Hopkins vs. Kessler

Your ridiculous selective definition of skill. You essentially believe Pavlik is a far superior fighter, because he is far more skillful in the areas that you choose to compare, whilst ignoring footwork or any sort of movement (offensive/defensive) that may be influenced by "athleticism".

 

You have clearly implied a number of times that Pavlik is the better fighter as he is in your opinion a better technician than Kessler, as Kessler is purely reliant on his natural athleticism.

 

Hopkins by decision.

This would in no way resemble Hopkins/Pavlik. I can't understand all these references to it.

Pavlik and Kessler are both essentially 1-2 fighters and white, but they aren't otherwise very similar.

Pavlik has (typically) a higher workrate and stops opponents with accumulation whereas Kessler throws less but heavier shots.

Kessler is a natural 168lber and therefore bigger naturally than Pavlik.

Kessler's chin and/or defence can be said to be better as he hasn't tasted canvas as much as Pavlik.

Pavlik suffered from a crushing lack of experience when he faced Hopkins. He/his team didn't have a clue what to do in there. Kessler has already had his out of depth moment against Calzaghe so would say he wouldn't be quite as bewildered.

Kessler's size, accuracy and power would cause Hopkins to respect him more than he did Pavlik. Kessler is good at finding range whereas Pavlik consistently got too close to Hopkins to use his long punches.

Also Kessler has better hand and foot speed.

As I said Hopkins would take this as I believe Kessler's orthodox 1-2 style wouldn't give Hopkins any problems. But Kessler's aforementioned advantages over Pavlik would mean it was no schooling.

 

to bad he didnt show that against taylor

 

Yes clearly implied. Pavliks systematically destructive Kessler's limited (which Pavlik clearly isn't :nut) etc etc. I will stop because your just going to try and weasle your way out of the obvious implications you make.

 

kessler is superior to pavlik in all areas.. that includes the technical point of view and athletic.. :deal

 

Sorry I missed this.

Please explain your veiws,

 

I can't tell if you are being serious or not on any subject after that thread yesterday....:scaredas:

:smoke

 

Extremely hard fight to predict even if we all know both fighter will fight his fight and won't change his style overnight. But still... youth, power, stamina, punch output, straight punching, power jab, effective style, textbook defense, accuracy vs. timing, slickness, ring smarts, counter-punching, slipping the jab, inside fight, tricks, physical advantage (at 175).

I'm leaning toward Hopkins at the moment, although Kessler is clearly P4P material, just needs a big fight to crack into the top10. Pretty tough fight to predict, Calzaghe didn't smart or boxed out Kessler - on the same punch output level Kessler was clearly superior due to accurace. He outfought and outlanded him, so Kessler, who fought a perfect fight and landed enough punches that wins a fight 99.5%, lost. But Hopkins style might confuse Kessler, wintout the jab, just going at it (worked pretty well in the 12th vs. Calzaghe), isn't Mikkel's fight. Hopkins by SD.