So where does Hopkins rank now all-time?

I think of all the people who benefitted from Hopkins beating Pavlik, Joe Calzaghe got the lot of it..

For one thing, Hopkins win over Pavlik validated Calzaghe's win over Bernard, in that he defeated a man who was clearly still a force in boxing regardless of his advanced age.

Secondly, by losing to Hopkins, Pavlik probably reduced the high demand for a fight with Calzaghe, and perhaps even the doubts that Joe would stand a chance against him. Hence, Calzaghe has no real pressure to face Pavlik, and can now reap the lucrative rewards of fighting Roy Jones, and perhaps even ad a good scalp to his resume.

Ultimately, I would like to see Calzaghe retire undefeated sometime within his next two fights or so... Will it happen? historically the odds are not in favor of such a scenario. He will likely fight until he has several losses and can no longer climb into a ring. Additionally, his first defeat will probably come against an opponent whom he was not supposed to lose to..

Nevertheless, I wish Joe the best, and hope that he makes the right choices at this junction in his career..

 

You are right.


I thought he was though (which, i admit, means **** all in this regard), and history was on my side.

 

But your earlier points are still well taken. Underdog or favorite, Vitali was 37 years of age, hadn't fought in 4 years, and was constantly mending injuries.. He destroyed a 27 year old titlist who was coming off the biggest win of his career. Hopkins at age 43, and after losing 3 of his last 5 fights, defeated an undefeated champion who some thought was one of the best p4p fighters around..

Is this a reflection of the sport's decline?

 

Not necessarily. Due to advances in training, nutrition, et. al., athletes' primes have been greatly extended in almost all sports. VK and BH are reflective of this. Furthermore, both matches were stylistic nightmares for the losers. And both winning performances were masterful in any era.

 

Hopkins prime IMO was between Echols II and Eastman. Some say the mid-late 90's when he fought Jackson and Johnson. I disagree with that assumption. His tactical approach; aggressiveness, boxing laterally, countering, precision, speed, athleticism, and generally being at his most effective with everything combined was in his mid-late 30's.

 

hopkins' last night domination earns him a new spot, my top 50!.

 

I'll be the first to admit I wanted Pavlik to win. Not becaise I'm a fan, but because I want all these old coots out of the sport. Moreover, I've never been a Hopkins fan and especially so over the last 2 years. In my eyes he had become a cynical, rule-bending bore.

However after watching Hopkins turn back the years and absolutely school Pavlik, I'm happy to eat my words. It's been a long, long time since I've enjoyed watching a fight as much.

Hopkins put on a masterclass and used every bit of his skill and experience to simply dominate a man 17 years younger, and not some up-and-coming prospect (which considering Hopkins' age would have still been a great result) but a proven young middleweight champion. Astounding.

Being generous, I gave Pavlik 1 round and the rest to Hopkins. People may say the extra weight affected Pavlik, but I think Hopkins simply neutralised him. His movement, workrate and sharp hitting confused Pavlik, who ironcally was made to look 43 instead of 26.
Despite Hopkins' great start, I was expecting him to slow down and for Pavlik to eventually exert some sort of pressure, but it bever materialised. Hopkins actually really started to catch Pavlik with some hard combinations and Pavlik was rocked on several occasions. Perhaps with a bit more ambition, Hopkins could have forced a stoppage, but Pavlik has proven power and the old war horse was too smart to make a mistake which had cost the likes of Billy Conn a famous victory.

Perhaps some will now turn on Pavlik and question his credentials, but let's face it the odds were not in Hopkins' favour, primarily because at 43, he should really be nothing more than a shell of his former self. How he managed to fight as well as he did is a marvel. ****, he's a marvel.

It was also nice to see him give words of encouragement to Pavlik afterward, and he showed class in consoling the loser.

As for Pavlik, he needs to turn this into a positive by learning from it. One or two shortcomings were revealed. His hands aren't quick (At 43 Hopkins was miles faster) and defensively he needs to sharpen up a lot, but time is on his side and he's still the middleweight champion.

 

Give it 20 years and then we can judge properly what these wins add to Hopkins attempt to enter boxing greatness.

 

On an all-time P4P basis I would certainly agree, and I have a soft spot for Marvin.
Hopkins is just phenomenal though...in fact, I'm a bit of a fan now.

 

Good to see someone not afraid to bury previous leanings and find new and unbridled appreciation


:happy

 

It's true that fighters are better at advanced ages these days, but even so at 43 Hopkins is doing things he just should not be doing.
Modern nutrition and such can only go so far. He's a freak no matter which way we look at it.

 

Calzaghe did not beat Hopkins. Just like with Leonard-Hagler we have no clear cut winner in this fight :-(

 

I think there is much more of a case of hagler beating leonard than hoppo beating joe......

 

Yes, he did. The judges and The consensus says so. Accept it.

 

Yes, there is. And Hagler didn't fake injury at any time to buy a few seconds. He didn't beat Leonard though.