated
and not fully motivated whereas in the same year as the Jones-Griffin
fight, Hopkins was highly motivated and actually knocked out Johnson who
was unbeaten at the time and later beat Jones. Griffin was clearly on
the canvas on one knee and to punch him twice while he is on a knee is
not very clever to say the least. Jones did knock out Griffin in the
rematch but the frustration-fuelled actions in the first fight are
surely not the actions of the greatest in the last decade."
|
Red: "First off, good luck Jas.
Ok, here we go. There has not been a fighter as dominant and as amazing
looking as Jones Jr. since Muhammad Ali. Bernard Hopkins just doesnt
compare. Hopkins barely made a name for himself not long ago when he
beat Trinidad, that was the fight that put him on the map. This wasnt a
decade ago, this was recently. Then he went on to fight an out of prime
DeLaHoya. That's it. Jones Jr. was on the map long long time ago.
Beating Toney wasnt just the beginning. His resume far surpasses that of
Hopkins, and his ring skills are clearly superior, but not only that,
some of the best skills in the ring the whole world has ever seen. Roy
Jones was magnificent and probably the best fighter P4P umong Ali and
Joe Louis as far as the greatest to ever live go. Hopkins will never
attain that high, even if he were to beat Tarver in his next fight.
Entertaining goes a long way as well. Hopkins may dominate at times, but
puts the crowd to sleep. Jones was flash and fun to watch, and never
lost a single round. He was unbelievable. Jones put combinations
together like no other fighter and his fights go in the books as some
great ones.
And to add on top of this all, JONES BEAT HOPKINS!"
|
Jas and Kobra meet at the center of the ring for this one. Jas comes
right out and lands a monster right hand to back Kobra to the ropes,
seconds into the fight. Kobra didn't know what hit him. Jas applies the
pressure and keeps Kobra on the ropes as he lands combinations to the
body. Kobra may have expected a different Jas as he doesn't look like he
knows where he is at the moment. Jas carefully picking his shots, lands
a huge uppercut and Kobra staggers sideways to the corner. Jas pounding
on Kobra who is doing his best with his hands up. Jas just too much here
for Kobra. Kobra opens up to throw in some punches, but nothing enough
to back Jas off. Jas all over Kobra and a left to the body sends Kobra
buckled over. Kobra is in trouble here. A right hand to the head and
Kobra staggers forward and DING DING, saved by the bell!
* 10- 8 Round to Blue * No Knockdowns, Just
Dominant
|
|
- Round 2 - |
Red: "So in knowing that Jones
dominated Hopkins, how can Hopkins be any greater, especially since the
opposition of both men differs a great deal. Hopkins is a great, dont
get me wrong, but he isnt the greatest. Muhammad Ali best defines the
greatest and Jones Jr. is the closest in comparison as far as that goes.
Roy Jones could do it all, including move up the heavyweight to win a
world title in only his first move up. Holding ever single belt at light
heavy was a cinch and Jones was so good that he would toy with his
opponents, then dismanle them piece by piece. Hopkins just plays the
waiting game and uses his slow and boring technique, which although
works, but who would you rather watch? Or who would most rather watch?
Jones only got booed in his 1st fight with Tarver, but no doubt it was
close and he gave his best. Hopkins gets booed way too often, in nearly
every fight, and in his fights with Taylor, he didnt do enough. He didnt
put in that extra 100% to get the job done or act like it meant
everything to him. Jones does that. And although he never needed to in
the past, when push came to shove, he showed his versatlity and overcame
nearly every obstacle."
|
Blue: "You
mentioned that Jones beat Hopkins and therefore Hopkins cannot be any
greater but the fight between the two was 13 years ago in 1993. Hopkins
was not experienced enough and did not have the Olympic amateur
experience that Jones did. Jones did not crush Hopkins. There were very
few punches landed in the fight. If the two were to fight now, Hopkins
will be closer to Jones. You said that Jones could do it all and he is
versatile but I and many others believe that Roy Jones is a largely
one-dimensional boxer. Also, even though Roy Jones did win the WBA
Heavyweight title against Ruiz in 2003, he did not fight the best
heavyweight. Jones did not go up against Lewis or Byrd who are better
fighters than Ruiz. You said that Jones fights like it means everything
to him – was this particularly the case in the first fight against
Griffin, in the second fight against Tarver and in the fight against
Johnson? You mention that Jones beat Toney but this wasn’t a major
obstacle because Toney possessed inferior hand speed. And Toney never
had the experience that he has now and this was shown in his fight
against Jones where Toney got knocked down following his imitation of
Jones putting his arms down his side. Who else has Jones fought? The
only other big names he has fought are Ruiz, Johnson and Tarver. Ruiz
was hardly the best heavyweight at the time. Jones lost against Johnson
and lost against Tarver twice with their first meeting being very
controversial. This shows that Jones has failed against big obstacles.
You said that Jones will go down as one of the greatest ever – no way!
