8-11 if he KO's or legit UD's him. If it's controversial, then he stays around 13-17. Prior to the Dawson win, he was hardly on the radar for a top 30 P4P list.
if he gets in the p4p rankings, then we will have a definitive answer for that thread the other day about 'worst boxer ever to make top10 p4p list'. Beating an ancient ATG doesn't make you an ATG, and neither does beating a passive, lackadaisacal champ like Dawson. Pascal is an awkward, lunging one shot at a time guy. I don't think there's ANYONE who considers him as a guy who's going to hold the belt for any length of time or dominate a string of challengers. He's a titleist who's going to go down sooner rather than later. The fact that a 68 yr old Hopkins is considered a serious threat to beat him tells you all you need to know... he's just a soft spot for Nard to maybe get one more big victory before he rides off into the sunset.
Dawson has serious talent, he just doesn't have any drive. When he bothered to put an offense, he was crushing Pascal. But you are correct, Dawson really didn't belong in the top 10 to begin with.
sure where was BHop when Dawson was undefeated ?....this is abitch move almost like what would happen if Margo beat Pac, Floyds sorry ass would have his name on a contract A.S.A.P.
B-Hops not your average 40 something though is he? To answer the question, I don't think it is enough, but Im sure most lists will shove him in at 9/10
I dont think I'd consider him top 10 quite yet and he's one of ym favourite fighters and I'm probably one of his biggest fans on this forum.
you should just give posting about Pascal, because from this comment and your comments on another thread related to Pascal it is clear you barely nkow anything about him as a fighter and have not watched him very often.
I can't see Pascal beating Hopkins. Hopkins is too crafty and chooses his opponents carefully these days. He obviously sees glaring flaws in Pascal's style. I'm going with a Hopkins UD in an ugly fight.