Hopkins getting better with age was/is a myth

This might be the stupidest ****en outlook that I've ever read on any boxing site.

And you're last 3 so called sentences...I should smack the **** out of your stupid ass!

And what happened to the pressure of Duran in their second fight?

Just stfu, lmao.

 

They were quicker than he was and threw more punches than he did.

 

That's over simplifying Hopkins problems with speed. He beat plenty of guys with quicker hands than him. Tito, Allen, Pascal etc all had faster hands than Hopkins and Hopkins dealt with that speed fine.

But if you had quick feet as well and force him to chase you then he really struggled. Guys like Jones Jr and Dawson had the speed of hand and more importantly foot, to give Hopkins nightmares, they both had styles that would always trouble him.

Calzaghe's quick footwork was what gave Hopkins the most problems in their fight. Not his hand speed, not his work rate but his footwork. Calzaghe was able to put pressure on Hopkins unlike other volume punchers like Tito and Pavlik because he had the footwork to get to him and be in a position to throw more often than not.

Hopkins best asset was his footwork it's what allowed him to be so good late in his career and anyone that had quick and good footwork would always give him problems.

 

I don't think Calzaghe nor Taylor beat Hopkins. Jones beat Hop. Dawson didn't beat Hop because of speed. He had a size and reach advantage that he utilized perfectly in that fight. Dawson did the same thing to beat Tarver, Johnson, and Adamek. He didn't overwhelm Hop.

 

I like this post. You make some good points. However my statement stands on its own. Tito was a chinny natural welterweight. Allen and Pascal were not great at world level. Didn't Pascal lose a decision to Carl Froch at 168?

 

I never wrote he overwhelmed Hop but Dawson's speed and workrate advantages were apparent. And I believe both Calzaghe and Taylor beat Hop. Even if you disagree with that statement you can't deny their speed and workrate advantages gave Bernard problems.

 

Pascal its way better than all ggg resume

 

Taylor and Calzaghe missed a lot of punches against Hop. Hop missed a lot of punches against Roy. And Hop was just at a size and reach disadvantage against Dawson.

When I think of Hop, beating him with speed and high volume punching isn't the formula for beating him becaue a lot of guys have not beaten him that way.

 

I wrote that he didn't overwhelm Hop. And that's where we differ. I don't think that Cal nor Taylor beat Hop. And yes I'm denying your statement. Giving someone problems is one thing, beating them is another. Speed and high volume punching will give any fighter in boxing history problems.

Hop knew how to deal with that. Hops style changed after he went from being the high volume puncher to being a more conservative fighter who paced himself as he got older. But age does that.

 

You had excuses for Pac and now Duran. Foh. And for every pressure fighter that you can name, 9 times out of 10 a boxer beat his ass.

The greatest fighters in boxing history are pure boxers. Henry Armstrong might be the greatest pressure fighter in boxing history, and he isn't called TBE.

 

Ouch! Isn't that another thread somewhere?

 

Hopkins missed alot against Calzaghe and was massively outlanded against Calzaghe

 

Hop and Dawson are approximately the same height with Dawson having just an inch and a half reach advantage. That's not why Dawson beat Bernard. Even though Taylor and Calzaghe missed a lot against Hopkins they still out landed him. And as far as your last statement goes, just which outstanding fighters with "speed and high volume punching" did he beat?