Bernard Hopkins vs. Chad Dawson & undercard RBR

Dawson clearly reached around his legs as he shoved forward. There's no excusing that.

 

Wouldn't this be similar to a non-IntentionalButt? But maybe instead, something like a non-IntentionalInjury?

Accidental foul? Despite the "no foul" call? He was injured from going down due to....what?

 

Forget when it moves past the E. The issue is when it aligns with the bottom of the E, coming from further back.
Hopkins throws a right. Then he step forward with the right leg from the momentum. Chad starts his rugby tackle. He meets Bernard half-way (this is when his head aligns to the bottom of the E). Bernard didn't get to put his right leg on the floor as he was shoulder-charged in the mid-section in mid-movement. From the impact, his right knee raises and his torso lowers, draping himself over Dawson. Chad continues his tackling motion, bowling Hopkins over.

 

The main thing that caught my attention was that both of Hopkins' feet were off the ground (briefly) at the same time, while moving backwards, off balance.

 

Wow, surprising degeneration repeatedly when faced with rather clear and not impolite refutations ...

Apparently you can do a laudable job at describing fights but would benefit from actually having played competitive sports at some relevant level (i.e., university/college, and above) so as to have a better understanding of "contact". When it is too late .. it is too late.

(PAC10 - mid 1980s)

Pity ESB is a good fit for ya. Probably one out of a thousand here has accomplished ANYTHING in ANY area of life. Finding comfort in their "support" is rather meager fare.

I remember reading some of your posts years ago before I ever posted (long before you were doing round by round) and considered your view on certain fighters to be typical unremarkable "ESB" stuff. But, more recently, I actually thought you were getting much better as a product of reviewing/watching so many fights - diligently and regularly.

So, I'm more than a bit disappointed in your reactions and responses tonight to rather solid perspectives - on an isolated event - that merely differ from your own. Unable to create a compelling argument you regularly find solace in immature and derisive comebacks.

Pretty weak, guy.

You shouldn't want to be just like the masses on ESB. This place is largely a gathering of idiots. Fitting in here is not an accomplishment. To be defined by this group would be a detriment.

It is understandable (for everyone) to fall into petty BS occasionally (if not often) due to the VAST multitude of half-witted kids (and unaccomplished adults) that dominate this site but you should be able or at least attempt to distinguish between those posts and ones that reflect an honest difference of opinion.


Perhaps the passage of time will add some depth to your perspective and experience to apply in understanding athletes and/or athletic interaction.

There is ample room for improvement.


FWIW, generally a good job on the round by round in 2011 ....


G'nite.


..
Don't bother with a defense (though you will probably feel compelled to say something solely for your benefit relative to others who may yet read this thread) and definitely don't waste your time with another petty bit of jawboning or a cut & paste of unconvincing patter on this collision .... outside of that ... I've already succeeded in three fields of endeavor in my life - there is nothing you could throw out that would change my environment and you obviously don't have the life experience to alter or affect my perspective.

Simply try not to lose sight of the fact that you while it is great to receive pats on the back for your fine efforts to provide an accurate, interesting, and concise summary of each round under the shortest of time constraints there is substantive growth that can only come from ignoring and avoiding much of the negative aspects occurring in the majority of posts on this site rather than devolving into the same patterns of posters you would likely never give or want to give the time of day if you had the misfortune of meeting these idiots in your every day (non-internet / REAL) life. It can be better to stand alone than have the support of imbeciles. Your progress and development may ultimately depend upon it ...



Cheers

 

The icing on the cake.

 

All that aside, why did Dawson do it at the same exact time he thrust an off balanced Hopkins backwards? Intentional or not, Hopkins did not go down because of Hopkins, Hopkins went down because of Dawson. Either way, not a TKO.

 

I shouldn't edit my posts when conversing with people who can actually type here.

 

just watched it

I'm not a Hopkins fan by any measure but Dawson clearly grabs his leg before he lifted up (from a low position, so of course hopkins would be above) watch it slowly

it was not a shrug by any means, it was a fast slick body slam

it should be a no contest at a minimum, maybe a DQ/lawsuit

Hopkins probably was not acting much as he really did injure his shoulder too

 

I can't hypothetically slice this up in any way that leads to the outcome that is currently official.

 

That's all there is to it. Cut and dry.