Hopkins win v trinidad - is it hugely overated?

Who cares if most people think Tito lost to oscar? Oscar can outbox most guys on his best day :yep, so can Hopkins. Trinidad was a damned good win, enough with the hindsight BS.

Speaking of hindsight, Hopkins was an old man in there with Trinidad.

 

From Europe or not Eastman was a good fighter, this is easy to see. And Hooking longevity is 20 defenses. As I've pointed out, it is historically much tougher to keep focus and stay on top than it is to get there. And no, Hop won't be remembered for the things you named, but for being the oldest fighter to capture a tilted and remain competitive with fighters half his age.

 

At the time, no one...and I mean no one expected Hopkins to dominate Trinidad in the manner that he did. It was a clinical dismantling of an undefeated, supremely confident power-puncher who was expected to either 1. overwhelm Bernard and stop him at best or fight his way through the incoming and then grind out a close but clear decision at absolute worse. Even those who picked Hopkins couldn't have imagined that he would win so easily, or that he would box so well in the process.

Hindsight is 20/20, but given the information available to viewers at the time, the result was incredibly unexpected. And that;s why this win isn't overrated, at all.

 

...

 

yeah its overated,

its like martinez getting a fight with Berto and stopping him

wouldnt mean ****

fight people your own size bernard

 

atsch

 

I have personally only seen this type of "logic" used to discredit Floyd's win over Corrales or Ward's domination in the super 6.

What fighters have you seen discredited with this tactic?

 

Trinidad would have won had 9/11 not happened

 

Very good win no doubt, no-one expected Hopkins to dominate him in the fashion that he did.

But for those saying that Trinidad was prime as a MW, or exaggerating how good Joppy was, shame on you

 

You mean 9/11 in any way didn't affect Hopkins as it did Trinidad? Last I checked even though "Tito" has a huge fanbase in New York City and the 9/11 terrorists attacks took place there Hopkins is an American citizen who was born and raised in this country and just like all americans and nationalities in this country B-Hop was just as affected by 9/11 as supposedly Trinidad was and therefore should not be used an excuse as to why he lost a fight that was fair and square.

 

Correction, "Tito's" promoter Don King didn't want the rematch(Hopkins-Trinidad 2)to happen, not Hopkins. B-Hop was all for a rematch and would've happily done the sequel in Trinidad's home country of Puerto Rico or even Costa Rica for the right amount of money of course, somewhere in the reasonable neighborhood of $15 million dollars. But it was King who didn't want it to happen because he knew what was coming and it wouldn't have been sweet revenge for Trinidad versus a guy who successfully implemented the same strategic/lateral manuever plan that Oscar De La Hoya used on him in 1999 before tiring and running in the last three rounds, except B-Hop was a bigger version of Oscar not to mention a more natural Middleweight that did a much better job of implementing the strategy and got the job done. Don King knew this.

 

:roflatsch

No he wouldn't.

Winky was far better at 154lbs then 160lbs, and would beat Tito. Maybe not as dominant as their actual fight, but beat him none the less.

 

Oh, so we're going to play this game?