View Single Post
Old 08-02-2007, 09:40 AM   #15
East Side Guru
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,032
vCash: 1000
Default Re: X's power at 160: how would you rate it?

Originally Posted by JohnThomas1
Point me again to his best two or three destructive ko's over good durable opposition? Oh hang on, he doesn't have any

Larry also said Leonard beat Hagler. That seals it beyond doubt of course

Unlike hundreds of other great fighters who never were, or even could be outpointed right?

Probably something about as meaningful as Roldan dropping Hagler i'd say
The consensus is that Hagler slipped. You're an idiot with nothing intelligent to offer.

Now explain to me why you said "Bernard's power is very often underrated"?

Why would anyone say that? Maybe you and Tobkhan are satisfied with
performances Hopkins-Hakkar but that shouldn't mislead anyone into thinking that Bernard was "Up there" with the other gifted punchers, as you say. What a crock of .....

And yet some misguided fans are putting him up there with Hagler and Robinson. Don't you know all the greats were traditionally feared punchers? Ketchel, Walker, Cerdan and even Nunn was dangerous and had speed to go with it when in top condition.

When X hits a man they don't wobble unless it's done thru what Merchant says cumulative effect.

Even his jab is more of a push with no real snap as compared with the better fighters and has fans longing for the days of Hagler and Robinson. Hell, I'd much rather see Tony Ayala in action than boring, plain vanilla Hopkins. I'm glad he's gone from the middleweights.

About all I can say is he's a good fighter, a little dirty and a durable blue collar fighter, but that doesn't make him special.
redrooster is online now  Top
Reply With Quote