Tommy Burns vs Bernard Hopkins

I go for Burns.

 

Yeah, me too. Hopkins at lhw isn´t anything special. The only reason why he still is successful is because the smw division drains half, if not more, of the lhw talent pool. And I say that as a big fan of the old man.

 

workrate would probably be one of the deciding factors, not in hopkins favour.

 

I think Burns would outwork B-Hop.

Then Hopkins retires and starts his own fashion magazine.

 

I think Hopkins would win every round. Hopkins is bigger, more varied, and just plain better in almost every department.

Am I supposed to be impressed that Burns beat Squires or Schreck?

Just look at this shitpile Squires and explain to me how that is a professional boxer by today's standards... All respect due to historical value, but please...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk2ozZ-x9Q8[/ame]

 

one area where i would favour turn of the century over modern, infighting. i see that holding up here. hopkins would score and do some damage with jabs and generally from the outside. but this is not lhw bernards game. and in range is bad against the puncher above, although hopkins is the polar opposite of that opponent so very little specific to be taken from it
12 rounds, ref allows infighting.
7.00 hop ko/tko
2.60 hop pts
1.95 bur ko/tko
5.00 bur ko/tko
maybe something like that?(not real work so i aint doing real maths)

 

a) Holmes giving homage.

b) Squires doesn't even seem to be participating in the same sport as Johnson. He's breaking just about every rule I ever learned from a coach... and not breaking them in the "I'm a genius. I learned the rules to break the rules" way.

 

Hopkins more refined on skills in every aspect.....Tommy´s right hand would be dangerous.....but Hopkins by a clear decision IMO...

 

Yeah this is pretty much my sentiment too