Originally Posted by Boxed Ears
Blue: If you understood me correctly, this would not be here. It's like an umpire and a coach are arguing out or safe and some drunken fan stumbles in and starts yammering about corked bats. I cannot argue about corked bats with you, Bo. Nor was I talking about them to begin with.
I understood you perfectly, but I think you missed out on something. I'll make it easy for you: Hopkins was some way past his prime and probably had a hard time making weight when he lost to Taylor.
Can't really understand why it should be a big strike against him that he lost two close fights to an average opponent when he was 40 and had stayed in the same weight class for some 15 years. If the Taylor losses were a true measure of his ability, and not just soemthing that happened because of his age, don't you think he would have been exposed sooner?
Please tell me what other fighters that have losses at this age that you really hold against them.
A lot of smileys will not help make this anything but a stupid post. "Former
LW" was the term used, since Duran did the vast body of his best work there. This is a big factor as to why most, and I suppose you too, rate his wins at higher weights so highly.
And the Duran that faced Hagler was not only fighting in a higher weight class than he did in Montreal, he was far from the same fighter any more. That he had BEEN great doesn't really make any difference. At MW he was never great.
DLH was not that shopworn and Hopkins stopped him. Became the first to do so, if I'm not mistaken.