Was Hopkins/Pavlik REALLY a technical masterpiece?

Can you imagine BHop in his prime vs Pavlik. Dear god.. the thought of what would've happened to Pavlik is scary..

 

Pavlic looked terrible in that fight but Hopkins fought a great fight. I stood up after the fight and applauded when BHop looked at the crowd even though I was rooting for Pavlic.

 

The sad thing is Bhop was never known for having fast hands or high punch output yet he displayed these attributes against Kelly Pavlik!!

Hopkins looked as if he were in his 20's!!!

 

:good

 

yes...it was a masterclass. bhop is a master boxer. he spanked my boy all over the ring. but, my boy also took his whippin like a man and didnt quit on his stool like many have.

 

Well, you're right in that Hopkins' strength and superior hand-speed were important factors. If Hopkins had no strength, Pavlik would have just walked all over him. He needed to get Pavlik's respect to stop the guy just walking him down, forcing him to exchange and then turning it into a war. Plus, Hopkins needed to be able to control the inside action. His skill allows him to do that anyway, but Pavlik is a big and strong enough Middeweight to be able to push a guy off of him or to get his arms involved unless he's suffering the strength deficit that he was. As for Hopkins' hand-speed, that obviously oiled the wheels all-round, but it was the way he set up his shots and took the play away from Pavlik that made his speed at all significant. I mean, Taylor had a massive speed edge against Pavlik and still couldn't out-box him in Pavlik/Taylor II, mainly because he was a sitting duck for Pavlik's straight shots.

What Hopkins did well was control the range. He constantly moved on Pavlik and didn't sit in front of him and allow him to get off like most of KP's opponents. He circled and circled, and then suddenly got in something through a clever bit of feinting or just by being generally faster and more unpredictable. He then took the fight straight to the inside where Pavlik was relatively clueless. BUT, he was never so far away that Pavlik couldn't reach for him. He was just out of range, so Pavlik would end up lunging in and falling short with whatever he had and Hopkins could counter. In other words, his range control struck a perfect balance between avoiding confronattion and creating counter-punching opportunities.

And don't overlook his punching ability. Hopkins' was repeatedly taking Pavlik's jab away, making it miss and then countering with the straight right - often whilst off balance. He hardly missed a shot all night he was so precise. Check out 4:30 where he lands a crazy left-uppercut from nowhere, which lands right on the button:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJkDi0JpPP4[/ame]

 

So, yes; it was a masterclass. An all-round demolition. A comprehensive schooling. And I say that as a Pavlik fan. We all know what his vulnerabilities are. But don't forget: there's only one Bernard Hopkins.

 

I understand everyone's point, I'm not saying it was close or anything, that would be absurd. Just that it was a slower paced tactical fight and Hopkins was not consistantly beating on Pavlik, it was a clean flurry and then he moved away for a while. Smartest way to fight no doubt, least hit to getting hit ratio, I just don't think it was as amazing as everyone has it cracked up to be, though I was never a person who thought Pavlik would knock him out.

 

Yup, sure was.

[/thread]

 

Normally when somebody wins every round of a fight against a proven undefeated fighter who is on the cusp of superstardom, they call it a masterclass.

And it was one.

 

You mean the 2nd round when he wobbled Pavlik on two different occasions?

Or the 3rd round when he broke out every punch in the book on Kelly?

Pavlik was taken out of the fight by round 3.

 

I think it was a "negative parabola" type fight. Hopkins controlled the start because Pavlik wasn't expecting what he brought to the table. Pavlik was determined to do something and made a couple of the middle rounds a little closer. Then, later on, Pavlik realised he wasn't going to win, got despondent and Hopkins ran away with it.

I had it a shut-out, I think.

 

Well, Pops rates that as his best performance.

At 160 Pavlik might even have a better chance. Still wouldn't win, but at least he'd be remotely strong.

 

Yes it was, a way past it beyond shot Bernard Hopkins, who also was a huge underdog goes in and schools the guy from the opening round to the end. I don't even think Pavlik won a single minute or a second in that fight to be honest. Hopkins made Pavlik look like he's the 44 year old.

Of course this fight was promoted and looked at as Pavlik scoring a KO over someone old that Calzaghe struggled with and someone never stopped before to secure a fight with Calzaghe after it. To give Pavlik credit, at least he tried to make a fight with Calzaghe and took this fight regardless of how "easy" it was supposed to be for him on paper.