This is because Jones’ recent losses were mostly convincing whereas most
people thought Hopkins won his fights against Taylor. You said that
Hopkins didn’t act like it meant everything to him but Hopkins was
unbeaten for as long as he was because he didn’t underrate his
opponents, whereas Jones didn’t look like he gave his best particularly
in the fight against Johnson. Also, where is Jones on most Pound for
Pound lists? Nowhere to be seen."
|
* 10-9 Round To Blue *
|
|
- Round 3 - |
|
Blue:
"I said in the first round that you have to look at the fighters outside the ring as well as inside squared circle. And one of
Hopkins biggest highlights outside the ring is his ability to speak. In relation to speaking smart, Hopkins goes against the stereotype of fighters. People can learn many things that are outside boxing from Hopkins as Hopkins has been through and overcome many tough obstacles himself.
Hopkins speaks at great length and the media find him very humerous. Hopkins is a much greater speaker than any other current fighters including Roy Jones. Hopkins spoke at the centre hearings in 1999 while some other fighters didn’t show up and he was given 15 minutes to speak when others only had 5 minutes to speak. At this point, Hopkins wasn’t making that much in terms of money and he spoke for what he believed in. Hopkins has spoken for better wages and treatment for fighters. Hopkins continued to be an advocate for fighters even when he was on top whilst many other fighters get comfortable and choose not to challenge the traditional big powers in the system. Because Hopkins fought for this he wasn’t getting the fights he wanted soon enough but Hopkins still fought for boxing reform. Hopkins sacrificed this to continue to keep his principle. Hopkins is a born leader and his fights outside the ring are those that mark the greatest in the last decade.
Also, Hopkins was criticised by Merchant, Lampley and Foreman after his fight against the WBC mandatory challenger Hakkar. Hopkins was criticised by the HBO team for being a bad manager and was criticised by Larry Merchant for calling out the top light-middleweights. Larry Merchant, who else is Hopkins supposed to fight then if he’s beaten Trinidad and many other middleweights? Hopkins called out Mosley, Vargas and Roy Jones. Also Larry, Hopkins had to fight Hakkar because he’s a mandatory meaning that if he didn’t fight him, he would have got stripped! Hopkins overcame this criticism to become the Boxing Association of America Manager of the Year. Hopkins was labelled a fool and was criticised for not cashing in the lottery ticket and fighting Roy Jones for $6 million. Hopkins then earnt $8 million plus a percentage of the pay-per-view revenue to fight De La Hoya. Who’s the fool now? All this illustrates that Hopkins has overcome criticism outside the ring and achieved milestones outside
the ring that Roy Jones hasn’t.
You said that Roy Jones has far superior ring skills than Hopkins but I wouldn’t say that this is the case now. This is because previously Roy Jones used his legs as his defence and this was shown in his fight against Hopkins, but now Jones’ is less mobile. Jones defence is definitely worse than the defence of Hopkins and this was shown in recent Jones fights
against Tarver and Johnson. Jones was nailed in the second Tarver fight, against Glen Johnson and Jones was hit with a right hook that had Jones hurt in the 11th round of the third Tarver meeting. Hopkins has mastered the basics. You will rarely see Hopkins get hit flush and this is shown throughout Hopkins’ career. Apart from the first Mercado fight where Hopkins got knocked down twice, Hopkins has never been on the floor and has never looked like to be heading to the canvas. And Hopkins accurate punching coupled with Jones decreasing defensive qualities make for a Hopkins win over Jones if the two were to fight now."
|
|
* Ladies And Gentlemen, This Fight Has Come To And End As Jas Has Been
Too Dominant And The Referee Has Waived This One Off, No Need To
Continue. Your
Winner By TKO, JAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!
Jas, great performance here. Dominant from beginning until the end. Tell
us about this fight and where do you go from here?
Jas "The Executioner":
Firstly, I would like to thank "Threat", BoxingVideos.net and
fans of Fan Fight. After the first round, I didn't think I would lose. I
would like to big up Kobra-Kai as he did provide some resistance. It's
good to see Neil1690 put his I.F.F.B.C. title on the line and I think
that he will beat Prisoner Ksc2 303 by a points victory. I would want to
go up against Neil. Everyone, peace and live life with no regrets.
Kobra, a tough fight. You just seemed to be outworked in each round.
Whats your assessment on Jas and where do you go from here?
Kobra-Kai:
|
|
* |
|
- Round 4 - FINAL ROUND! |
|
Red: |
|
Blue: |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan Fight (Feb.
6-12):
"Who Should Kassim Ouma
Fight Next: Wright, Taylor, Mosley/Vargas Winner, Karmazin,
Forrest, Quartey, Sturm, Other?" |
|
Result at Time of Stoppage: Blue:
20,
Red: 18
KO Artist TKO 3
GoadenTeef |
|
Blue Corner:
KO Artist
(1-1) -
Roman Karmazin
Red Corner: GoadenTeef (1-1) -
Mosley/Vargas Winner |
|
-Round 1 - |
Blue: "As a boxing fan I was
shocked when Karmazin beat Ouma. Where did this dude come from? All I
know about Roman was that he was supposed to fight De La Hoya and it got
canceled. Then he drops Ouma twice in the third round of their fight on
his way to win a decision. I think Ouma should fight Roman next because
if he doesn't other fighters can continue to avoid him. I think many top
fighters breathed a sigh of release when Karmazin beat him. Now they can
all say, "Well he still needs to beat Karmazin then we can talk about a
fight." It doesn't matter how many fringe contenders he beats, the top
fighters know he had an off night with Roman and will use that to stay
out of the ring with him. The winner of Vargas/Mosley would be a good
fight for Ouma but not a good fight for the Vargas/Mosley winner.
