Bernard Hopkins vs. Antonio Tarver II

Within moments of Hopkins' defeat of Tavoris Cloud to seize the IBF world light heavyweight title at 48 years old, his fellow quadragenarian and first-ever light heavyweight opponent made these social media posts:

This content is protected

This content is protected

The 44 year old Tarver has been on a career rollercoaster since losing decisively to Hopkins seven years ago. He looked tepid during his initial comeback against middling opposition - Muriqi, Santiago, and Woods - and then horrid and painfully dull of reflex and lacking in competitive fire twice in a row against Dawson (although to be fair, the same exact thing can be said of Hopkins). Then he began a resurgence, with a dominant victory every year from 2010-2012. He moved up to heavyweight and schooled raw puncher Nagy Aguilera - not a great scalp by the standards of a natural heavyweight but Tarver was considered too old and too small to hang with him. Then again he was cast as the underdog against Danny Green, cutting back down a division to challenge the Cruiserweight in his backyard. Again Tarver kicked some ass. Then he called out unproven CW Wild Card prospect Lateef Kayode and gave him a spanking, which later got overturned due to a failed drug test which Tarver still contests.

 

Tarver did look better against Aguilera, Green and Kayode than Hopkins looked in Pascal I or Dawson II - and no worse than Hopkins looked against Cloud (who is as limited and exploitable in some ways as the aforementioned trio) :think

 

Against Hopkins? No he wasn't.

Against Hopkins he was overconfident, having just come out on top in a pair of rivalries against the other two best light heavyweights of the day. (the Johnson rematch followed immediately by the Jones rubber match) He also underestimated Hopkins moving up in weight - having not been over 160lbs since 1992 - and coming off two straight defeats by Taylor which although close showed Hopkins had lost a step.

Tarver had also caked on 45lbs of mass to play Mason Dixon in Rocky Balboa, then quickly cut down to meet Hopkins within a couple of months of wrapping.

Hopkins did clearly best him on the day, but a rematch isn't without some intrigue. They've both been inconsistent over the last several years, but in Hopkins' case it's a more enigmatic up-and-down, up-again-and-down-again sort of electrocardiogram pattern whereas Tarver observed a more gradual and sensible parabola with a decline starting upon his return from Hollywood and culminating in what looked to be a retirement performance in 2009 followed by a renaissance ever since.

I'd argue that current Hopkins is a lesser fighter than when he beat Tarver, while current Tarver is greater fighter than when he lost to Hopkins.

 

Tarver doesn't have Dawson's hand speed, but he could similarly bother Hopkins and disrupt his virtually auto-pilot defensive presets with that southpaw jab much as Dawson was able to - and his counter straight left is still proving to be a dangerous if not even improved weapon in the last few years. It's a weapon Dawson used to limited but successful effect in the Hopkins rematch.

Tarver also has 12 rounds' experience to draw from, and while not a chess master like Hopkins is by no means unintelligent. He should be able to game plan more effectively against Hopkins than most of his younger, brasher, less cerebral opponents.

He wouldn't be making the stupid mistakes that usually cause Hopkins foes to unravel, trying to decapitate him with big shots or drown him with activity. He'd be patiently making tactical counter-adjustments along with Hopkins, welcoming the relative dearth of action, and picking his spots with straight punches from tricky angles out of the lefty stance - something Bernard doesn't like.

 

Record in rematches:

Tarver 4-1 (2)
Hopkins 6-2 (0)