Willie Pastrano vs Jean Pascal

Newbie here, I say Pastrano

 

You just like old timers and are biased against modern fighters. I can tell by your previous posts.

(BTW, welcome to ESB :good )

 

I'm liking you more and more every post.

 

I'm not a Pastrano fan actually, but let's say you were actually being particularly seious, this would be biggest insult since IB's kalule vs Kofi Jantuah thread.

 

Pastrano was clearly more than 'a very good fighter' in terms of overall ability if not in terms of dedication and overall achievement, that much is obvious. I can't see how anyone could watch him at his best and not think otherwise, he was an outstanding pure boxer and a probable dose of h2h kryptonite to counterpunchers.

I never mentioned what I think of Hopkins (he's an atg btw), so how can you say that I'm underrating him? Not that he's exactly turned up that many trees since moving north of ten stone six anyway. How you can say that his exploits at light heavy put him on another level to Pastrano? Based on what? A win over Tarver, a loss to Calzaghe and a draw (well, a win really) with Pascal? Hopkins at his very best (at middleweight) is probably Pastrano's equal in terms of technical ability, and he achieved more there than Willie did at 175. That Hopkins stands up very well with Pastrano in a p4p sense, but it's not the p4p sense that matters so much in h2h matchups and it isn't that version of Hopkins that Pastrano would be faced with.

Based on what? And how? A counterpuncher/fundamental technician in the mould of Hopkins would likely be at quite a stylistic disadvantage against a slick, fleetfooted defensive type in the mould (and of the quality) of Pastrano even if the technician is a natural lightheavy at the peak of his powers, which Hopkins isn't/wasn't. The Hopkins who beat Tarver was nowhere near as effectively proven as Harold Johnson was at 175 even if Johnson, like Hopkins himself, had clearly lost a step. Pastrano was the clear opposite of Tarver in both style and ability. Hopkins, having nothing to feed off as usual, would have to pursue Pastrano as he pursued Jones and Taylor and in doing so cede control of the fight on his normal terms. Either that or allow Pastrano to keep circling away and using his jab, which would probably see him lose the outside battle. If someone as mediocre as Taylor can do it without Hopkins managing to consistently close the distance and take away the jab, what exactly do you think is going to stop Pastrano from doing exactly the same when he was leagues above Taylor in terms of overall ability and ring smarts?

Hopkins has been an outstanding fighter, but I'm not sure that I get where you're coming from at all.

 

i'm just fooling around A:good.


As far as Moore and Hopkins go in old age go, i think it's tough to compare.Moore benefited i feel from fighter an easier crop of fighters overall, as compared to his more inconsistent younger days anyway.But he was more or less still a steady, busy campaigner, winning and consistently defending a title, while working in non-title bouts in two weightclasses.

Hopkins post-Tito career is impressive for his age and definitely among the better past-prime wind-down's, but after moving up is far more stop start and stage managed as Sweet scientist has said. he's basically picking and choosing his fights, not fighting often, while relying on an already well earned rep to set up some the bigger money fights.Fair enough as the division's aren't stacked with good fighters, but it still has to be considered to an extent.

Moore just looked better a lot more often and came back better after hard fights and losses to some truly top-shelf fighters.Both won and lost against the better fighters they fought, but Moore's were much more talented and the fights generally weren't unimpressive turgid trash for everyone involved like Hopkins vs Taylor 1 and 2, calzaghe, Wright, Jones(a joke that should have been an 10 round espn fight).Jesus, those are some dire fights., Ottke never got away with stuff like that!.

Tarver and Pavlik, good worthy stuff and i don't think Tarver was THAT far removed really from his best work, he's always looked similar to me.Big deal, Moore had plenty of fights like that against fighters at least as good.

So for me, no comparison between both fighters late years success, though to be fair the different boxing climate's of the two generations dictate much of that right from the off.Moore didn't have a lot of choice but to keep resolutely campaigned as he had done for years...Hopkins can afford to coast and pick his fights, both because of how fights are made and hyped nowadays and the position he had put himself in with his middleweight work and high profile tito victory.

 

The thing is I think Johnson is somewhat mechanical/stiff and a whole different kettle of fish to Hopkins, who is a very relaxed disector of opponents. And yes I'd give even this Hopkins the edge on defense, footwork, timing. BHOPs is just a much much smarter boxer

 

Back to the original subject, which is Pastrano versus Pascal and not Hopkins; Pastrano batters him.

 

Pastrano, it may be remembered, was a major influence on Cassius Clay, and had the gift of an excellent chin as well...he was only down one time in his career, at the very end, from that hellacious liver shot that Jose Torres hit him with. Hell yes he would have beaten Hopkins, who feasted mostly on one dimensional walk-in puncher/slugger types.

 

Pascal, it can be said, is really nothing much as a fighter and holds a title only because he was lucky enough to have benefitted from Chad Dawson having an off night. Rematch him with Dawson and Bad Chad will redeem himself. Let Hopkins then deal with Dawson...something he's never been too keen on doing.

 

Thanks for the welcome but that was my first post here! I'm not biased, I like Khan and Manny P for example. But I did think a fit Pastrano was a sensational boxer - and apparently so did Ali.

 

Just kidding mate :good

Pastrano was indeed a fine boxer.

 

I agree. And Pastrano would toy with the badly balanced Pascal for 12 or 15 rounds.