Hopkins was outboxed once in his whole career, by Roy Jones. And by the 8th onward he'd adjusted and was getting the better of it. Complete silliness.
Yeah, but dispite the level of competition he won those fights. So that said, you going to make a credible argument here or just keep spouting off bias? Because you don't have a leg to stand on here.
I don't? The guy was beaten twice by Jermain Taylor, that shouldn't happen to master boxers (no matter what age). Every time he faced a guy with faster hands he struggled to cope and was more often than not beaten. A master boxer should be able to work something out. Guys like Mayweather can neutralise these disadvantages, Bernard can't.
I still disagree. Losing to Taylor twice looks bad, but the fact that it's the same opponent makes it look more like a fluke or just a bad style he couldn't get past. Some people have their kryptonite opponents and Taylor seemed to be that guy for Hopkins. No boxer is perfect but that doesn't mean their skills are overrated because they lost to a couple of opponents. You have to look at their whole body of work.
The one thing you could say Taylor had over Hopkins was handspeed. That means that four out of Hopkins five losses were down to the fact he was facing guys who had that particular asset over him. All I'm saying is that a guy who is as lauded as Hopkins is for his ring intelligence should be able to find a way round that, especially against a guy as fundamentally ordinary as Taylor. I mean even Carl friggin Froch was able to solve that particular puzzle. Don't get me wrong, Hopkins is a great fighter, but I just think that part of his game is somewhat overrated.
I'd say his skills are underrated in a way, seeing as how he's pretty much disparaged in here on a daily basis.
I think with Khan, the perception is that he's not such a masterful boxer technically, but his sheer speed allows him to dance circles around his opponents. But yeah, perhaps on this board his boxing isn't overrated, as you know SND.....you've spent so much time defending him!
I didn't see JT's speed being what beat Hopkins. I thought JT's robotic unorthodox style is what beat Hopkins more than anything. Also Froch didn't exactly know how to beat speed. He won because the guy he fought fought like a bitch plus Froch had some home town cooking going on. Nothing he particularly did affected the outcome of the fight. You see this is what's called a black and white view of watching boxing. You're not taking anything into consideration. You see Hopkins not able to deal with speed, yet didn't Hopkins beat the much faster punching Joppy and Tarver? Meanwhile Froch constantly got beaten to the punch and almost KO'd but because he won a disputed close fight in his home town you consider him having dealt with speed. I think Hopkins is every bit the master boxer most claim he is. Does that mean he can outbox every boxer in the world? Of course not, even Floyd wouldn't be able to do that. I'm sure there are a couple guys out there who could beat Floyd, but that doesn't detract from his skill as a boxer any more than it does Hopkin's.
Given how close the fights were, age was the most significant factor in Hopkins' losses to Taylor, IMO. That being I think the Hopkins who beat Echols & Trinidad would have turned the trick against Taylor. By forty, Hopkins was beginning to have trouble pulling the trigger. It told, IMO. He still very, very nearly won both fights, it is worth remembering.
I think Hopkins lost to Taylor for the same reason he lost to RJJ. He's totally intimidated by speed. Hopkins fights scared. It's why he holds so much. And the worst thing you can be against a guy with speed is afraid of getting hit. That's Hopkins.
You see, though, he just wasn't afraid at all of Taylor, & as mentioned, the fights were extremely close. Extremely. Even a fighter as well-aged as Hopkins loses something by forty. I just can't help but feel the prime Hopkins (of around 33-37) has less trouble pulling the trigger, & wins it.
I agree and like I said I don't see JT's speed being so much of a factor against Hopkins who was no slow poke himself. JT isn't that fast of a puncher and I too agree it was Hopkins age more than anything that cost him those fights.
Errr what are you talking about? I said Froch solved the Taylor puzzle, I agree he lost the Dirrell fight.
Tell me about it mate :: See the thing is, yea it's easy to say "Oh he's just so fast that's what beats guys alone", Alexander is also a young, athletic speedy guy and supposedly (by what people have been saying in here) a far more fundamentally sound boxer, rather than a "leap amateur", basically he fights the "right way". So how come the leap amateur was able to basically shut out Kotelnik, where as Mr Incredible got schooled? The answer is there has to be some sort of boxing acumen in Khan's work, which if anything is underrated on here.