Whoever wins that fight would have rejuvenated their career and would
not want to fight one of the toughest fighters they could. Especially
when the risk is not going to be worth the reward. Ouma is good and
would give whoever wins a good fight but only hare core fans would be
excited about that fight. Causal fans wouldn't care about it and
therefore the winner wouldn't want it. He needs to fight and beat Roman
so that the top fighters have no excuses and he can prove that he had an
off night. Once he beats Karmazin the top fighters have no where go and
he can start getting those fights we know he deserves."
|
Red: "Yeah but, did Tszyu need
to face Phillips again to get where he got? Did Judah get Tszyu again in
order to get the title shots he's been getting? Heck, just look at Gatti.
Doesnt need to face Floyd again and gets the title shot in just 2 fights
probably. Mayorga also rings a bell. Ouma can look passed that guy and
because of the reason you stated, "he had an off night". Did Tyson need
to rematch Douglas to get further in his career? Everyone knows what an
off night is and it happens to the best of them. Karmazin isnt that good
and Ouma would probably score a quick knockout in a rematch which would
proove what we already know, thT he had an off night, so that would
further take time away from his prime career when he could be fighting
some of the bigger names. For Karmiz, that was his biggest fight and
only fight anyone knows him from. He will dissapear in the division
eventually. Ouma doesnt need him. Ouma needs the winner of Vargas vs
Mosley. Those are the 2nd tier names he needs to beat in order to fight
the Wrights and Taylors. He should be like all the fighters I anmed who
losta fight and get the title shot in just two fights. Ouma is too
good for that. Let him beat Vargas or Mosley, show who he is to the word
that he beata top name that had fought a DeLaHoya, then fight the best!"
|
Very good opening by both men to begin round 1. KO Artist clean with the
jab and his punches, very precise as to what his argument is about.
GoadenTeef mixing it up a bit more, however not staying as patient and
KO Artist is able to pick off most of his shots. GoadenTeefs argument is
loud and clear however and most would agree, but KO Artist steals the
round with his ring generalship, looking like he has it planned out.
* 10-9 Round To Blue * Good round by both!
|
|
- Round 2 - |
Red: "Mosley and Vargas are the
gatekeepers now. Ouma beats either of them and he's a big name all of a
suddun. Beating Karmazin does nothing. People barely know who Ouma is
and they certainly dont know Karmizin unless theyre die hard boxing
fans. A win over Karmizin puts him right where he is, in the no name
section. Beating a name means it's televised on HBO and forgive me if Im
wrong, but wasnt that Ouma fight on HBO latino or something? He needs to
get back on prime time and ppv. and Karmiz is hardly that. Vargas vs
Mosley is ppv at that, so that tells you that Ouma would be in the lime
light with a fight vs either of them. The win just propells him. And
hey, he may not beat Wright and he's too small for Taylor, win or lose,
BUT if he works his way up fighting the gatekeepers then there's more in
store for Ouma and the right way to success."
|
Blue: "Your making my point for
me. All those fighters that you mentioned that lost a fight and
rebounded without a rematch were the draw before their loss. Their name
was already established and the loss didn't really hurt them because
their name was already big enough that fans forgot about the lost. Their
name kept the doors open. You said yourself, "People barley know who
Ouma is." I think it was one of the first main events he had had and you
right it was on HBO Latino. His name isn't big enough for this lost to
be ignored. Look at Judah. His lose to Baldimor didn't stop his mega
fight with Mayweather because he has a name. Now look at Rocky Juarez.
His name wasn't that big when he lost to Soto and now his fights haven't
been on TV since. Ouma needs to fight Karmazin and beat him to get
people to start bring his name up when talking about potential opponents
for the big names. It is not realistic to think that the Vargas/Mosley
winner would fight Ouma when he is not a draw and still has unfinished
business with Roman. Once he beats Roman then he can get people saying
his name again and force the big names like Vargas and Mosley to look at
him."
|
* 10-9 Round To Blue *
|
|
- Round 3 - |
Blue: "In the March 2006 edition
of The Ring Magazine there is an article called, "The 10 Fights We'd
Like To See." Number four is Roman Karmazin vs Kassim Ouma II. In that
section they say the same thing that I have been saying. "Ouma is not a
big enough name that he can resume his career as if the loss never
happened (as Barrera did after Pacquiao, or Erik Morales did after
losing to Zahir Raheem). Ouma needs to redeem himself." Ask yourself
this question. If you were the Vargas/Mosley winner, you are one of the
few Superstars left in the sport, you just rejuvenated your career with
this win over another Superstar, and all these doors are now wide open
for you, would you want to take on Kassim, a fighter who is young, fresh
and has a style that is very difficult? Also a fighter that doesn't have
a name in the sport and wont bring any money to the table? Ouma needs to
show everybody that Karmazin was a fluke and that he is an elite
fighter. He would also show that he can triumph over adversity (beating
someone who beat him) and put himself in a position where other fighters
have to look at him."
|
|
* Ladies And Gentlemen, This Fight Has Come To And End As GoadenTeef Has
Refused To Come Out For Round 3. The I.F.F.B.C. Rules Your
Winner By TKO,
KOOOOOOOOOOOOO ARRRTTTTTTTIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSSTTTTT!!
