View Single Post
Old 11-24-2012, 05:05 PM   #60
East Side Guru
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 7,998
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bernard Hopkins - How great?

Originally Posted by Nightcrawler View Post
true but selective phrasing.another way of putting it is that a rusty, 12 month off hagler BARELY lost to one of the 20 greatest fighters of all time who had a perfect strategy.
I was phrasing it the way everyone was phrasing it at the time. Hindsight and Hagler worship has rephrased it in some places, but I'm not terribly impressed by that.

That you call Hagler "rusty" in this context is quite hilarious. Just wished more people here saw the joke.

hopkins beatdown of tito is *****-inspiring. oscar was no middleweight simple and that win means about as much as monzon's over napoles. duran is one of the best fighters ever and his fight plan to was amazing. i don't see hopkins doing any better...he'd be in with someone with a better lead/overhand right than his own, better movement, patience and fantastic defense
Duran was nothing special as a MW. Not only Benitez and Hearns, but also Laing had previously handled him far easier at 154. If Hopkins had had similar problems with, say, the Whitaker that faced Tito we wouldn't hear the end of it. Or even the Whitaker that faced DLH. It would be taken as a water tight proof that only the extremely ****ty state of the MW division made Hopkins able to dominate it.

Even much more so than is currently the case. But for Hagler it's put forth as one of his better wins.
Bokaj is offline  Top
Reply With Quote