Bernard Hopkins vs. Larry Merchant

Funny how he wasn't talking about the 8lbs it took to go and fight Calzaghe at this point in his career.

 

Hopkins owned the drunken *******.

Double standards against a brotha on full display in this interview.

 

Only Hatton gets along with Merchent

 

Hopkins SD

Could have gone either way. Hopkins was slightly more effective IMO and after starting slow, did just enough to win as the incident went on.

 

It was a mandatory, I like Larry normally but what the **** did he expect Bernard to do? Give away his belt?

 

I'd say Larry took this, Hopkins started as if he had some good points, you were waiting for him to make them and then he kinda confused himself. He did it a few times, "you are either part of the system or with it" being a good example.

The end he really contradicted himself too, after stating that he didn't care about the money for his mandatory and that keeping the belt was a priority, he then went on to say he'd only fight Winky for good money?

Hopkins deserves a break though, I don't reckon too many people would make a lot of sense after a decent boxing match.

 

Oh the Hakkar fight. Not much of a fight but Hopkins did what he had to do in order to win.

 

Larry is ****ing great

 

Wow you truly are a Calzaghe nuthugger to bring him up in a thread that has nothing to do with him.

 

Two Philly guys going at it.

 

All this reminds is that WAY too many fighters don't fight to for legacy or to entertain their fans, but to try and grab the fattest paydays. I know money matters, but listening to Bernard, that's ALL that matters...and it sure as hell isn't just a problem in boxing.

 

remember those days when guys fought for food on the table? yeah, well most of those fighters died penniless. Legacy don't pay bills, I don't see too many ESBers offering their homes to broke boxers.

Besides it was a Mandatory, Hopkins fought a mandatory so he could be the gateway into the division.

 

Hahahaha, this was awesome. Thanks for posting. Hopkins UD.