All you idiots, listen: Styles make fights!

He beat him with :

Speed and Timing

He also did take away his best punch ..But from a decison stand point Hopkins was outlanding Kelly with hand speed prob by a 2-1 ratio ..

Lets also remember that Kelly is a 1 2 plodder who inches his way in while loading up on jabs and rights ..Joe Calzaghe is an offensive machine who throws punches in bunches ..

Hopkins took that aspect away with clinches but was still out pointed ..Kelly is not a clincher ..Joe's hand speed would be just as frustrating to him as Hopkins was the diffrence BHOP is 43 ..Craftiness well I know that Joe and Hops are two of the most adaptable fighters of our generation..What does Kelly do when Joe nuetralizes his right and can't catch him with that 1 2 ?? Joe beats him in the same manner !

 

You are right but i still think Joe wins.

I would see this fight panning out like the Kessler fight.

Joe would start of relatively slow, sizing Pavlik up and judging the distance. After a couple of rounds Joe opens up more which will lead to him getting hit by Kelly's straight right. Joe has a good chin and great recouperation powers so, even if he is floored, he will recover quick.

By the mid point Joe will realise fighting inside and trying to out hustle and trade power with the strong Pavlik is not the best plan so he will move outside and start using his great foot work to jump in and out and hit Kelly from different angles. Hopkins shown that Pavlik can't handle fighters hitting him from angles. Also, as he is on the outside he can time Pavliks slow punchers better and slip them and counter a lot cleaner than he could when he was fighting on the inside.

This is exactly what he done to Kessler, who i believe is quicker, stronger and technically better than Pavlik, and i believe this same style would work against Pavlik.

Joe clear UD. Not as impressive as Hopkins victory as Joe gets hit more but still a clear win.

 

:good 100 times out of 100, thats exactly what I told these morons BEFORE Hopkins schooled Pavlik... I said that Hop would win on pts & if Pav/JC ever happened JC would **** him up bad because he is at his best vs aggressive guys that come forward.

This shouldnt even be up for debate after that pathetic performance by KP & that IS me taking`styles make fights`into consideration.

Overhyped, overrated, Kelly Pavlik doesnt deserve to share a ring with either JC or B-Hop, he never will & it was proved.

Over & out.

 

[quote=Bill Butcher]:good 100 times out of 100, thats exactly what I told these morons BEFORE Hopkins schooled Pavlik... I said that Hop would win on pts & if Pav/JC ever happened JC would **** him up bad because he is at his best vs aggressive guys that come forward.

This shouldnt even be up for debate after that pathetic performance by KP & that IS me taking`styles make fights`into consideration.

Overhyped, overrated, Kelly Pavlik doesnt deserve to share a ring with either JC or B-Hop, he never will & it was proved.

Over & out.[/quote]



:good

 

He may be a sucker for the right hand, but Hopkins only caught him with it once and his is far superior to Pavlik's, which he only ever throws after the jab anyway, not as a lead. That's completely neglecting the fact that it'll be slower and will come an the attack rather than as a counter. He's also got a rock solid chin.

I've said it before; tall, orthodox, come forward, jab-right hand fighters get destroyed by Calzaghe. It's pretty much the worst style you can employ.

 

The problem is Pavlik lost by 12 rounds. Twelve rounds to zero.

I'm all for styles make fights, but when you get your ass whooped in every single round you are gonna have a hard time pulling that back simply with styles. There is a class difference at work here.

 

Add ring intelligence and training as well.

I can't stress it enough that style isn't the only factor in a fight. It's a lot more than just having a certain boxing style.

 

"It's Spinal"

 

Well said mate. Pavlik wasn't knocked out, he just lost a decision. He'll be back.

 

It should be a requirement before joining ESB each member is to click a checkbox signifying that he understands what "styles make fights" means, because this idiocy is uncontrollable

 

Thanks for saying it, but these Calzaghe **** suckers obviously don't get it. I said this myself last night.

 

xtian, nobody's saying (or at least, nobody worth holding a serious conversation with) that Hopkins' defeat of Pavlik by itself means that Calzaghe and Abraham would also beat him.

There might be a few knee-jerk knuckleheads saying that here and there (I haven't been paying much attention to the board in the hours since the fight to be honest) - but I think what you may be getting confused with that are those of us who always felt that Pavlik was stylistically vulnerable to Abraham, Calzaghe, Kessler (pretty much all the elite at 160-168) and who are just kind of nodding our heads after this 'upset' as though to say "see, the kid was elevated above his actual level of ability".

He was pegged as a sure thing against Hopkins - some even had it a sure thing KO! Those of us who have always seen him for what he is - a rugged, decent (but not special) fighter knew he wouldn't beat Hopkins, and likely won't beat any of the elite. Even someone like Abraham against whom you can argue a stylistic advantage for Kelly, IMO, is on another level in terms of class and intangibles.

Bottom line: playing the styles make fights card is not really appropriate in regards to this outcome, nor how it reinforces people's pre-existing opinion that non-elite Pavlik would lose to other elite fighters.

 

Very rue. For example, when Tito got schooled by Wright, there was no need to start discrediting Tito's entire career. No did we say that Hopkins win over Tito meant nothing.