KO, good to see you back in Fan Fight. What can yu tell us about this
fight and where do you want to go from here?
KO Artist:
Goaden, not the first time you've not come out for a given round.
What's the deal?
GoadenTeef:
|
|
* |
|
- Round 4 - FINAL ROUND! |
|
Red: |
|
Blue: |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Fan Fight (Jan 30-Feb 5):
"Did Jermain
Taylor win both his fights against Bernard Hopkins?" |
|
Final Result:
Blue: 39, Red:
37
Jas "The Executioner"
W 4 Richard "Game Over" McCormick |
|
Blue Corner: Jas "The
Executioner" (1-0, 1 KO) - No -
Red Corner: Richard "Game Over" McCormick (Debut) - Yes
-
|
| -Round
1 - |
Blue:
"Let's firstly focus on the first
injustice which was on July 16. Judge Paul Smith, who I strongly
recommend wears some glasses, gave all the first six rounds to
Taylor. How can he give particularly the third round to Taylor
when Hopkins outlanded Taylor in that round by 7 punches to 5
and Hopkins landed 54% of his punches in the third round
compared to a mere 13% success rate by Taylor? Both judge Duane
Ford and Paul Smith should have given this round to Hopkins
because Hopkins was fulfilling the key criteria more than
Taylor, particularly Defence and Effective
Aggressiveness, two areas that judges are told to score a round
on. This was shown in the whole fight in which Taylor only
landed 50 power punches compared the 78 power punches landed by
Hopkins and Taylor only landed 19% of his punches thrown
compared to 29% by Hopkins. And the margin of power punches
landed in the second fight was even greater. In fact, in the
second fight, Hopkins connected with over a 100 power punches in
comparison to a mere 60 by Taylor. Taylor was aggressive but not
in an effective way. There's a difference."
|
Red:
"Listen judges judge they don't
keep count of how many punches are thrown. That's not there job.
They watch the action and see who's the busier most aggressive
fighter in the ring. Leave that job to compubox, punchstat, etc.
Secondly, Jermain clearly outworked Hopkins for the first 6
round and held his own for the next 6. Hopkins started to slow
cause when he was getting popped he knew he couldn't rush in.
Jermain power and his combinations had Hopkins fighting
cautiously for the most part. When Jermain got tired in the
latter rounds and Hopkins was coming on Jermain done enough with
upper cuts to make Hopkins retreat again. When Hopkins know he
can beat hurt he will run and fight cautiously the whole fight
waiting for you to make a mistake. Jermain never made any big
mistakes in both fights. In the rematch it went basically the
same way, cause now you gave a young lion more confidence and
you know when a boxer gets more of that look out! Hopkins messed
up big time when he didn't jump on Jermain out the gate in the
first fight, which every boxing fan with knowledge and boxers
said so themselves. Hopkins even said it said it to a degree and
claim he would do different in the rematch but didn't. Another
part where I knew Hopkins wouldn't win the rematch is when you
been a Champion that long and crying foul play the judges is
going roast your ass again just for not being a fair sport even
if you did win the fight. Hopkins been around long enough to
know that. Just ask Larry Holmes fighting Spinks in the rematch
which we clearly know he won. In my opinion he beat Spinks the
first time but they just didn't want him to break Marciano's
record. Holmes probably would've won that fight if he kept his
mouth shut about Marciano instead of talking trash. That was a
no no in the boxing world cause they adored that man. Get my
point--even if you won the fight in many people eyes if you mess
yourself up before you even fight then it will go down as Lost
most of the time. Now Jermain went back to the drawing board and
corrected his deficiencies and fought better in which Hopkins
didn't that much more in the fight other to complain like a
bitch again as he did the first time. I won a $100 for both
fight cause I knew Jermain had the goods to defeat Hopkins."
|
Jas comes out to begin
round 1 and is short and sweet and on the mark with his jab.
Without giving away too much, he sets the pace of the fight.
Richard "Game Over" McCormick establishes his jab as well and
the two begin a feeling out process. "Game Over" begins to pick
off Jas' jab to land two of his own. "Game Over" simply a
bit busier here in this round despite both having a good
argument to begin round 1.
