so now faking low blows is "old school,crafty,throwback" ???

Very true.

 

This does make me laugh, I read hundreds of posts about how Hatton belongs in the wwe but Hopkins is a wiley old fox :nut

 

just as long as his explanations include the terms "jersey joe walcott" or "archie moore" it's legit .

 

Uhhm, there was clear video evidence that Joe whacked Nard in the balls. What part of this is everybody missing?? LOL

 

***** move, plain and simple. Ruiz didn't get any love when he did it, why does hopkins?

 

If BHop wasn't dirty, he wouldn't be BHop..:tong

 

Indeed. Now how do you explain the second time when Hops was in the corner and Cortez had to tell him he wasn't hit low?

 

Pathetic acting too, everyone there including the ref knew he was pouring it on.

The punch was smothered (was from the side and bounced off B-Hops right glove), and unless B-Hop has a ****, it landed nowhere near his genitalia

 

I've noticed that many of the people complain about Hatton and Wlad holding and how it's cheap and they should be penalized are the same ones who heap praise on Hopkins for being so crafty

I would say that holding is more tolerable when it's actually accompanied by a reasonable workrate and an attempt to throw punches on a fairly regular basis. Clinching is a part of the game but Hopkins doesn't supplement it with enough punching

What Hopkins does later in his career is almost identical to Ruiz, constant holding/mauling, throwing 20-30 punches a round, with no intention of fighting. The only difference is Hopkins is a lot more gifted and better defensively. But it's not any better to watch. His style in the later years is like watching a smaller, more skilled John Ruiz.

 

He was hit low and milked it to catch some wind. Big deal. He's 43, cut the guy some slack.:finger5