Originally Posted by Bogotazo
Hopkins said himself, there's a difference between fighting a guy and fighting a guy off of you. Calzaghe and Dawson both made him fight to defend without giving him time to adjust. He tried with mixed success, but ultimately couldn't make it count over 12 rounds. And the way he talked after the Cloud fight about activity being a modern scoring tactic suggests that maybe he thought he landed the cleaner punches. Walking back to his dressing room after the Dawson fight I saw he talked to a jeering fan and pointed at his own face saying "look at my face, what did he land". The Calzaghe and Taylor fights are much more reasonable in thinking he edged it.
The stance issue does get over played, but for me it was an issue of pacing. He allowed Leonard to control the pace. I do give Leonard credit for what he did, but there was no sense of urgency after the rounds were going by. It wasn't Leonard waning but Hagler ramping it up that brought him success in the middle rounds. It's not a glaring flaw, it's just a characteristic or personality trait that sometimes seems to affect his will to shift tactics. If, for example, he insists on stepping into his jab as Hopkins circles, that might lead him to giving up a round or two instead of trying to set up a feint for something else while Hopkins does as he pleases. It's a small factor but a potentially decisive one.
This is a great informative post. When Hopkins has fought guys who really go for the win, he bends a bit. Sometimes, even looking for an out (fake injury). If he is allowed to dictate, he controls the fight. I am saying that Hagler (not leonard fight Hagler, he was past it) takes it Hopkins, similar to what Taylor, Calzaghe and dawson did. And gets Hopkins defensive. Prime Hagler would bring it and bring it effectively. People seem to think that Hagler would be scared or not agressive enough to bring it to Hopkins, are they serious ?