Hopkins "No Need To Fight Kovalev "

:deal

 

And would lose a wide UD by trying to do so....

 

Well in that case that's probably true.

I was referring to Hopkins' post fight statement that he wants to be the undisputed champion. He will become the man if he defeats Stevenson, and will probably talk down the WBO belt claiming that he is the undisputed, but the fact is that without fighting Kovalev he won't be undisputed.

I honestly don't care about the marketability of their fighter, it's not nice to see fighters not fighting each other became of the problems between the TV companies and promoters.

 

Kovalov KO's Hopkins, Bhop beats Stevenson though

 

Right Hopkins, cause you don't need the WBO to be the fully unified champ

What a fool, basically getting ready to call himself the unified champ without being the fully unified champ :roll:

Thought Hopkins was smarter than that.

 

#1 in the division based on what exactly? It can't be his resume...

 

So did you think Hopkins wasn't the unified champion after the 160 tournament because Harry Simon was still around?

 

I'm trying to visualize a scenario where Hopkins gets a decision over Kovalev and I just can't do it. I don't think Hopkins can fight a hard fight over twelve rounds at his age, not that he would last twelve rounds against Kovalev anyway.

 

Hopkins came from a generation where the WBO didn't even exist when he was growing up so it's not surprising he doesn't value the WBO belt. I myself see it as a 2nd tier belt, it's the champion that makes the WBO belt not the belt the champion. Undisputed for me means WBC, WBA and IBF and I'm sure for many older fans think the same.

But Kovalev is arguably the best fighter in the division, you can't be undisputed without facing the best fighter available. If Hopkins doesn't face him he can't call himself undisputed. Just like when Jones Jr was champion but never fought DM, for me he was never undisputed even though he had the belts.

 

What does Kovalev have other than his [overrated] punching power? What does Kovalev have to beat Hopkins with once the ole' man takes away his advantage in punching power?

Big punchers are not the types of guys who beat the ole' man. Hopkins eats those types for lunch...

 

I personally feel that if you are the linear champion then you are undisputed - seeing as no other fighter can lay claim to your title. Belts don't mean ****...

 

That's why I said "arguably". He is rated #2 by Boxrec and the Ring, behind Bernard Hopkins. I myself rate him as #2 behind Hopkins too. But many people rate him just below the champion, and majority of the people think that he'd beat Stevenson if they were to fight. The whole point was that whoever wins between Stevenson and Hopkins, they are not becoming undisputed until they defeat Kovalev.

It's not that he specifically needs WBO, WBC or whatever belt. As long as a highly regarded fighter holds one of the belts, you are becoming undisputed until you defeat that fighter.

 

Too right.

 

Perhaps but my point is that the "undisputed" title is second tier to the linear title - with lots of daylight between the two.