Didn't Winky prove he was better p4p than Hopkins?

Full credit to him for coming physically and mentally prepared at his age. I'm not taking that away from him. It is truly amazing, and I don't begrudge him winning this fight, as I feel there is an argument that can be made that he won a good 7 rounds.

 

You, like many others here are getting caught up in the fact that Hopkins is still competent despite being a fossil. I'm not denying that, but age has NOTHING to do with your p4p status, which is what the topic of this thread is all about.

And sure, Hopkins did well and humiliated Tarver despite making the jump up in weight, but I think it's fair to say that the jump in weight has not debilitated him as much as it has Wright. Hopkins is much more natural at lightheavy (I mean, he even started his career there) than Wright, and the question is really whether Wright proved he was better than Hopkins p4p right now given that he fought above his best weight, a weight more natural to Hopkins than it was for Wright.

 

Kinda reminds me of another fight
<=====

 

Damn you come up with some great threads, topics very worthy of consideration. When judging a fighter like Wright, we have to consider how under-rated he was for so long due to his stingey defense. A lot of razzle dazzle tends to get peoples attention whether the shots land or not. In the end judging tends to be subjective.. If we were just to measure power shots landed and jabs landed, the fight likely would have been a draw, or Winky would have won it.. Thing is the power and quality of the clean shots landed are what many people tend to judge, rather than the punches actually landed.. In many cases you don't even need to land cleanly to have it considered a clean punch via compubox.

This is one thing I was trying to point out in the Wright vs Taylor fight. So many punches Taylor threw had effect even though they were clearly at least partially blocked by Wright, who I still thought had a considerable landed punch output in that fight which I suspected before I even watched it a second time.

Unfortunately fighters don't get points for blocking punches .

But yeah, I would have to agree that lb for lb today, Wright has to get the nod considering he was the one that went up in weight and seemed to not be comfortable in his own skin, or at least as comfortable as we usually see him. Game fight with one of those fighters who is a master at winning, and for a very long time being a guy nobody liked unless you are a true boxing fan.. I'm talking about HBO for a long time didn't like Hop, I believe because they didn't feel he was an easy guy to market.

 

I disagree. He didn't shatter it. I don't think he had the speed or power to, some like RJJ could do it. X went around it and through it. Not only that but he was catching Wright with shots that were cleaner then Wrights ever been hit with. I think this started in the first round.

I see what you are saying about the little flurries. X would take away Wrights offence and pick his shots. Those flurries were to even the table when he was caught.

The punch stats offensively are a moot point, it was close. The fight was close in the ring and on paper. However the ring general was X, plus he had the suprior defence, offence was about equal.

I thought you meant all time is Wright higher. Now Wright isn't higher either, ultimately he lost. He could clearly fight at the weight, it was skill and smarts that gave him an L!

Taylor didn't do a better job. He had the youth to bomb away. If X was younger he'd be ripping Wright apart. X was still pacing himself. Being at 175 and facing a smaller guy meant he could risk a bit more than usual but he is still old.

 

hopkins is a natural light heavy winky is a natural junior middle he has goen up 3 divisions to fight him...did you see how lathargic he was this wasa fight which didnt prove anything winky's whole style revolves around being quick snappy and agile while being able to block the punches.hopkins did exactly what he should of done but it wasnt a fair fight at middlewieght i would of agreed more.

 

Being "the man" is different from being respected and being marketable.

Winky is still the man man? Nah . . . definitely not. If he only fought a rematch with taylor and defeated him . . . you can call him the man.

Respected? Yes! Definitely. Winky has some serious skills and nobody can deny that.

Marketable? Nah . . . he's not. He needs a named opponent for his fight to sell. Has he ever headlined a main event of a PPV affair?

 

I agree, sweet scientist.

 

I don't think so, Hopkins was the 160 pound champion for 10 years.

 

Thanks for the nice words mate :good

I've got to say, measuring the effect of a blow is not exactly a science, and people can disagree with the quality of clean punches, to say nothing of ones that are partially deflected and even totally blocked but manage to have the defender's glove hit up against the head. Ultimately I didn't feel Bernard's blows were having that much of an effect on Winky (i.e. anymore than what Winky's were to him), and though Bernard closed the show well, as he usually does, in terms of rounds counted, I thought both men had gathered the same.