*
10-9 Round To
Red * Good Round By Both
|
| - Round
2 - |
Red: "Listen my first
response was a straight KO and it should've been judged that
way, but now I'm pulling out the finisher. Listen-we all know
stats don't mean that much. You can be beating the guy all day
and STILL get your ass knocked out. You can land most of the
punches in the fight and still lose by getting knocked down
twice. That's just two scenarios I just brought up. Then what
does them stats mean then? Shows you winning at one point but
the decision will STILL be a KO on your record or a lost! Stats
are not used
or
determined by a judge. Leave that to the commentators and
tacticians before and after the fight analysis. Now Hopkins is
done and to talk about this and that is a waste of time. Jermain
is the new lion in town with two well deserved wins. The old ex-
champion who is on his way out the door should never let a young
lion come in his den and push him around and then start getting
some balls later to try and come back. Shit won't work. You will
be fighting an up hill battle all day long. You stomp on a young
cat out the gate. Give that bastard no confidence and let him
know your in a ring with a legend! Threat go ahead sound the
bell for the KO!"
|
Blue:
"It looks like you have been listening too much to the
HBO commentary by Merchant, Lampley and Harold who were
very biased towards Taylor. These commentators strongly
influenced some people who watched the fight, and it
looks like you are one of those people. Some people in
the boxing world wanted a young unbeaten fighter in the
Middleweight division so that when Hopkins left the
scene, there will still be an attraction in the
Middleweight division. The judging in the favour of
Taylor may have been due to this or it was simply “inept
judging”, as I quote from Johnny Ortiz who is highly
respected and a member of the World Boxing Hall of Fame
Board of Directors, indicating that Ortiz is
knowledgeable. Ortiz also slammed Judge Duane Ford, who
somehow gave the 12th, yes the 12th,
round to Taylor in the first Hopkins-Taylor match-up or
otherwise it would have been a draw. How is this
possible? In the 12th of their first fight,
Hopkins landed 12 punches compared to 5 landed by
Taylor. Even the HBO commentators scored this round for
Hopkins! Boxing2005.com also scored the 12th
round for Hopkins and scored the fight a draw. And,
allegedly, Ford, who should definitely start to wear
glasses or go and learn how to judge, was the last judge
to hand his slip in and he left the building. And, after
the fight, Ford said that he scored the 12th
round based on the roar of the 6,000 Jermain Taylor
hometown fans that were in the MGM Grand, and because
Ford could not see the action as Taylor’s back was
towards him. How pathetic is that?
Hopkins and
his team are known for manifesting perfect strategies
and such masterful tactics were shown in Hopkins’ fight
against Trinidad. And in Hopkins’ fights against Taylor,
a logical and smart strategy was deployed. Taylor came
out like a bull early on in the fight, throwing 33 and
38 punches and landing 9% and 13% of punches thrown in
rounds 1 and 3 respectively. With such a low connect
rate, Taylor was bound to get tired and he did in the
first fight and less so in their second fight, in which
Bernard had out landed Taylor. Hopkins won some of the
earlier rounds and more so in the first fight. It seemed
that the judges favoured Taylor in the closer rounds
especially in the first fight, in which Bernard was the
champion. Don’t the judges tend to favour the champion
in closer rounds as it is the challenger who has to take
the belts away from the champion? And don’t say that the
judges favoured Taylor as he was more aggressive because
Taylor was not effectively aggressive.
You said that
Hopkins complained about the decision of the first
fight, but Taylor complained by saying that Hopkins is a
dirty fighter. You also said that Taylor never made any
big mistakes but don’t you remember when Hopkins hit
Taylor with a left hook because Taylor was waiting on
the referee to break the two fighters up. And speaking
on the referee Jay Nady, he told Jermain Taylor during
the second fight that he would take a point off for
holding but Jermain Taylor continued to hold and Nady
still didn’t take a point off.
After the
first fight, of 20 media members scoring the fight, 13
thought Hopkins won the fight, 4 said it was a draw and
only 3 thought Taylor had won the fight. Hopkins has
been brave in battling the system and has been a real
man whilst doing things his way. Perhaps the system
favoured Taylor because of this.
You might has
won $100 because Jermain Taylor beat Hopkins in the eyes
of the six judges during the course of the two fights,
but you’re definitely not winning a custom boxing dvd.
Hopkins did not lose both of his fights against Jermain
Taylor in the eyes of the majority of people.
Just look at the reaction of Hopkins and Jermain Taylor
and his corner after the first fight was over.
A picture is worth a thousand words."
|
"Game Over" comes out
for round 2 as he did in round 1, jabbing his way in being
patient. Short and sweet with his comments in this round. Jas
picks up the tempo here and saw round 1 sneak by and lands a
straight left on the chin that backs "Game Over" to the ropes.
Jas staying patient as well, picks his shots carefully and lands
combination body shots. Jas finding his rhythm here in round 2
and outworks "Game Over", then lands another straight right that
staggers him at the bell to punctuate the round!
*10-9 Round to Blue *
|
| - Round
3 - |
|
Blue: "You’re
complaining about Hopkins debating the poor decisions but
you’re complaining about the judging by Threat by saying the
first round should have been a KO. How was the first round a
KO and how could you have expected to win Round 2 with a KO
with such a weak argument. You’ve complained at Hopkins’
strategy but the facts show the matador’s strategy was very
good. In the first fight, Taylor landed only 86 of 453
punches thrown. Hopkins landed 10 more punches than Taylor
despite throwing more than a 100 less punches than Taylor.
