Fight that people remember 'wrong'

Hakkar tried at least as hard as Gatti did vs Floyd

 

good call on hopkin-hakkar. it was far from a shamefull performance, Hakkar showed heart in this fight.He was just severly outgunned. Lots of the hate toward Hakkar came because he was french, and at that time, theyr was a strong anti french sentiment in the US (just rebember the freedom fries fiasco, or that during the 2004 presidential race, John Kerry tried to hide the fact the he could speak french) because they explicitely opposed the iraq invasion, and it was considered chic in the to tag french as coward. Not to mention that Hakkar is arabic, and arabs are always depicted as coward in the US. If Hakkar was named John Smith, Peter Mctavish or Gianfranco Lombardi , nobody would have said he was a coward

 

Nah...

Round 1 of Hopkins-Hakkar is 1 of THE Most SHAMEFUL Displays Ever, in a World Championship Fight...There was No Possible Way Hakkar's Effort Could've WORSENED from Round 1, so the Rest of his Performance Obviously Looks BETTER in Comparison...

Equating Hakkar w/Gatti, on ANY Level, is Ridiculous, Bro...




REEDointlaugh:

 

It is, but it is not fair to judge the whole fight based on that. Great fighters often lose the first round as they take a look on their opponents but it doesn't matter since they turn the tables. Hakkar was able to overcome his fear and give it a shot, unlike guys like Akinwande, Audley etc. who had a clearly better chance of winning than him

 

NOBODY Gave a Damn about Hakkar's Ethnicity or Nationality, Dude..Let's NOT Pretend this was Some High Profile Bout Either...

You Speak as If there was a CAMPAIGN, Some CONCERTED Effort to HATE On Hakkar, but that Simply WASN'T the Case...He Looked like a CHILD Running from the Neighborhood BULLY in Round 1 & was RIGHTLY Criticized for it...

REED Can Acknowledge the Criticism MAY Have Gone a Bit Overboard, but Using Words like "Gutsy" or "Heart" are OXYMORONIC, when Discussing Hopkins-Hakkar...There's No 2 Ways About It...

WhatTHEFUCK is Going On Here @ Fightbeat???...It's Actually EMBARRASSING to the Collective Boxing IQ of Fightbeat, this is Even Being Debated...





REED:doh:

 

Yeah, OK...

Hakkar was just Feeling Out Bernard in Round 1...Got It...



REED:doh:

 

Bullshit

Francophobia in the US was massive in these day. I rebember that a lot of boxing writer made joke about the cowardice of the french army and nation when they talked about this fight. I have no doubt that Hakkar would have been treated way better if he wasn't french and arab.

 

No. Please. Just that the other rounds count too.

 

or maybe, he was a guy who kind of froze a little while as he was fighting on the big stage for the first time in his life but who settled down after the first round..

 

No doubt, it was the time of the Freedom fries. The French national anthem was booed lustfully before the bout

 

Looked exactly like Leonard's tactics in New Orleans, Mr.The REED.

 

REED Actually LIVES in the Fucking United States & is a HARDCORE Boxing Fan...Your Take on this Matter is Flat Out WRONG...

Hakkar was an ANONYMOUS Foe, THE LAST Guy Anybody Would've Singled Out for Unjustified Hate...He Put Up a CHICKENSHIT Round 1 & the STENCH from it Lingered, Which is Why the Criticism was Such...

NOBODY in America Gave a Flying Fuck about Some NON-DECRIPT, French-Arab w/a Last Name that Sounds Like Someone CLEARING their Throat...



REEDhno:

 

Don't Forget the LAUGHING Smiley Next Time....




REED:hammert:

 

Same tactics.

 

True dat. Run away and avoid engaging the dangerous enemy at all costs.

 

::

 

okay, how about Gatti against De la Hoya, then?

Gutsier, no?

 

Ja, I would say so. Hakkar didn't disgrace himself though

 

no he didn't but it still wouldn't be among the first 100 or so examples of a gutsy challenge from a no-hoper

 

I think I did a thread on this subject a year or two ago... lots of good responses

 

Good choices.

