Why is Bernard Hopkins continually given a free pass?

So now, on the front page, we read about Chad Dawson blasting Hopkins and calling him out. I mean, dont Americans really want to see it? Or youd rather cling onto Calzaghe? Even though im not sure exactly how good Dawson is(obviously he's good...but how far up can he go), im sure this is an important fight in American boxing terms. His stature in the division is far greater than that of Hopkins.

Let me first say i think Hopkins is a top fighter and his longevity is impressive but he seems to get away with way too much and fans seem to be giving him a free pass on alot of things. He also seems to have a very high opinion of himself, as a 'legend' and this and that but where do we start?

-Losses to RJJ(handily), Jermain Taylor (twice, arguably biggest tests at MW), Calzaghe(had to come up in weight and go across the pond and still won).

-and yet he's most notable wins are all vs smaller fighters- ODLH, Winky, Pavlik, Trinidad.

-Why didnt he seek to re-match RJJ earlier?? He moved up and beat Tarver right after RJJ was beat:huh isnt that strange to you?

I even found this after the Tarver bout---
"I could have moved up to this weight five years ago and I've always been good against southpaws," said Bernard Hopkins

hmm? oh well he gets a free pass and people even have the nerve to say hes ahead of RJJ all time:huh. Not to mention the fact Bernard completely skipped the 168 lb weight class where Calzaghe was waiting for him. He pulled the plug on their fight in like 2002 and all of a sudden its all Calzaghe's fault now he didnt fight Hopkins earlier.

Oh and Calzaghe gets stick for all his defenses? What was so much better about the Hopkins defenses at MW?. 'Oh he was the first man to beat Glen Johnson' , okay, Johnson has 13 losses and lost to Sven Otkke among others. He has like 4 rematches in there and a trilogy in those defenses!

I could go on but I'll leave i there. Bernard's so-called boxing greatness is exagerrated.

I was shocked with him being linked to Haye. I think Haye is over-hyped tbh but its still a great challenge, especially at his age-something not expected that he would do. I dont believe him tbh but we'll see what happens after he takes on who his trainer calls the 'mexican Joe Frazier'..yh ok Nazim

 

im sure it America it would have significance and would sell.

Sorry about that. I wasnt focused enough when i wrote it. --Basically in everything he does. People critisize Calzaghe and RJJ yet Hopkins is somehow above them. Why exactly? Ive stated reasons above.

Ive also said i think he is a top fighter and his longevity is impressive. Seems like he's allowed to get away with things throughout his career...mainly because of his age.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl.. You were the guy i had that argument with over Calzaghe/Dawson and i said the same things to you and you are now saying them to me! You've been exposed. Difference is, this fight has more meaning in America. Im sure this would gather more interest in the U.S --Hopkins/Dawson than Calzaghe Dawson and it would be more significant for many reasons.

Hopkins can fool you with age as he's shown throughout. He fight younger than his age though i guss it will catch up aty some point.

So why is he fighting? Hes not proving his greatness like some people are claiming

 

okay i rushed it a bit. Tarver? Tarver himself was old and wasnt he coming off dropping all that weight for the rocky movie. Pavlik had to move up to 170...

Pavlik-at 170.
Calzaghe-had to move up in weight and go across the pond and wasnt peak Calzaghe by any means.
Winky-blown up winky at 170
Tarver-see above

oh really:huh are these the ones were the fighters all had to move up in weight to suit him?