Bernard Hopkins: Kelly Pavlik can't even jab.

Are you sure he said that? The quote that I know is "this guy ain't never fought nobody with a jab before and they already made him a star", or "this joker ain't fought nobody with a jab before and they made this joker a superstar"... That's pretty much verbatim. Except it was Naazim Richardson who said it, about Pavlik, in reference to his opponents, not about Pavlik himself. Pavlik has a great jab.

 

Yeah, Hopkins was so classless that he embraced Pavlik and consoled him after the fight, telling him not to quit and telling him to stick to it and get back out there and work on his game. What has Pavlik done and said in return?

 

It was only a young Roy that made Hopkins look bad. His fights with Jermain and Calzaghe were close and some had him winning those. (I thought he won the first JT fight and edged the second but not mad they gave that one to JT)

 

He said, "Yes Sir". Not sure he lived up to his promise though.

 

Fair enough -- my bad. :good

 

Hes only like that when he wins...

For class see dirrell after the froch fight or tszyu after the hatton fight

Then watch hopkins after taylor 1 and calzaghe

 

Was Monzon a true champ? Ray Robinson? Mike Tyson? Jake LaMotta? Edwin Valero? Hell Is Manny Pacquiao a true champion? They all have done something a bit worse than telling it how it is.

 

I'd like to see him in there with Ward, Abraham (still an interesting fight), and Bute. A focused and more seasoned Andre Dirrell would be an interesting fight for Kelly too. Dawson would not be a fair matchup. Pavlik loses that fight badly.

 

Hopkins probably wouldn't have said this about Pavlik if it weren't for Pavlik's ongoing excuses for the loss and just the total discrediting on Pavlik's part.

 

I also think this is why Bhop said what he said about Pavlik. Bernard had never criticized or belittled him up until this point.

 

This really, ****ing truly amazes me.

It's a media beat up of the highest proportion. He might be in the top 10 age for age list, but not P4P. That's farcical.

Going back 5 years from today, his record is

4-3.

His light heavy record, is 4-1.

That includes

A win over Tarver (Good win to be fair)
A win over Wright - a middleweight fighting at light heavy
A loss to Calzaghe - a super middle fighting at light heavy
A win over Pavlik - another middleweight fighting at light heavy
A win over Ornelas. Who?


In my eyes, that's hardly the record of a top 10 P4P fighter.

No ABC belts at stake apart from the first 2 losses.

All based around Ring belts and IBO belts. All smoke and mirrors.

He's supposedly held up as a top 10 p4p fighter, but Dawson gets **** for calling him out because "he's too old?"

Which the **** is it? Is he a competitive fighter, or not?

4-3 in the last 5 years, which is 1-3 against guys in or around their natural weight class (above gatekeeper level), does NOT make a top P4P fighter.

If he fought Pavlik and Wright at middleweight, the story might be different. But he didn't. He made them come up TWO weightclasses, but somehow gets kudos as a P4P fighter. That's laughable.