Bernard Hopkins vs Jermain Taylor I 15 year anniversary

Then how would you like to explain Hopkins beating on smaller men?

Weight doesnt equal size. My great grandpa was under 100 pounds when he was rescued from a German POW camp. He was 5'10". Does that mean hes smaller than Hekkie Budler? Of course not.

@Badbot is being deliberately obtuse. He knows if you weigh more than your opponent that doesnt mean you are bigger.

 

If you can comfortably make weight, you are playing by the rules. There's nothing more too it than that

 

I watched those fights numerous times

Taylor won both times. Hopkins came on and pushed it close but he didnt win.

 

I didn't say he was breaking the rules. I said he picked on smaller men.

 

Weight bully is defined by someone using extra weight to their advantage. It´s pretty self explanatory.
And you came up with the "frame bully" . When have you ever heard someone else use such a term?

Hopkins rarely had an weight advantage over his opponents. Well, he pretty much never did.
Was he a naturally big man for his weight class? Sure. Proven by the fact that he so effortlessly moved up to LHW.

But you are NEVER going to have someone equally match up. There are always going to be those who are tall for their weight and those who are short.

But to call Hopkins a weight bully when he clearly never used it to his advantage, is just hilarious. The man should be given credit for staying at the weight for so long.

 

But he's not. They are grown men and they weigh the same. Are you telling me that we need to make sure every human being fighting each other need to share the same physiological dimensions for a boxing match to be fair? Should give them all mri scans too to make sure their tendons are the same thickness? This is a fight man if your gonna wine and cry because someone else is naturally more muscular than you you need to get a new line of work

 

Well there you have it. He was a bigger man than all of his opponents at Middleweight.

 

I heavily favor clean punching over any other scoring criteria. With that said, I believe Hopkins won both fights because there were too many times where Taylor was wildly flailing his arms at Hopkins (often landing NOTHING) and Hopkins would landed a check hook. This was especially apparent in the second fight. Lampley was orgasming at Taylor's missed flurries and Hopkins would pop him clean. Sure, Hopkins left way too much doubt but he was clearly the better man on both nights despite Taylor being the much hungrier fighter.

 

There you don't have it

 

I thought Hopkins pulled out both fights and definitely should have at least gotten the draw in the first fight when he was champion. The first fight seemed to be some preordained coronation for Taylor.

 

Weight equals just that, weight. Size factors include more dimensions than simply weight. If i was standing next to Andre ward who was 168, and I weigh 170. No one in their right mind would suggest i'm the bigger guy. The frame responds to how well the weight is distributed throughout the body.

 

Hopkins is one of the g.o.a t,

 

Um, how so? He fought middleweights and rarely, if ever, had any weight advantage.
You said that it´s just about calories. Then why didn´t his opponents do the same? Why not move down in weight?
Hell, why did Hopkins stop at 160? If it was just about calories, then he surely could have fought at 154, right? He weighed 156 for De La Hoya.

 

Yes if he cut more calories he could make 154.

The key is to get as low as possible on the scale without compromising your ability to physically fight. Most fighters do that. But Hopkins was so disciplined with diet and training that he was able to cut down to a weight that was unnatural for his body.

There is a reason he debuted at 175. He is an ABSOLUTELY MASSIVE middleweight.