Please stop praising Hopkins

I want to give a shoutout to two people. ME AND MASSACURE.

WHY? Because we were the only two people who stated that Pavlik was not very good. All of you know nothings bashed me in particular because I stated Pavlik was basic, one dimensional and not very good.

bERNARD is a cockroach. He wanted this fight because he knew Pavlik had fooled the public. Btw, Pavlik is probably my favorite fighter right now. He is just not good. By that, I mean he is a bottom level world class fighter and if he stays at `160-168 he will make money because it is weak, although Kessler kayos him with ease.

Credit to Hopkins for being smart and taking a fight he knew he would win with ease. Bob Arum should be crucified. Although, Pavlik's career is destroyed(Yes, it is over) and that saddens me because he single handedly with his style could have brought boxing back in popularity it makes me happy that the greedy zionist swine Bob Arum has ended is criminal career with his disgusting greed.

 

Obviously Hopkins is a better fighter, there is no fucking way you're going to take credit for knowing the fight would play out the way it did. Did you predict a Hopkins domination? If you did, great for you, but I don't think you did.

 

I didn't make a prediction because the board was down. However, I have been telling anyone who would listen that you guys were going to be shocked when Kelly gets smashed. I figured Bhop would win but run the last 3 or 4 rounds and win a ud. I had it a shutout for Bernard. I thought it would be an 8-4 type of fight.

Hopkins has finally done it though. His career has been smoke and mirrors and now he has fooled the lot completely.

 

One last thing. Fuck you and the Slystaff you rode in on.

 

Slystaff picked Hopkins because he is black and Pavlik is white. He deserves no credit on any subject ever. He called Pavlikkk that fucking mook. Don't ever mention that idiot in relation to me ever again.

 

Well you make statements like that about most fighters today.....so don't slap yourself in the back.

Yeah but Pavlik is one of your favs.

 

Hahaha, sorry about that.

 

He is. I can't think of a fighter I'd root against Pavlik for. However, my point has always been he is more exciting then good. Surprise, surprise, the virgin queen with his same lame comeback.
I predicted Cotto would quit against Margarito. How is that not specific.

 

OKay.....HERE you predicted Cotto would beat Margarito.. ..but just before the fight you told Jaws..or another of your Cali boys that Margarito would win....you return to the site with the same kinda thread..."See i told you Cotto was a fraud"...

:: AND here you are AGAIN saying you knew HOPKINS would beat PAVLIK..but since the site was down you couldn't post your prediction...but you also never mention it in the Secretariat thread when he picked HOP..

 

::

Seabiscuit might have been posting from a bigoted side but he got it RIGHT...1st time i can say that about him..he got it RIGHT...

 

dsimon writes:

Convoluted reasoning Ike.

1) So what you are saying is that Kelly is maybe not a great fighter. And? Who said he was? Your prognostication is not extradordinary.

2) Hopkins showed dominance against a guy who he used guile to beat. That is no smoke and mirrors, that is the craft of boxing.

3) Sly got this one spot on and deserves props. Most people thought a one dimensional fighter like Taylor or Kelley would show Hopkins to be lacking and he did not. (Neither did Taylor imo).

Credit where it is due.

 

Pavlik is good. Very good actually. Its that Hopkins is GREAT. Pavlik will never beat a great fighter, though he'll beat alot of good fighters. His career is far from over. He'll go back to 160, and most likely beat Abraham. Though if Abraham KO'd him, it wouldnt be the biggest shock in the world. I'd still pick Kelly though.

 

::

Funny enough I was just thinkning the same thing about being mentioned alongside you.

 

He may have to reign for a while, because I don't see a lot of fighters around 160/168 for Pavlik establish his "very good(ness)" against.

 

Abraham is not a tough fight even now. He sucks. AA is one of the worst title holders in the history of the sport.

He will not beat Kessler at 168. 160 is weak as it has been since Roy was there. This was a disaster. Pavlik lost millions Saturday night.

 

AA isnt even one of the worst title holders today! Fuckin Verno Philips has a belt for Christ sake, and Mora just had one. Abraham is pretty limited, but he CAN punch, and Pavlik is hittable. That makes him a live threat to Kelly.

I agree however that Kessler would do a number on Pavlik, and I wouldnt hold my breath for Kelly to ever fight him.

