Hopkins v Duran

I know a couple of hardcore Duran fans who would even chuckle at that.

 

I was also to a degree, but I appreciated what Hopkins did. First, he was already 39 by then and hadn't been aggresive since Joppy, but more so because he tactically broke down De La Hoya.

He made Oscar become aggressive, and made Oscar open up, by the middle rounds Hopkins was timing and placing lead right hands on Oscar quite frequently if I remember correctly. Even at that stage he should have just ran over DLH, but the way in which Hopkins fought and the success he had, I have no doubts that P4P B-Hop would always beat DLH. His size of course palyed a role, but he didn't use it as an advantage to the extent Hagler did to Duran or Monzon did to Napoles. Granted Duran and Napoles were far greater than DLH, but they were also considerably smaller and both clearly past their absolute peak when they fought Hagler or Monzon. Watching how the fight played out, I pick Duran P4P over Hagler, and Napoles very well could have beaten Monzon P4P, but I saw no indication that DLH would have been able to beat Hopkins in a P4P match-up. He outsmarted, outmanuevered, and for the most part outboxed De La Hoya.

Overall it's not impressive because Oscar was not very much at 160, but from a strategic viewpoint I was impressed by Hops.

 

Hopkins would do a number on him ... way too big, strong and good at that weight ... wide decision win ...

 

I don't think Hopkins did anything wrong either really.He was totally comfortable throughout.

I'd just have preferred the old executioner Hopkins to have shown up that night.

 

Yes, it would have been awesome to see Hopkins rip Oscar apart.

 

Hopkins would have walked through De La Hoya if he had opted to do so. But what happened, happened. And IMO Hopkins never had an easy time with for him for as long as the fight lasted. De La Hoya was boxing aggressively, landing some nice jabs, and outboxing Hopkins. But it was only a matter of time before Hopkins started to click into gear.