Dawson reminds me of Audley Harisson actually. Never gonna use the tools he might have. Should retire and open a barbers shop or something.
Inherently, a Boxing Website is Going to B MORE Combative than Most...Then Factor in the Nonsensical Postings of Someone like Hanz, the Littany of AGENDA Driven Comments that Irish Takes from Thread to Thread AND mikE's Customary Brand of Contrarian BULLSHIT... It Doesn't Bother REED, but he Can See How & Why it WOULD Bother Some... REED:Lok:
I don't really like beating Glen Johnson being indicative of too much, regardless. Hopkins beat an undefeated Glen who had beaten nobody to that point (Sam Garr??) and then Glen lost his next two fights to B- level guys. And it's easy enough to cut on the version that Dawson beat. While I don't usually have a problem saying that beating an undefeated version of a fighter is more impressive than beating a later version, I really don't think Glen Johnson was better when Hopkins beat him. Discounting the Adamek win...whatever...you have to if your goal is to discredit my claim...but when you jump to defend Hopkins' resume, it's full of wins that can be discounted...from Pavlik and Winky above their best weights, to welters and jr mids fighting at middleweight, to Tarver perhaps not being a bit past it. And there's Jermain Taylor, and Joe Calzaghe reaming his butthole, etc. Where you guys have a decent enough chance to bring this thread up and say how wrong I was is when Dawson never pans out. Some guys suck it after their first loss and Dawson didn't exactly tear it up on his comeback fight. Also, Pascal may not have been the aberration I think it was. Maybe he's susceptible to getting outpointed by that type of fighter every time. I don't think so, however. Finally, another possibility, is the fact that Dawson has some other possible competition who could beat him if they fight...Ward, Kessler, Froch, Shumenov, Campillo...and Dawson could suffer another legit loss or two if he tries to run that gauntlet.
Genius. Hopkins' resume is far better than Dawson's. I said the best version of each for a reason. The best win on Dawson's resume is Adamek, imo, and THAT win compares favorably to any win on Hopkins' resume, imo. My opinion that the best Dawson is better than the best Hopkins isn't based on an individual win, however, it's based on my eyes and watching them both fight. I don't think that Hopkins' shutdown defense would (or will) work against Dawson. At least not well enough to get a win now or in the past.
Something in the cyber water here these last few days:tick: Maybe a new banner advert broadcasting subliminal rage.
I feel the feng shui of this thread should be re-yinned with a Celtic song about Rangers FC and Queen Elizabeth. <iframe width="420" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/PXyBLnScuCU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Exactly, honestly REED, it's the biggest mystery in contemporary boxing to me, that Dawson gets talked about as an elite fighter. He is nothing at world level. He got beaten clearly by Jean Pascal. Unless Bernard turns up so shot he can barely keep his balance, he'll win a clear UD over Mediocre Chad.