 

It's good that we can agree on something :good

 

We'll just have to disagree there. I think Vasquez, Vargas and Taylor were landing cleaner blows and putting more hurt than what Hopkins was on Winky.

It was a good ploy on Bernard's behalf, unsettling Wright's guard with quick little shots which enabled subsequent ones to land.

I thought Hopkins was the better ring general, Winky had the slightly better defense and landed a few more clean punches. As to effective agression, I didn't think either man was that effective in their agression, though Winky was the one pressing the fight.

I thin there was a clear drop off in stamina and speed for Wright with the rise in weight. You can't say the same with Hopkins. He looked utterly shyte against Taylor both times and has done better with the rise in weight. Wright still fought well at 170, but there's no question in my mind he does a better job at 160. Right now, I don't think Hopkins does a better job at 160. Prime for Prime, Hopkins beats Winky, no doubt, but Hopkins hasn't been prime for a good 5 years at least.

Taylor did a better offensive job than Hopkins (never said he did better defensively or tactically). He did have the youth to bomb away, and some of his bombs landed.

Again, you're talking all time and I agree, Hopkins wins. Right now, Winky is the better fighter p4p in my books.

 

Good God Scientist, although you agree Hopkins was the better ring general, you're going to give Winky rounds based on your opinion on a slightly better defense and a few more clean punches???????

You are not going to take the effectiveness of those punches into account??????atsch

You are totally going to disregard that Hopkins landed the much harder blows???atsch

Since this fight is just a few days past, I'd really love to see the rounds you gave Winky with an explanation on why that round went to Winky!

I'm baffled as to how someone can come up with more than 2 rounds to give to Wright!

If you have the time Scientist, take me into your way of scoring a round, by pointing out the rounds you gave Winky and why he edged those particular rounds!

I just cant see anything that Winky did in a round that Hopkins did'nt do better!

 

Btw Scientist, how did you score the Hopkins and Winky's fights with Jermaine Taylor?

 

I don't think either man was more effective with their shots. I thought Bernard threw harder as a whole, but didn't land as cleanly as Winky. And although Winky landed a little cleaner, there wasn't much to his shots. In the end I felt they neutralised each other. (Haven't I said that in this thread already?)

I haven't got the time to do an in depth round by round analysis right now, but all I will say is that many rounds were close, with not much separating each fighter. Having said that there were subtle shifts in the action, with some rounds Winky doing a little better, landing the better shots, other rounds Bernard doing better and landing the better shots. All the rounds weren't carbon copies of each other to warrant a shutout as you had. There were shifts in the action. I'm sure most people that had Hopkins winning by 2 points, or even so much as 4, would specify rounds I gave to Wright as the same rounds they gave Wright.

Having the fight scored a shutout to me says that you came to the fight (or developed very early in the fight) a preconceived idea, and you stopped following the action and just went with what you surmised without looking at what happened.

But hey, you had Taylor shutting out Spinks, you had Marquez shutting out John and you had Marquez all but shutting out Barrera as well, so why should I be surprised?

In any case I will give you my scorecard:

115-115 A draw.
Hopkins gets rounds 1,3,5,11 and 12.
Winky rounds 2,4,6,7 and 9.
Rounds 8 and 10 even.

As I've said before, I'm totally fine with anyone having it 2 points either way, as some of the rounds there were very close.

I had Taylor taking the first Taylor-Hopkins fight 115-114
Taylor winning rounds 1,2,4,6,7 and 8.
Hopkins winning rounds 5,9,10,11 and 12.
Round 3 being even.

I had the second Taylor-Hopkins fight scored a draw: 115-115
Taylor winning rounds 1,2,4,6 and 11.
Hopkins winning rounds 5,7,8,9 and 10.
Rounds 3 and 12 even.

I had the Wright-Taylor fight scored 115-113 for Wright.
Taylor winning rounds 3,4,6,7 and 10.
Wright winning rounds 1,2,5,8,9,11 and 12.