Is Bernard Old Enough Where...

absolutely and that has been the case since the rematch with taylor IMO.

I felt he won the first fight but he wasn't able to adapt as good as taylor in the second and just didn't look as good.

being in his 40's, criticisng him for any loss is ludicrous imo.

 

You cannot take away his accomplishments. He's proved him self over and over again. So no a loss wont hurt his legacy. A loss is almost expected to be comming sooner or later.

 

In some ways I think it would be insulting to Bernard to just give him a pass for any failure. I think that if he looks aged or tired or slow or unable to pull the trigger, then he should almost always be given the benefit of the doubt for his age. But losing to a great fighter at this stage should still have credit given to his opponent, despite the fact that losing at such a high age would not hurt his legacy. There comes a point where you're so past your best, only the successes really count for you; though that doesn't mean credit can't go to one who defeats you around the same time you are making those successes.

 

Erik Morales baby!

 

He is getting older.. Retirement or a loss(es) is coming closer..
I wont take anything away from Bhops legacy if he losses at this point..
BUT, i will certainly give his opponent credit..

 

:good

 

What Hopkins is doing is amazing but if you are going to give him credit for his wins then you have to take into account any losses he might get as well when judging his legacy.

A fight either counts or it doesn't. Can't see how you can go into a fight and have a fighter fans saying his legacy is enhanced if he wins but it is not affected at all if he loses.

 

Ali-Holmes???

As far as the questing being asked:

Yes, he's that old. If he looses it will be clearly due to the fact he's OLD! Still whoever does it will be due respect.

 

Basically this.

 

I dont know if everyone else feels the same, but for me he is in a win win situation because if he looses its because he was "too old" or "aged over night" and should already be way past his sell by date, but for some reason isnt.

For me competing at this level at this age means he cant damage his legacy and win or loose it gives me more respect for the guy.

I want to see him continue to win and leave on a win.

 

Take duran v barkley, would his legacy have been damaged if he lost to barkley? Of course not. Did his legacy improve by beating him, of course it did.

 

Yeah Ali had not business still being in the ring at that time, still goes down on his record as a loss though doesn't it. Although you obviously don't count it for much when judging his career as a whole.

Its a tricky area but i don't think its fair for a fighter to basically be in a no lose situation.

Ali from the Holmes fight was clearly shot to pieces as Roy Jones is at the moment so you can make a big consideration in those sort of circumstances. But like it or Roy Jones' legacy is being hurt by his fights in recent years.

Hopkins on the other hand despite being 46 is not shot as a fighter. And all the credit to him for his dedication and his natural gifts for being able to still be fighting at the top level at his age. But he's still a very capable boxer so i think both his wins and losses should count

 

When your legacy is "sealed" then losses doesnt really hurt anymore..
Examples: Do you consider Roy jones's losses legacy damageing?
Would you ever bring up those losses when talking about his greatness?
Erik Morales, even if he losses he will still be remembered as an ATG, wins would still be nice through..
Hopkins have proved everything that he can prove, losses wont remove anything from his legendary legacy, but wins would still look good on his record..
As another poster mentioned: These old guys are in win-win siturations...

 

How can roy's legacy be damaged? His accomplishments don't get magically wiped away.