Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Twitter MMA Facebook Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > General Boxing Forum

Thread Tools
Old 08-27-2007, 08:29 PM   #76
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 11,308
vCash: 15000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Originally Posted by McLovin
No he hasn't . Haglers first 45 opponents lost almost 60% of there fights . Hopkins combined opponents lost 23% of there fights while Haglers lost 29% . Hopkins beat more name fighters and won titles in 2 divisions while shattering Haglers defense record by almost double !
You really are tied up in all these facts and figures aren't you? Get off BoxRec

Compare the winning records, seeing as you have a liking for them, of the people Larry Holmes beat and Rocky Marciano. Whose opponents had better records? Holmes. Who beat the better fighters? Marciano.

And again, give me one good reason why defences are important. Seeing as you think they are so important, which of these made up resumes is better?

1) Title defences:

Muhammad Ali
Joe Louis
Mike Tyson

2) Title defences:

John Ruiz
Marvis Frazier
Jesse Ferguson
Alex Stewart
Tex Cobb
Joe Bugner
Bert Whitehurst
Pete Rademacher
Harold Mitchell
Hans Birkie

Seeing as title defences are so important, if some mythological fighter beat the first group, and other fighter beat the second group, who would have the better resume?

Your posts are pathetic.
Jack is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 09:37 PM   #77
Fading into Bolivian...
ESB Addict
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boston...
Posts: 4,882
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Originally Posted by Jack
No it isn't, but please, keep thiking it was. You thinking you have outwitted me, because I couldn't be bothered to reply tpo you is ****ing hilarious
You gave Hagler credit for Leonard because it was a debatable fight...yet didnt for Taylor, even tho it was a debatable fight. BIAS!

You gave Tito ZERO credit for Joppy, saying he got beat by Hop and Winky in his only other fights at 160....yet ignored the FACT that those two are two of the top fighters of the past 10 years....OF COURSE HE LOST TO THEM! BIAS!

You placed so much credance in Duran, Leonard and Hearns....saying they were ELITE fighters at 160, which is grossly inacurate. Hell even the morons that puruse boxrec can see that.... BIAS!

Originally Posted by Jack
Answer my points properly, and then I'll bother to reply to your nonsense.
Properly...or say what YOU want to hear? I remember my post being quoted quite a few times saying great post and owned and answer it properly in whose eyes? YOURS? You cant even see the ridiculousness of your original post....and Im supposed to care about your perception of the truth.

Its quite obvious that...your boxing knowledge is either lacking, or your own personal bias is getting in the way of your better judgement....I mean, anyone reading any of your posts that you have some vendetta with Bernard.

Originally Posted by Jack
It just gets better.
I always do brotha!!! Sit back and enjoy the ride...hell ya might learn a thing or two.

Originally Posted by Jack
All three beat fighters better than anyone of Hopkins smaller opposition did.

Can you honestly compare the wins of Leonard (160lbs), Duran (160lbs) and Hearns (175lbs), to those for De La Hoya (160lbs) and Trinidad (160lbs)? I don't think so. The first three have wins miles ahead of anything Trinidad or De La Hoya did.

The best win between DLH and Tito at 160lbs is Joppy. He isn't as good as Barkley.
Well, lets break this one down a bit...shall we?

SRL - Since you yourself counted this as a win for Hagler...we wont (seeing as how ya cant have it both ways). So, his best win at 160 was Lalonde...a decent fighter with pop, but no William Joppy (ever thought we would ever say...THAT GUY AINT NO JOPPY THO!!! )

Hearns - No names to speak of...couple of decent fighters (at 160 now...I mean, we are talkin about one of my all time favs here....), but none on the level of Joppy.

Duran - Barkley and a few others. Well, as much as I love the blade, was he really better than Tito Trinidad (Who Winky beat...which you AGAIN, didnt give any credit for....gee I wonder why??? ). I say overall in his career, NO...but you could argue it.

So that means, of the three fighters....ONE beat better comp at 160. Hardly what you would call ELITE FIGHTERS at that weight.

