Hopkins vs Pavlik is one of the best fights a boxer can watch to learn

Bhop certainly had his share of dominant performances. Tarver, Joppy, Tito, Pavlik and Cloud hardly one a round between them all.

 

Add de la Hoya to the picture and you get Hopkins sauce with a side order of liver!

 

So true about hop

Great technician who lived the life and respected his craft. I would say he had elite reflexes

 

Most would say "he was just a blown up middle weight when he challenged tarver for the light heavyweight crown" but no he gained his power and was strong, carried his strength up to the next 2 divisions above him!

Tarver was a stud in rematches, hence forth Hopkins never gave him any such liberty to rematch clause. Poor Tarver never had a chance to redeem himself after such a dominating performance from bhop. A beautiful right hand put him on the canvas, this is the same Tarver that beat Roy Jones junior.

 

You think a rematch plays out any different?

 

Man ya gotta love the wind up bolo punches twice in the seventh round, what a beatdown. Most fighters get out at their late thirties, early forties but Hopkins was still doing this stuff at his age close to 50. Even George Foreman was only 45 when he snatched the title, bhop was the oldest man in history of combat sports at the time to beat and win a title.

Kelly Pavlik said he was not 100% for the Hopkins fight BUT no fighter is EVER 100% when they enter the ring, giving full props to Bernard.

This is the same Pavlik who got sent to the canvas by Jermaine Taylor in what he was thinking then was that "Shyte it's gonna be a long night."

Boxing is a young man's sport.

Sam Soliman was pushing past 40 yet was the most conditioned athlete on the show of the contender.

Feroz and Tito were washed up and showed signs of weakness during their early Demises. The only division that is prime when you are 30 years old is the heavyweight division, because they don't spend too much energy at that point , look at Jared Anderson not peaked yet, because they are more focused on the knockout. Then you have to factor in seasoning, match making, timing, and also have to wait for the kingpins to retire in the division. At 30 a hw is young. In his prime. Most have a background of coming from other sports, so they are young in boxing years, not much wear and tear on the body. Look at Seth Mitchell. A hw is usually a cross over athlete. That is why the gym in America called "the heavyweight factory" is in business trying to find the next great great heavyweight.

Watching Hopkins, I some how ask myself: is power really the last thing that goes? With Hopkins I'm thinking usually it's the experience, ring savvy, IQ, ring generalship, expertise, style and compatibility as styles make fights; with a few tricks up his sleeve. Evander Holyfield in his 40s could only fight in spurts!

Emmanuel steward (r.i.p.) also explained that Holyfield's legs weren't under him at a certain age in time, he couldn't do roadwork. Guys like James toney never did roadwork, but that's besides the point,

Hopkins was an alien, uncanny in his abilities even at an advanced age.

 

No, I don't. But Tarver feels differently lol, latest episode of hot boxing with Mike Tyson.

 

This content is protected

 

The plot thickens https://www.boxingforum24.com/threa...t-kelly-pavlik-at-the-age-of-43.633345/page-2

 

Pavlik fought like he was drugged in Hopkins fight. Never saw a top boxer so listless as Pavlik that night

 

Hopkins was maybe THE best in history at making other fighters fight his fight.

 

Pavlik has made a lot of excuses for that night. But he seemed genuine in one of the interviews released a few years back. I think he admitted to something like: "I wasn´t at my best and Hopkins didn´t let me into the fight". He admitted defeat and gave Hopkins his credit.
Seemed like he was regretful that he could not perform at his best that night, more so than being upset over the loss.

 

Made some solid dough over that one.

 

That was Joe Calzaghe