Unless Paddy takes him to the ground, Paddy is better than Nate Diaz, they are a similar size with Conor`s one inch reach maybe a slight factor...
B-hop`s a different case to Foreman, I think underestimating how hard he was to hit compared to Hearns above 154, B-hop would have toyed with...
Hagler would have had a harder time hitting B-hop, Hearns went toe to toe with Hagler, a number of fightes lasted more than 3 rounds v Hagler like...
Hearns was more fragile late in his career and B-hop stopped most of the guys he fought early in his career before he change his style.
He got hit too much above 154.
Hearns defense was very poor, above 154 he got caught a lot in fights.
Benitez would be too small to take on B-hop, he started his career at 140.
Top 10 by doing what, beating Dan Hooker? Being in the top 10 deosn`t mean you`re special what the hell are you talking about? Just means you`re a...
That`s common knowledge, B-hop changed his whole style everybody knows that.
That is true, but B-hop was better defensively than anybody Hearns fought at 160 or above.
Was McGregor overrated? Is Paddy overrated? Would a match-up between the two be worth watching? [MEDIA] [MEDIA]
Roy was much quicker than Tommy and it was a boring fight, B-hop improved vastly by the late 90`s.
Tommy didn`t have a great chin, he was stopped at 147 by Leonard, B-hop had enough pop to stop Tommy.
Barkley countered Tommy`s jab with his own jab well in the second round, he also landed several powerful hooks too, Tommy had to clinch a few...
He didn`t show much speed or power at 168, he certainly had power though because he finished Andries at 175, but that and Maynard were the only...