The stats speak for themselves. You said that the stats
don’t matter if there is KO but there wasn’t a knockout!
You’re arguments are so weak, they are worse than the HBO
commentary, and that means you’re arguments must be bad! And
to put the HBO commentary into perspective, I remember once
when the bias Larry Merchant asked Roy Jones if yellow
gloves meant you could see the opponent’s punch better. And
if Jermain Taylor is such a lion like you said he is, why
did he repeatedly turn his back on Hopkins during the first
fight? How can especially you formulate an argument that
goes against 17 of 20 media members who did not think Taylor
won the first fight? I haven’t heard anyone saying that, in
the first fight, Taylor won the 12th round, which
if Duane Ford scored correctly, the first fight would have
been a draw. Look at the reactions of the fighters at the
end of both fights where Taylor and his corner had subdued
looks. Also, Hopkins didn’t even look like he had been in a
fight. Hopkins did not have scratch on his face after both
of his fights against Taylor. Hopkins was not hurt once in
both fights and if you think he was when Hopkins stumbled in
the first fight, you’re wrong. Taylor, in fact, stepped on
Hopkins’ foot. But Taylor was hurt particularly in the
latter part of the first fight. In the teleconference call
that was held with Taylor and his promoter Lou DiBella after
the first fight, Jerry Magee asked Jermain Taylor “Before
the beginning of the fight could you have imagined you would
win the Middleweight Championship landing only 86
punches…that comes to less to two per minute?” And Taylor
didn’t answer the question directly and properly. And Magee
asked Lou DiBella “How would you respond to somebody who
would suggest that Jermain won a title doing less than just
about anybody who has ever won a title, 86 punches is not
very much?” Lou DiBella responded by saying “I would say
that they were a f****ng idiot.” What sort of a
disrespectful response is that? The responses, particularly
Lou Bella’s response, clearly illustrates that DiBella
couldn’t answer the question and he reacted in a rash way.
Also, who won the championship rounds that are considered
the most important rounds? Hopkins clearly did in the first
fight and in the second fight he won 3 of the 4 championship
rounds with the 11th being very even. The
importance of the championship rounds (rounds 9, 10, 11 and
12) was illustrated in the Trinidad-De La Hoya fight in
which Trinidad disputably won and the De La Hoya fight
against Felix Sturm in which De La Hoya pulled out the
championship rounds. I think Taylor’s next fight against
Soliman will attract a smaller interest that some expect
because many people believe that Taylor did not win his
fights against Hopkins. The Boxing2005.com poll below showed
that more people thought that Bernard Hopkins won their
first fight.
Bernard Hopkins vs. Jermain
Taylor
|
Who
Did You Have Winning? |
|
|
Hopkins |
 |
48.1%
|
|
Taylor |
|
33.3%
|
|
Draw |
|
18.5%
|
Do I need to say anything
more?"
|
Red:
"???????????????????????????????????
I can't believe were still talking about this and I'm not
declared the winner. What Jay saying is straight repeat of his
previous statement only this time the part he added still hasn't
strengthened his argument. There is
a divided consensus on who won both matches in everybody eyes.
Why would I need to respond about Duane Ford, media panel, and
the ref Nady. Let's not forget you mentioning I'm listening to
HBO commentary too much? Fact--HBO commentary don't have a damn
thing on me! I'm on the level of the boxers who knows boxing
that give there commentary. I got columnists from a bunch of
websites that ask me for my opinions, read there books and among
things. I respect and show them much love. None of that you
mention in your rebuttal even warrants a response cause you
haven't strengthen your argument at all. Your whining just like
that bitch Hopkins. I can tell you are a big Hopkins fan. He is
one of the greatest but let it go Jay and move on! Homie--fuk
the dvd. I don't do this for a dvd I do this to wax mf's asses!
It's about how Hopkins started out slow and didn't get back into
the match until Jermain got tired and was off balance with his
shots. Every boxer does what they have to do in the ring. So who
gives a damn about dirty tactics or turning your back during the
fight. Shit like that goes on in boxing all the time. Lamon
turned his back on Wlad a few times and then knocked him out
later on. Both fighters did what they needed to do. Hopkins
fought scared and cautious the whole fight. Those upper cuts,
rights and left power shots kept Hopkins at bay when he was
coming on. Most of the professional boxers picked Jermain as the
winner in both fights, due to the fact Hopkins started out slow
in the first match and didn't do that much more in the second
match. Even a blind man listening to the fight would know that
Hopkins lost. If you want to bitch talk too Hopkins about his
boxing strategy cause nobody else wants to hear what your
saying. Now Threat go back and look at both arguments again and
make this decision to sound the bell. This cat is wasting my
time with the rambling and saying the same thing over with a
subject that can only be stretched so far. Jay has just been
electrocuted and executed! Bring me Mr. fact man called Prisoner
or the next undefeated chump! PS..Over the last 4 years I've
been undefeated in picking fights cause I'm am the MAN and I
know what the hell I'm talking about! Can you say the same in
picking winners Jay? Also that picture of the two fighters and
your line was corny as hell. Bhops eyes swoll the hell up and
your saying judge it by that? Please! Now my picture says a
thousdand words the one below casue i'm a damn beast! Threat
post my pic to my profile so all the pretenders can see who's
kicking there ass!
haha"
|
*
10-9 Round to Blue *
|
| - Round
4 - FINAL ROUND! |
Red:
"Listen-who in the hell is Ortiz?
