What happened to B-Hop vs Pavlik?

Basically Pavlik couldnt land **** and Hopkins pot shot his ass to death. I only gave Pavlik two rounds.

 

I won't spoil the action (finding the fight online is easy) but I will give my score. I scored it 118-109; I gave Pavlik one round (5th I think) and Hopkins lost a point for clinching (bull****, he clinched very little compared to most boxers). Pavlik lost one point for a very deliberate and very powerful rabbit punch.

Overall, I found it the most entertaining Hopkins fight for a long, long time.

 

How exactly would you call that pot shotting ?

Did you even watch the fight ?

 

On and off. I wanted to watch the Laker game too. From what I saw it was pot shotting but I did see some combos from Bhop in the later rounds.

 

I scored it 11-1 B-Hop.

118-108 with the deductions.

 

B-Hop was mocking him doing wind up style punches like Apollo Creed in Rocky, you missed a thing of beauty.

 

I bet you enjoyed it Calzaghe fan.

 

I'm not much of a Calzaghe fan actually, his slapping style doesn't appeal to me but that doesn't mean hes a **** fighter.

I enjoyed it because i picked B-Hop on here said Pavlik could be exposed and had a bet on Hopkins to win @ 4/1 and i'm a fan of the executioner!

The Executioner of old was baby, the one that schooled Tito.

 

So you claim Pavlik was "exposed" huh? Was Cotto "exposed" when he faced Margarito?

 

Cotto was competitive.

 

Cotto-Margarito was a fight of two halves; both Cotto and Margarito looked sensational at different parts of the fight.

Pavlik barely landed one meaningful shot. He never hurt Hopkins, never even forced him to back up. B-Hop did it all on his own accord, deployed his strategy so well he had time to rock Pavlik hard with a series of Bolo punches.

Honestly, it was sublime, and dispelled all the myths about Bernard Hopkins-

A) That he's boring
B) That he can't fight for the whole 12 rounds
C) He has to cheat to win
D) He's past it/Shot/Old etc etc
E) He's a defensive spoiler

Hopkins has of course met that criteria in numerous fights, some fights with all of those things. He showed his age in the latter stages of the Calzaghe fight. Here, Pavlik looked like a 40-year old journeyman facing off with an unbeaten prospect, full of energy, speed, flashy combinations and dictating the pace. It was like a showcase for The Executioner.

But what he did last night was awesome, answering all the questions, outclassing a nigh-on Elite level fighter, supposedly ducked by some and with a fearsome K.O record, and totally nullifying his strengths to the point where some people are writing him off as having none.

 

But was he "exposed"?:think

 

Pavlik lost almost every round and barely did anything, he was jabbing out of range and hitting air, he looked like a sparring partner in there.

Time for you to watch the full fight then say he wasn't "exposed", its not a word i throw around like most on here, this was exactly the definition of exposed this was as bad as Calzaghe-Lacy nearly only Hopkins was a massive outsider to win, Pavlik was getting hurt badly and busted up and could of easily been stopped he was picked apart.

 

Tru dat but I hate the whole "exposed" **** people always say. BTW, what is your prediction for Jones/Cazaghe?