I beg of you please READ, Hopkins vs. Pascal

:deal Thats all she wrote.

 

Well said......very well said

 

****ing drama queen! it was a close fight, if it was such a robbery, why did the AMERICAN judge only have Hopkins up a round or two?????? Answer me that?? It was a close fight that could have gone either way. Stop ****ing crying, pull your **** together and move on.

What whinging pussys we got here on a boxing forum!

 

:blabla A draw was fair.............Hopkins looked good, but got KD 2x............Pascal's stamina is freakin garbage

 

I just want to say that there were only one Canadian judge, and that Hopkins needed 8 out of 9 last rounds to win because of the ko's (even if I feel Pascal i very lucky to have 2 kd's). He got 7. If one round scoring is called a robbery, well ok, that's a robbery then.

 

Stop you're crying folks! Boxing fans are the biggest sooks on the planet!:-(

 

I give hopkins credit for his performance however you have to admit he blatantly ducked dawson and waited for the less talented fighter to have the belt. Pascal says after the dawson fight something like "I'll fight hopkins or whoever" then all of a sudden hopkins acts like he had to fight him because he called him out.

When Dawson had been calling him out directly for years but hopkins never got up for those and fought instead orneales and jones jr. That being said hopkins is a freak of nature and atg.

 

you cannot give victory because somebody is older and fight good at that age. I agree he is good, I agree he won more rounds, but i agree that it was a draw because of the 2 KD. By the way, 1 judge from america, 1 judge from canada and 1 judge from belgium. If the canadian judge would have give the victory for Pascal you could have said the "omg robbery" thing, but he didnt. Fair fight, very good for hopkins, he was happy of his performance, Pascal was ashamed by his. Pretty good fight. Who sais Hopkins was anti-boxing?

 

:nut

 

This, epic!

 

Settle yourself down there Rep.

Your passion is admirable but you're getting carried away.

Well, see, there's part of your problem.

Analysis is what leads observers to come up withn their takes on what the score should be.


Pascal won the first four rounds, two of them 10-8.

So Bernard is trailing 40-34 heading into round five.

If he wins ALL EIGHT remaining rounds, he pulls out a 114-112 victory.

This is precisely how the American Judge saw it.

The Belgian judge and the Canadian judge each found one of the last eight rounds to give to Pascal.

(IMO, Pascal pretty clearly one the 8th)

So by your reckoning, anyone who gave Pascal any one of the last eight rounds was robbing Hopkins and , more than that, robbing boxing ?



You're normally a well balanced poster, but as I said, getting a little over the top here.


Not even close to a robbery.


A great performance from Bernard, and a rather shitty performance from Jean after the first few rounds.

But in rounds, 6-6, 7-5 0r 8-4 , for Bernard are all reasonable. And combining that with the two KDs, all three scorecards were well within reason.

There was only ONE Canadian judge, same number of Canadian judges as American judges.

And as I've explained, there was nothing disgraceful about the decision.

 

hes a special elite fighter,who is age defying and awe inspiring.

his desire and proffesionalism is amazing.

pascal new he lost,his face and body langauge said it alll!.

bhop schooled another young fight,by looking like the younger hungrier busier more effective guy.

they should have respect for such a legend,over rule the decision,give bhop the ring title,sack/fine/ban these judges.

the one thing i am pissed off at is did bhop really think a home decision woudlnt happen!,it happened vs calzaghe,it happens all the time.

he should have had it made somewhere neutral,hell,should have been in mexico!.

in time people will look back,watch this fight,and know bhop won clearly and fairly,and know that bhop was the oldest man to win a world title,wheather he was awarded it or not,he won.fact.