Another member of the media panel you quoting? Have he ever
laced up the gloves? How can the media panel and no names of the
Boxing Hall of Fame, know more then the actual professional
fighters that saw the fight? Jay the stat man look this up for
me. Tell me how many on that Hall of Fame panel are boxers?
Winning Records? I rest my case when you do find out. You do
know what professional boxers do right? People that actually get
there asses in the ring and fight. You stick to quoting media
and public opinion polls though. All you have done is talk about
stats, media panels, and anybody else you can think of. I grant
you this fight was close. Taylor corner was cerebral for a
reason after the fight. There comments after he fight and I'm
paraphrasing here, was since the fight was close they don't know
if the decision would go their way. Taylor and his camp knew
they done enough to win but it couldn't
tell if the judges would see it that way. Also, remember Hopkins
said he would come out the gate faster AND he didn't. So you can
cry me river with the 12th round scoring and the championship
rounds BS talk. Talk to Hopkins for starting slow in both
fights, and not doing enough in the second match to wrestle the
belt away from Jermain! I got your ass so rattled you can't even
quote me properly. Let me slow it down for you Jay. I said
nothing about a knockout occurring in this fight. I just gave
examples. The point I was making... regardless of how many
punches were thrown, less punches, you can still lose the fight
on a knockout or decision. Judges DON'T COUNT PUNCHES on none of
those scenarios. You need to get a job with compubox. Your good
with stats but poor in actually breaking a fight down boxing
style wise. That's why I'm so good. I look at stats last. Then
your quoting to me on yellow ass gloves as if to say I'm corny
or weak. You can't hold my jock strap. Just writing that quote
line lets me know your lame as hell! You think your detail
attention to conversations, quotes and stats makes you real good
but IT DOESN'T! It makes ou neurotic in other people eyes. I
studied psychology big time so i'm good at reading people. Jay
go beyond those borders and REALLY watch a boxing match the next
time! You talk about interviews and picking up on all the
innuendos made by Dibella and Taylor. Jay-get a fuking life and
quit reading into everything that is not there. You're reading
way too much into stuff that you're twisting it to support your
statement. I just paused before writing that next sentence. Jay
tells me what that means? haha YOU HEAR ME BUT YOUR NOT
LISTENING, BECASUE YOU KEEP GIVING TRIVIAL ASS EXPAMLES TO
EXPLAIN YOURSELF. Any man that has to rely on stats and other
non boxing people to argue is weak. He has nothing to go on!
Threat is cool with me and I have a right to voice my opinion
when I say you still should've been knocked out already. I said
that at the time cause your arguments were weak. You step your
game up a little bit but I just unleashed the dogs on your ass.
Now I made two responses today which each one going up a level
higher to show you can't touch me! Now you step your game up a
little bit Jay BUT IT'S A WRAP HOMIE! I said Jay been
electrocuted, executed and now I just pulled the plug!"
|
|
Blue: "You’ve said
that my name is Jay, which it isn’t. My name is Jas. Did you
have trouble seeing my name properly in the similar way that
it seems you had troubled watching the two fights and making
justifiable arguments?! You might just have bad eyesight
like Duane Ford! I think you named yourself perfect and
accordingly because it’s going to be “Game Over” for you.
You said that over the last 4 years you’ve been undefeated
in picking fights but isn’t this your debut!? Look at the
rankings down the left-hand side of the page, and you’re at
the bottom because you’re a debutant.
You said
that my arguments are a repeat – this is not true. This is
shown by the fact that in the first round I focused on
Taylor not being effectively aggressive and in the second
round I focused on numerous issues including Duane Ford’s
bad judging, the HBO commentary, Hopkins’ strategy,
overwhelming media opinion that Hopkins was victorious and
the looks of the two fighters after the first fight was
over. And in the third round, I showed you that most people
thought that Hopkins had won in the first fight. Whereas you
have complaining and not answering the Fan Fight Topic
question. In the third round, you said that “even a blind
man listening to the fight would know that Hopkins lost”.
You are right if the person was listening to the bias HBO
commentary! If the person put the volume on mute or reailsed
that the HBO commentary was bias and could see properly, the
person would definitely think that Hopkins’ won both of his
fights against Jermain Taylor!
You said
that Hopkins was scared and cautious the whole fight.
No, he wasn’t. In both fights, and particularly in the
latter stages, Hopkins threw and landed more power shots.