 

Verno Phillips is better than Arthur Abraham. You obviously haven't seen the man fight. If he had fought Jantuah or Eastman in Las Vegas, he'd have lost. If he fought Miranda in anywhere but Germany, he would have lost by tko in the first fight. Abraham is horrible. abraham HAS overrated power as well. . Pavlik will walk over him and stop him.

 

Did you think Phillips beat Spinks?

 

I thought 160 was very good when Roy was there, but unfortunately, not enough of the top guys fought each other.

Jones, McClellan, Johnson, Jackson, Hopkins, Toney (left a few months before Jones won the IBF belt)

It certainly was much better in the early 90s than in the late 90s/early 00s, when Hopkins was ruling.

 

me and ike have been saying kelly isnt that good for while, people were saying kelly would beat people like lenoard and fuckin tommy hearns, the shit infuriated me. someone even said that he would drop lenoard. and shit about koing hops.

a few weeks ago i said kelly isnt good but will probly beat bernard because of bernards output in his latest fights.

when i saw the hbo countdown i changed my mind, he seemed to have good speed coming in and out, and told Big L i though hops might win by KO within 7 rounds, i still think he could have done it, but it wasnt worth taking the chance when your winning all the rounds.

if kelly would have came with the aggression it took to win the fight, or even a round for that matter, he would have got ko'ed

 

No offense, but that is ridiculous. Hoipkins "reigned" over one of the weakest eras in the middleweight division. I do not think Joppy, Eastman, Echols or Tito were decent middleweights historically speaking and all of them would have been crushed by those you mentioned save for Jackson who was rather chinny.

 

That's what I was saying.

I didn't think middleweight was bad when Roy was there. I thought it was much weaker in the late 90s/early 00s when Hopkins was ruling.

The early 90s had a lot of talented middleweights.

Right now, 160 is the weakest it's been since.......I don't know. Probably a very long time.

 

this fuckwit is upset arum took the hopkins fight because he allegedly ruined pavliks marketability and career ::

then he claims 160 sucks and that pavlik would walk over the only interesting opponent in the division.

what do you want ?? pavlik to fight a steady diet of cans so that he can "bring back boxing" ??? sounds about par for the course from a gatti fan.

 

Lol, here comes Arum's lone fan. Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. Pavlik should have been marketed as a destroyer and he would walk over Sturm, Abraham and he would have been an unblemished and undisputed Middleweight champ. Instead your uncle puts him in with a stinkbag who is impossible to look good against, two classes above his weight class and gets him humiliated. Pavlik lost millions. It must hurt you that the hero Arum fucked up so badly. It honestly is the single worst maangement move in the history of the sport and I said as much before this fight.

 

arum and trampler got pavlik to 32-0 by moving him astutely. it obviously wasn't a wise choice to go up to 170. then again hbo is as much to blame as arum. you were dying to see pavlik face sturm and abraham? :: alleged mismatches according to you? what is it like to be a fan of a boxer who you only want to see in tune ups? it isn't surprising that you wish for a favorite of yours to strive for mediocrity considering your posting history.

 

Why move up and fight Hopkins you douchebag. That was a stupid move. If he needed to move up and make money why not Kessler or Lacy before he signed with JT. There is no justification for them having him fight Hopkins and how is it mediocre to get all the belts in one division especially when the alternative is to fight a stinkbag who is at a higher weight. Sorry douchey, but "mediocre" is the better of the two choices and if you had the ability to get over your zionist pride you'd see it was a horrible decision.

 

When Pavlik nuts up and fights Abraham he will get KO'd.

Taylor almost took him out, and Hopkins could've at any point if he wanted to.

AA has shown the ability to adapt, respond to adversity and counter-punch with power. My money says that'll be enough.

I'm not saying AA is anything more than an average title holder, the thing is neither is Pavlik. Beating Taylor, who only held the title due to inept judging, does not make you special.

 

:boohoo::boohoo: Inept judging? Lol, Hopkins lost both fights.Abraham loses by knockout. Pavlik is average but he is a level better than the scrub Abraham.

 

Taylor didn't win those fights. Hopkins only has himself to blame as he allowed them to be close, but there's no way Taylor deserved more then a draw in either.

If they were scored correctly Pavlik would never have held a title. :crafty:

 

you live in candyland. here in reality guys can only fight opponents who are available. move up and fight kessler? :: that's a worse ass whupping/stoppage loss for less money and also no ppv upside. you sure are a shrewd manager. I'd still rather see that match than pavlik vs rubio or sturm (another unlikely fight )