Question: How is it that...

Uhm, DLH hasn't utterly demolished a top ten pfp figter in many years. Hopkins did it a month ago.

 

how can people say Morales is shot, but not JMM?

shot is alot more than just age.

 

Hopkins has always been an incredibly smart and great technical fighter with average to good physical attributes and an insane work ethic to preserve his body in top condition at all times. His average to good physical attributes have not eroded that much, and he still has all his mental attributes.

Oscar was a physically gifted athlete and a solid technical fighter who hasn't always kept his body in the best of shapes. His physical attributes have eroded, but he is still a solid technical fighter.

 

seriously dude? :?

the answer is past performances vs recent performances... erik lost the 5 of his last 6 fights. 2 losses by the names of raheem & diaz. his legs are gone and obviously isnt the same 'el terrible' ala pac 1.

imo, jmm is in his late prime and he could still fight & beat the best @ 130 which morales cant..

and yes, prime erik would have shat on jmm.

 

When you ask these types of questions, it really shows how much you know about boxing. And I don't mean for that to sound like a diss either. It's apples and oranges. Basically, you are saying they are equal in their status against top competition.

 

De La Hoya is NOT shot. He surely is past his prime, but definitely not shot.

Hopkins, on the other hand, is not shot either. He might be at a slightly better lever right now than Oscar, but mostly he's found a way (=style) to be very EFFECTIVE at the age of 43, despite his understandable physical decline.

In other words, both are past their prime, but neither is shot. Roy Jones is shot, those two aren't.

 

comon now before Hopkins fought Pavlik he was still in everyone's top10 p4p list. its not the same.

 

First of all, saying "everybody said..." doesn't even mean everybody said it. I don't know who you mean by everybody, maybe posters here. Well, there's maybe 2 good posters out of every ten, so take what many say here with a grain of salt.

DLH didn't look better just because he beat Forbes. If anything, the Forbes fights showed just how badly DLH is shot, or faded, or whatever you want to call it.

And part of the reason was due to just how badly DLH's face was marked up and bruised by Forbes, a guy who's not even a heavy hitter @ 135 (his best weight). Pac is a hard hitter. But Pac, being so much smaller, is the only thing that makes this fight interesting.

People criticized DLH vs. Mayweather because the first fight was a bore. Neither guy willing to commit. And aside from the scores, it was a clear Mayweather win. So whoin their right mind wanted a rematch of that when better (but lower paying) can be made? I don't get a dime, neither you do you. So you shold not base who you want Floyd to fight on how much he'll get paid. That's pretty ridiculous. And not saying you think that way, but many here do.

And again, not EVERYONE is saying DLH will lose to Pac. Seems many here think he might, but read articles all over the web, seems pretty 50-50 with a lot of insiders leaning towards DLH sinply becuase of his size and punch.

Keep in mind Hopkins beat a guy coming from the MW divvision. It's not like Pavlik was some top SprMW or LtHW. He was a MW. Tall and heavy hitting, but still a MW. Just like DLH beating Forbes didn't make DLH a top contender, Hopkins beating Pavilk didn't make him a player @ 175 for the title of World Champ.

 

Who is saying that he is shot and is going to lose because he is shot? Many of the posters here are saying Oscar is going to win because he's simply too big for Manny. I really haven't seen many people saying he will lose because he is shot. For the most part, it's a size thing.

 

It would probably be unfair to describe Oscar as shot, but he is definitely more faded than Hopkins. Hopkins style and ability has survived time better than almost any fighter in history. Although his physical attributes have deteriorated he has been smart enough to change his approach and has the smarts and skills to bring a fighter down to his pace. So whilst he doesn't have the speed or stamina that he use to, he is clearly still a very good fighter and relies more on his ring guile now, as he cannot be complacent with his punch output.

No one would call Bernard shot because he fights on a level that isn't all that far from his peak performances, his approach differs slightly yes, but in terms of how effective he is he hasn't fallen that far. Oscar has pretty much deteriorated on all fronts, but he is still quite good so it is probably unfair to use the word shot, shot is Roy Jones, Oscar is just badly faded.