This is shown by the fact that in the first fight, Hopkins
landed 47 power punches out of 128 punches thrown in the
last four rounds. The 47 power shots landed by Hopkins in
the last four rounds of the first fight were only 3 less
than the power punches landed by Taylor in the whole
of the first fight. And I have already given you further
facts of the total number of power punches landed in Round 1
of this Fan Fight. The facts show that Hopkins did do better
in the second fight and many people thought this including
the person, who may be Threat, that wrote the Boxing 2006
P4P Top 10.
You spent
Round 4 complaining instead of answering the Fan Fight Topic
question, and I said before that you’re arguments are weak
but now it seems that you have no arguments! The Fan Fight
is about constructing an argument about the issue in
question, and you are doing very, very little of that. You
criticise the use of stats but they back up my arguments,
whereas you have very few arguments that relate to the Fan
Fight Topic to back up! You said that I use stats and that
means I seem neurotic and you mention that you can read
people because you have studied psychology, although to me
it looks like your studying of psychology has not done you
any good because you make incorrect and far-fetched theories
about me being neurotic, and it seems to me that you should
study boxing much more instead of psychology!
You said
that I should “really watch a boxing match next time”. I got
the tapes of both the Taylor-Hopkins fights and I have
watched the tapes a number of times and without denial, I
thought that Jermain Taylor did not beat Bernard Hopkins on
both occasions. It seems as though you might have watched
the fights only once, and in the opinion poll that I showed
you in Round 3 of the Fan Fight, the percentage of people
that thought that Hopkins won the first fight increased
after the HBO replays. In the first fight, Hopkins did more
damage to Taylor that some people realise. Taylor needed 40
stitches to deal with the cut on his head and had an aching
jaw. Taylor’s camp was thought to have tried to delay the
rematch date so that Taylor could fight a less younger
Hopkins. Taylor said before the second fight that he would
win every round but he clearly didn’t and, in my opinion, he
didn’t even win half of the rounds.
You said
that you don’t need to respond to Duane Ford and the fact
about the 16 out of 20 media members saying that Hopkins won
the first fight (and I have not got such a vote result for
the second fight but it would probably be similar or even
more of a landslide!), and you discard these issues because
you know that you can’t formulate a strong argument against
such issues. And speaking on an issue of Duane Ford which I
have not mentioned, I believe that Marc Ratner said to
Bernard Hopkins that he would be surprised if Hopkins did
not file a report in relation to the first fight. And even
though the decision was not overturned, the fact that Ratner
said what he did say speaks volumes on the inept judging
seen in the first fight. And speaking on “inept” judging,
which was what Ortiz made of the first fight judging, you
don’t know who the highly-respected Ortiz is? Ortiz’s
article about the “inept” judging was supported by many fans
that wrote to Boxing2005. Ortiz put the judges of the first
fight in perspective. He mentioned the fact that Ford scored
the second Mosley – De La Hoya fight 115-113 in favour of
Mosley but the majority of people thought that Oscar De La
Hoya won that fight. And speaking on De La Hoya and Mosley,
they both truthfully scored the second Hopkins-Taylor fight
in favour of Hopkins. You said that “most of the
professional boxers picked Jermain as the winner in both
fights” so why don’t you mention some fighters who thought
that he did?
You said
that you have executed me and pulled the plug on me but I
think you have been executed and you’ve pulled your own plug
with your weak arguments and I have helped you pull your
plug. Game Over."
|
|
* Ladies And Gentlemen, Please Give These Two Men A Round
Of Applause In What Has Been An Absolutely Great Fight And
Already Candidate For Fan Fight Of The Year.
This Fight Has Come To And End After 4
Great Round Of Close Action And We Go To The Scorecard!
The Final Score, 39 To 37, Your Winner . . .
JJJJJJJJJJJJAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!
Jas, a tough fight throughout. "Game Over" made sure you were pushed to
your limits and you showed you have what it takes. What are your
thoughts on this fight and where do you go from here?
Jas "The Executioner":
The Fan Fight was harder than
my previous victory and I am glad that it has been acknowledged for a
Candidate for 2006 "Fan Fight of the Year". I definetly thought I
won the fight despite what my opponent "Game Over" may think. Thanks.
Richard, some of the rounds appeared to
be close and you definitely put up a hell of a fight.
If it were any other fan fighter you may have came out victorious.
How soon will you be back?
Richard "Game Over" McCormick:
I won't be back. You did well Jas but now
that I went back to look at all
the arguments, YOUR not better then me and I don't consider this a loss.
NO
WAY IN HELL YOU BEAT ME! This contest is not what I thought it would be.
If
in the judges eyes to say the least should've been a draw. You keep
kissing
Threat ass giving him thanks and you will continue to come out on top.
One
man's opinion doesn't ruin me nor does any pat on the back about being
Game.
Peace! For the record James Toney, Floyd Mayweather and Zab plus a few
more
said Bhops lost. I like with your closing argument you came with the
same
shyt again! Also, I don't give a damn if pronounce your name wrong. Jay
and
Jas all that shit sounds the same! |
| |
| |
| |
|
Click
Here To View January 2006's Fan Fights |
|
|