The first to come to mind was Ali-Foreman. As a kid, I remember thinking that Ali was landing a lot more than people said, before he tired. After all the mainstream revisionist history, I saw it again years later, thinking maybe they were right and that I just had a bad understanding of it as a kid. Nope. Despite taking a hammering to the body, Ali landed clean shots to Foreman's head all night.

Toney-Nunn is another terrific example. People forget that Toney was doing well in the previous 2-3 rounds. As for Leonard-Duran 2, I agree that it wasn't as one-sided as made out to be. There is one sequence when Leonard throws a shot and it appears to land on Duran, looking like a big punch. If you watch carefully, in slow-mo, Duran is showing his usual defensive brilliance, avoiding most of the impact at the last split second

For some reason, I often hear people say Duran jumped from 135 to 147 to face Leonard. He had left 135 over two years earlier! And defeated a top rated WW a few months before that

It's rather ridiculous how people often remember De La Hoya-Quartey. People call it a "great" fight and I think I read some article that said it was the best WW fight since Leonard-Hearns. LOL. It had a terrific 6th round and exciting final round. Most of the remaining 30 minutes was two guys doing little. Way too much posing, and not some amazing chessmatch where one fighter makes a mistake and the other capitalizes. Setting traps and taking advantage. Lots of the fight was a posefest, with Ike doing little and Oscar (who lucked out on the cards, the fight was not hard to score) doing even less

People claim that Vargas lost to Trinidad because he got too brave and tried to go to war instead of boxing. I disagree. He simply got caught in round 1 when Tito countered a jab. Vargas was having success boxing Tito later on, particularly in the 5th round. Tito hurt Vargas late in round 6, Vargas was still trying to box and use the ring, but he got caught. This was with about 30 seconds left in the round, with Merchant saying the punch landed around Vargas's neck. The momentum went back in Tito's favor. Vargas still tried to box some more in the next couple of rounds, and was having some success, but still eating hard punches. In the 9th, he was backing up when Tito rocked him with a straight right. That 9th round is when Vargas tried to war with Tito, and paid for it, despite doing some good work of his own. He got KO'd in the last round because he went out on his shield. Foreman correctly said that if they traded hooks, that would be it for Vargas. But he was losing anyway going into the 12th. Vargas at least tried to win instead of just lasting the distance.

 

agREED on all

 

It reminds me a bit of how Louis-Conn was talked about. Conn was outboxing the Brown Bomber for the entirety of the fight, got too brave and then knocked out.

I only saw the fight once but that didn't appear to be the case in my eyes. He wasn't doing a stick and move job. He was in the pocket very often and landed a lot of great shots. If he decided to run ala De La Hoya against Tito in the last few rounds perhaps he could have afforded to give them away and take the decision. However i didn't see him changing strategy leading to him getting knocked out. Conn was simply building on the success he already achieved throughout the bout. Louis just caught up with him.

To hear some tell it the fight was like Leonard vs Hagler but then Sugar Ray went into Mike Tyson mode looking for the finish in the late rounds and got knocked out himself.

 

I'll need to watch that one again.

This may sound funny, but I would list the first Holyfield-Ruiz fight. The 3rd fight was no doubt horrendous, and I think people tend to think that all 3 fights were like that. I rewatched the first fight (I was making a dirty fighting video compliation), and it was actually a pretty decent fight. The pacing wasn't bad at all and the action was okay.

The second fight wasn't terrible, although it of course was far from good, we did get to see Holyfield more hurt from a single shot than we'd ever seen him before. But the trilogy wasn't quite as bad as it is made out to be, especially the first fight.

 

agree on Louis/Conn

Conn fought a brilliant fight but it ultimately came down to his not being able to keep Louis off of him... he couldn't stave off the inevitable, despite how great he performed

Conn was a remarkable technical boxer for a guy that never had an amateur bout... amazing he had such footwork

 

I dunno if people remember this wrong, but I think anybody who claims Spinks took a dive against Tyson is a tard. That right hand Tyson finished him off with would have stretched virtually anybody. You could see in Spinks eyes that he was gone. Not a case of he could have gotten up, but didn't. He was out.

 

The back of Spinks's head also hit the canvas very hard.

 

Dunno man, i watched the first round there was about >20 damn clinches. Looked like a pretty standard Ruiz fight.

 

Merchant is a cunt; Sheridan is a fan.