X's power at 160: how would you rate it?

Compared with the Ketchels, the Walkers, Cerdans, Haglers and Robinsons and more recently, other powerhouses Mugabi's, Roldans, and Hearns', I'd say looks rather low.

Long time observers of the sport such as Larry Merchant admittedly have said X never had the big punch and even I must admit to having overrated it a bit when he almost failed to put away Felix inside the distance.

His % with lesser opposition may be a bit more impressive but notice he doesn't knock out the better, more skilled opponents.

On a scale of 1-10, a generous 7.2 from me.

 

But for his style of fighting you must admit he's somewhat disadvantaged when he's pressed to come forward. That's why he lost his title in the first place-because he was hoping Taylor would come at him, a gamble that he lost.

I know it's a sensitive issue for Hopkins fans but how would you rate him?

 

Still no takers.

John Thomas, what do you think?

 

Taylor also had Bernard hurt early and taylor is not a fearsome hitter. Felix is a small boned jr middle who he really just wore down more than knocked out.

I think Merchant hit it on the button when he said that Hopkins isn't a big enough with the power to wait around. And he never has been.

He should have pressured Taylor alot more than he did. That's what you're supposed to do when you lack the knockout punch. Because adaptability only wins fights on paper.

with Taylor, he did nothing the first few rounds and until the late rounds did little else but an occasional right hand. Even late, he did nothing special on offense. Is that the genius people have been mentioning? He can't even launch an offense against a near novice on the move.

He gets another chance to remove doubt and fails yet again. The only thing those two fights confirmed to me is that he's overrated and the beneficiary of a weak division. A good fighter but nothing special.

 

Bernard doesn't compare with Roldan. Roldan was a puncher if there ever was one.

The fact is Bernard is one of the lesser punchers in the history of the division. Solid but as far as it goes. Even Larry Merchant said he never had a real punch and you're comparing him with Hagler and Roldan.

What got him where he is is a combination of factors. For one, he ruled a mediocre division. In Bernard's favor, he was durable with loads of stamina but he could be outpointed.

I still don't understand tho how feather fisted Jermaine was able to hurt someone like Bernard. What happened there?

 

X is short for Executioner. Clever isn't it?

 

The consensus is that Hagler slipped. You're an idiot with nothing intelligent to offer.

Now explain to me why you said "Bernard's power is very often underrated"?

Why would anyone say that? Maybe you and Tobkhan are satisfied with
performances Hopkins-Hakkar but that shouldn't mislead anyone into thinking that Bernard was "Up there" with the other gifted punchers, as you say. What a crock of .....

And yet some misguided fans are putting him up there with Hagler and Robinson. Don't you know all the greats were traditionally feared punchers? Ketchel, Walker, Cerdan and even Nunn was dangerous and had speed to go with it when in top condition.

When X hits a man they don't wobble unless it's done thru what Merchant says cumulative effect.

Even his jab is more of a push with no real snap as compared with the better fighters and has fans longing for the days of Hagler and Robinson. Hell, I'd much rather see Tony Ayala in action than boring, plain vanilla Hopkins. I'm glad he's gone from the middleweights.

About all I can say is he's a good fighter, a little dirty and a durable blue collar fighter, but that doesn't make him special.