When was hopkins prime & how does he rate to the hopkins who fought pavlik/calzaghe?

nard was at his absolute best between johnson and echols 2. after that he started to show his age. you people who even suggest a forty year old fighter being at peak or even prime are just ****ing ******ed, no two ways about it.

 

I think Hops started to slow down at middleweight after the Joppy fight. By the time he fought Taylor he was relying on expierience. When he went up in weight he seemed to get some energy back as he showed against Tarver.

 

Whenever his 'peak' was, we can certainly say he wasnt in his prime or at his peak when he fought Joe Calzaghe and Kelly Pavlik last year.

 

against Pavlik, he looked 30, against Joe, 34=35
He may stay till 50

 

hopkins pysically peeked b4 he technally peeked

 

Can't agree with this too much. BHop was pretty spent for much of the second half of the fight against Joe and needed to employ guile and cheating to the most in order to survive. He was over 40 ffs, and while I'd not say he was far outside his prime, his experience and skill set advantage of age (as well as his as China says 'rare genetics') are not enough to qualify him as prime. Couple of years before Joe he was probably about on balance at his best.

 

I'm with cuchulain on the career-wide analyses, but I'm not going to quote the entire post!

-There's the fierce I'll-be-damned-if-I-go-back-to-jail roadwarrior who'd go anywhere & fight anyone, and in a relatively crowd-pleasing style, no less.
-There's the hungry (in more ways than one) supremely conditioned veteran.
-There's the cautious 'old' fighter getting by on mind games and a right hand lead.
-And now the, possibly, hungry supremely conditioned veteran getting by on mind games and a spoiling style. I'm still on the fence on how the "modern" Nard does or doesn't compare to the physical and skill peaks.

The man's even more of a boxing chameleon than Big George!

 

Selectively quoting again, Pretty.

Why didn't you paste what I wrote when I DID narrow that gap two or three lines later ?.

In other words, I said VERY ****ING CLEARLY in my post that Bernard's peak was, IMO, between 1999 and 2004.

That's your opinion of when his peak was.

And we can differ on the exact points . Our estimates overlap at 1999-2001.

And regarding the point about Roy, A majority of the posters on here agreed that it was a better and craftier Bernard who faced Joe than Roy.


http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=7111

This content is protected

 

Yo, Pretty.

I hear you like having sports pics in your avatar so I dug you up a few for consideration when the time comes to make another change !

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected