do you think the zivic - burley fights show any indication? this would be a good fight. another I'd love to see is toney v hop at mw.
Too bad we don't have more footage of Burley. I get the feeling that he'd be a nightmare for just about anyone at his best, though. Jones I'd pick over him without hesitation and Hopkins might just be too big and strong combined with his skill, as well. This is just pure, wild speculation, though, seeing how little footage there is of Burley.
Haven't seen any of Zivic, so really can't say. Feel kind of pissed off that it never happened (not that it ever was close to as far as I know) now that you mention it.
I am kinda pissed at toney in general. from 95-2003 he just went missing really. he should have been competing at a higher level in the lhw division keeping his name in the picture. I'm watching a lot of him atm, fighting at such a high level vs nunn, mccallum, johnson, barkley, littles etc. then nothing, then jirov, holyfield, booker, guinn, he clearly still had his talent as a heavyweight which makes me angry we essentially missed 8 of his best years due to him being a dick. rant over lol
The comparison with Jones is a valid 1, but Jones was much bigger/stronger (likely 10-15lbs in the ring), hit far harder and was taller, probably rangier. Hopkins has allot of range on Burley and if he isn't having success outside likes to come inside to rough up faster opponents with better jabs, Burley being a natural WW would be susceptable to these tactics I'm going with the natural MW on this 1, a good big man beats a good small 1
he fought like he HATED echols in that one if memory serves. his torturing of robert allen and joppy rank up there with me
The rematches with Echols and Allen were as filled with hate as any I've seen. Hopkins operated at his very best when he really wanted to punish and destroy the other guy.
How is he going to do that exactly? And why does it make you favour Burley? One could argue Pascal is of 'that' style. As for the fight, I genuinly don't know how Hopkins would approach it. Be interesting if McGrain or SH89 have any thoughts on it.
Why do you think he was stronger? Did he muscle any LHW's? Burley muscled a really strong one, not to mention Moore who was a phenomenally strong human being. GP, i just don't know. There are so so many inflection points and levers here. How you gonna know? You can be really, really good at chess, but it gets to a certain level and you just can't predict what happens next because you just aren't seeing what they can see. Same thing here. Who knows? If Hopkins fought very cautiously employing the jab and trying to bring Burley onto it with small moves he's got two natural problems, a) he's outreached and b) Burley is a lot faster not to mention very unorthodoxed. So on the surface, you wouldn't expect Hopkins to fight that way. But who knows what me might want to try to take away or give out with a strategy like that? I mean at the end of the day this is basically how he fought De La Hoya for spells, he certainly wasn't ultra-aggressive in that fight with a smaller man. That was more a cautious kind of pressure. That would obviously be a total disaster with Burley. If he fought tactically he would have to get it absolutely right I think. I imagine it would be one of his more aggressive performances in patches.
i'm certainly not nearly the analyst they are but i think hopkins would approach it like most of his big fights: strip away burley's strength. i imagine hopkins realizing that timing, judgement of distance, power and working at range are even or in burley's favour. based on styles, id lean towards hopkins speeding the tempo up slightly to throw off the long range, precision punching and trying to walk burley down. he'd work to negate burley's outside game, force the fight on the inside and make it a bit rough. even a prime hopkins wouldn't be averse to tying burley up, frustrating him and picking his own shots carefully. bhop would have a size advantage by fight night and would damn well use his physicality to bust up burley in close. when ready, he'd then engage at middle distance behind the jab and time burley coming in with a right hand round after round, following a patient strategy and ad******g as burley does. just how i see it anyway
Depends on what you mean by 'muscled', as this is boxing not wrestling, he bossed and bullyed most LHWs with his punches, which pretty obviously have much more weight behind them than Burley's with the 2 men being 2 natural weight classes apart. And weight has advantages in many ways in boxing, being able to push a man back, durability, being able to parry/block punches, holding your own in clinches - and BHOPs does like to hit and hold. It seems Charles and Bivins both managed to impose their size on Burley. As for Moore, Moore wasn't a LHW back then and probably wasn't as good by that stage either. Your analysis is focusing on the older BHOPs, who had changed his style and/or slowed down a bit. The 90s version is ofcourse much more aggressive
You know what I mean by "muscled" and you know I didn't mean "with his punches". I think Burley was stronger at the weight. The older Hopkins was perfectly capable of fighting a tactical fight also, but yes, I was focusing on the older version, which I consider superior. Not the oldest version, of course.