Who decked Bernard Hopkins?

When you factor in the knockdowns, yes.

I think both the judge who had it for Hopkins and Mercado had it wrong.

 

You said you know more about Monzon's career than me? I seriously, seriously doubt it. I actually doubt there's a poster on this site with more material about him (fights, clippings, ringside reports, etc) than I have. And if there is, he's probably an Argentine.


ps. You thought the Roy Dale fight was a title defence for a start. I'd stick to Hopkins if I was you.

 

But if you read my original posts I'm saying that I think it was a manufactured draw anyway. Also, the atmosphere was nothing that Johnny Owen didn't face against Pintor or Kid Akeem didn't face against Quiroga. Also, i'd have rather been Hopkins facing Mercado in Ecuador than, say, Greg Haugen in Mexico facing Chavez.

 

It took Marv a loss to get this right. Hopkins didn't make the same mistake twice, and nor did Hagler.

 

But it obviously made sense back then. Yet, the same old 'hometown decision' bull**** comes out. :huh

 

I brought up Dale in the other arguement to show that even he fought fighters that werent all time greats....as did every great. I actually dont know **** about that fight other than that Dale wasnt in Monzon's league and shouldnt have been in the same arena, let alone ring as him (the same with some of Hopkins opponents...same with Hagler's...same with "fill in ATGs name".). But when discussing current fighters vs past ones, people attempting to discredit the current ones always fall back upon this.

And if it was not a title fight...it begs the question...how badly would Bernard get LAMBASTED if he took a non-title fight in the middle of defense streak? Gotta admit, there are members of this very site that would go ape****.

Again, I said I probably know more than you....and by the way it sounds, I do not. But again, doesnt change the fact that I can discuss him, or ANY other fighter without spouting nationalistic bull**** as part of my arguement.

If you prove me wrong in a debate about a fighter...I can admit wrong. If you bring up good points, I can aknowledge it (as I have said, I think most of the time, you are a good poster...just not when its about Bernard for some reason...).

But if you tell me I am wrong, or that I am unknowledgable (is that a word??? Oh well...) because of the location of the world I reside in, I will take offense at that and lash back. I think I have proven on this site that for the most part, I know my ****...and look at things unbiasedly (again, is that a word??? ) for the most part....my nationality shouldnt ever even come into play.

 

It didn't, it took a draw (a fight that is regarded as a far worse decision that Mercado I). It took Hopkins three attempts, so he did make the same mistake twice, really.

 

Sorry, a draw, which was in reality a loss as the title didn't change. Hopkins was beaten fairly by Jones and it's not like the judges ripped him off so i still call it two.

 

But he won the title at his third attempt, irrespective of what you call it mate. :huh

 

...oh and Monzon was shot himself a few weeks before too.



Right, time for tea. :good

 

He lost to one of the greatest fighters ever (top 25-30 at least) in his first one....when both fighters were reletively young and were nothing like what they eventually became. That is hardly anything to be ashamed of...

And you could easily argue that Jones was better than both Minter and Benvenuti (whom Hagler and Monzon won their first major title from respectively). So would it have taken them more than that first try (or second for Marvin?)?

And lets not forget...Hopkins was in his 23rd pro fight at 28 (minus the jail time, he was essentially a 24 year old fighter in there), while Monzon was 28 and was in his 79th fight and Hagler 26 but in his 53rd fight (unreal how busy fighters were back in the day...if only nowadays they were, maybe a reason boxing isnt in the limelight it once was....among other things). They were alot more seasoned....

People tend to overlook things like this.

 

:huh

Timing beats speed stylistically...so if we are talking pure matchup wise in that right (which I believe you were), noone had a better chance at Jones than Hopkins (which isnt the reason Id pick Bernard BTW...but I mention it on what you said in your post only).

The fight vs Hopkins btw was in no way lopsided. It was a clear victory for Jones, but wasnt a schooling, a drubbing or a clinic in any way. It was a simple, simple fight to score....and wasnt 9-3 like you said. Just about every score card I see was about 7-5...so I have no idea where you got that.

And yes, I stand by my comment about that neither of them were even close to what they became.

We will just examine Hopkins (who was NOT the more seasoned fighter...that plain insanity).

Leading up to the Jones fight, Bernard was a high output, swarming fighter. One that came RIGHT at you. Eventually (sometime around the Johnson/Jackson fights) he started to become more of defensive counter puncher (tho still could turn it up when needed...which he still to a point can do as evidence of him outworking Winky recently...who is KNOWN for his output)...more of fighter that outthinks his opponents as well.

Stylisticly, experience, talent and knowledge wise Hopkins was no where near the fighter that Jones fought (trust me...other that Sweet Pea being my all time fav...Hopkins and Jones are close second and third, I KNOW THESE GUYS IN AND OUT!). They were night and day from that point to his prime.

As for who would win....that is all a matter of opinion. You feel Jones everytime...I think its alot closer than that, I feel Hopkins barely (but wouldnt be surprised in the least if Jones took it).