I LOVE HAGLER (Im actually a fan of all 4 fighters we are debating)...but you are being ridiculously unfair in your assessment of Hopkins. The man is a marval and truely one of the ATGs of the sport (and definately top5 at MW...I have him just below Hagler and just above Monzon)...

Again, either your bias is blinding your judgement...or your boxing knowledge is far lacking.

Originally Posted by Jack
How can you ever base an opinion on fact?
This might be the dumbest thing I have ever heard. You base an opinion, by looking at the FACTS and drawing a conclusion. If your conclusion isnt backed by fact, then its false....hense my original post...showing just a few of the inaccuracies and falsehoods in it....all derived from a biased outlook....NOT ON FACTS.

Originally Posted by Jack
Do you think Muhammad Ali is a better fighter than John Ruiz? I'm guessing yes (Although reading some of your posts, this isn't guarenteed), yet it isn't a fact. Everyone with a brain (Again, not nessecarily you) thinks Ali is the better boxer, and I'm sure 99.9999999999999999999% of boxing experts would agree too, but it doesn't make it a fact.
Again, you base opinions on dont count your opinions as facts. Ali was a better boxer when you consider the FACTS of his resume, his speed, his skill, his talent, his heart, etc. These are all things that can be seen and your opinion can be drawn from...hense basing your OPINIONS on FACTS...something you continually fail to do.

And about the highlighted part of the quote....sorry bro, but I am one of the more respected posters on here (HELL, go look at the last few "favorite posters" threads...I was picked quite a few times....THANKS GUYS!!! LUV YA TOO!!! ). Even the people that disagree with me, respect my opinion (COUGH* AMSTERDAM *COUGH), because I look at things fairly...I (for the most part), dont let my personal feelings toward a fighter cloud my judgement (HELL I HAAAAAAAAAAAAAATE Floyd with a passion, but I still think he is gonna SCHOOL Hatton, who I actually like). Try that bull**** somewhere else please.

Originally Posted by Jack
I think Monzon and Hagler beat better smaller fighters than Hopkins. Is it a fact? Of course not, but it's a claim I backed up, something you are incapable of doing.
If you said that Leonard, Hearns and Duran were BETTER fighters than Tito, Winky and Oscar, I would agree with you. BUT, when you totally discredit the later three, UNFAIRLY I MIGHT ADD...then you credit the former three when its very close on the criteria you laid out (resume at 160)....YOU JUST CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!!! To take Hopkins razor thin loss as a loss, but to give Hagler his razor thin loss to SRL (BTW, I had Hop winning the first and drawing the second...and Hagler beating Ray), your not fairly assessing the facts. Again, your original post was full of stuff like this.

Originally Posted by Jack
And again, I chose not to reply to your post as it was stupid. It was random, pointless and added nothing to the thread.
And others CHOOSE TO REPLY and say great post and owned and again, stupid by whos opinion? Yours??? Well seeing as how the post was AIMED AT YOU (and totally factually based), I can understand your OBVIOUS BIAS in this right at least....


(And whats up with you and the name calling when people discredit your nonesense? You need to find an outlet for all this pent up aggression bro.... )
sues2nd is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2007, 11:18 AM   #78
Sonny Carson
ESB Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,497
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Originally Posted by DanePugilist
Great OP, Jack.

Monzon was a true phenomenon. Drank, partied, smoked and killed elites left and right.

Still, I have Hagler as my all time favorite, but quite possibly Monzon would have beaten him as well.
Monzon wouldn't have beat Hagler. He isn't fast or slick enough. Hagler whooped on every tall fighter he ever fought. Hagler had the superior hand speed and power.
Sonny Carson is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Old 08-28-2007, 12:35 PM   #79
ESB Junkie
East Side VIP
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: YUL
Posts: 38,151
vCash: 5685
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

If you're gonna pick their records apart maybe you shouldn't totally spin the facts to your advantage, and be more objective.
PH|LLA is offline  Top
Reply With Quote

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > General Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015