Eastman : I was robbed!!!!

[lirva33]

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/ar ... d=12645055

[jamesmcdonnell]

This is just incredible.

Since when was Eastman some incredible inside fighter, of the two men Nard is the far better inside. Hopkins initiated most of the holding inside, so he could rough it up, so the ref breaking them early favoured Eastman, it's part of the rules and you just have to work with it.

Eastman again demonstrates with his comments that he is a 'plan A' fighter, if his first tactic doesn't work for whatever reason, there's nothing else to back it up.

I wonder who Howard plans on signing with. Froch and Witter have a good deal going now with Hennessy/Golden Boy, and according to that Eastman must be considering going elsewhere.

[lirva33]

In fairness, Hopkins did A LOT of backpeddaling and didn't engage Eastman that much. He pot shotted all night. Nothing wrong with that at all, but he didn't fight Eastman like we thought he would.

Eastman should have thrown more punches. His footwork was terrible.

[barry]

That's the most ridiculous statement that I can ever recall another boxer ever making! I'm sure there have been many silly complaints, but that takes the cake! In my opinion, Eastman is a nothing more than a journeyman fighter who got the chance to prove himself for a second time and again failed miserably! I think Trinidad would destroy him and De La Hoya, although smaller, I believe would certainly out-point Eastman!

[barry]

As bad as I thought Hopkins was that night, which was very, very bad, Eastman was worse!

[knockout]

Eastman came up with the same "i was robbed" against Joppy....

NO YOU WEREN'T... YOU ARE EITHER NOT GOOD ENOUGH OR LACK THE DESIRE TO WIN...

OR BOTH

[DG.]

That's the most ridiculous statement that I can ever recall another boxer ever making! I'm sure there have been many silly complaints, but that takes the cake! In my opinion, Eastman is a nothing more than a journeyman fighter who got the chance to prove himself for a second time and again failed miserably! I think Trinidad would destroy him and De La Hoya, although smaller, I believe would certainly out-point Eastman!

Eastman would beat Trinidad. Trinidad would do what Hopkins was afraid to do..he would come right at Howard and get stopped.

Chicken Dinner ( ODLH ) may win but he would have to run like..............a chicken!

[jamesmcdonnell]

I never thought Hopkins would take any risks with Eastman, and he did exactly what I thought, just enough to win. When Eastman did come forward in the 5th, Hopkins then made sure in the 6th and 7th that he landed enough hard shots to stop Eastman rushing him, he fought a virtually perfect tactical fight.

He has now claimed that the judges robbed him against Joppy, then just before the Nard fight he changed the story, saying how he was 'led to believe' by 'forces behind the scenes' that he only had to finish the fight with Joppy to win. What utter bollocks. Now the referee has cheated him by not allowing him to dominate Hopkins on the inside.

I used to like Eastman, I thought he was a colourful and enigmatic character, but now he just seems to be deluded and in denial about his own failure to take control of the big fights. He seems to think that if he just keeps turning up in title shots, then eventually he will walk away with the title.

I just don't think Howard has a champions attitude, if he does have the skills, he keeps leaving them in the dressing room.

I hate to be so negative, but I think Jermain Taylor would kick lumps out of him.

[jamesmcdonnell]

That's the most ridiculous statement that I can ever recall another boxer ever making! I'm sure there have been many silly complaints, but that takes the cake! In my opinion, Eastman is a nothing more than a journeyman fighter who got the chance to prove himself for a second time and again failed miserably! I think Trinidad would destroy him and De La Hoya, although smaller, I believe would certainly out-point Eastman!

Eastman would beat Trinidad. Trinidad would do what Hopkins was afraid to do..he would come right at Howard and get stopped.

Chicken Dinner ( ODLH ) may win but he would have to run like..............a chicken!

Don't talk bollocks mate. It took Hopkins the entire fight to wear Trinidad down in a carefully controlled performance. The best Eastman managed was getting shot old man Cherifi to quit on his stool at the end of the 9th, the same Cherifi which Trinidad kicked the crap out of.

Eastman has never beaten, let alone stopped a fighter of Trinidad's class. Trinidad would do what Hopkins wasn't prepared to do, and that's punch the fornicate out of Eastman. Sorry, they are in two different classes.

[barry]

From what I have seen in the fights that I have watched of Eastman, he has basic skills, but a very inflated knockout record because he doesn't throw a hard punch! I to think Taylor would have his way with Eastman and Trinidad would stop him before he could even think about what excuse he could use as to why he lost and of course De La Hoya would out-point him in a similar brawl that he had against Hopkins. It's funny, Chicke Hoya got inside on Hopkins and landed a hell of a lot more punches than Eastman did, so talk all you want about chicken this, or chicken that, the proof is in the fights!

[lirva33]

That's the most ridiculous statement that I can ever recall another boxer ever making! I'm sure there have been many silly complaints, but that takes the cake! In my opinion, Eastman is a nothing more than a journeyman fighter who got the chance to prove himself for a second time and again failed miserably! I think Trinidad would destroy him and De La Hoya, although smaller, I believe would certainly out-point Eastman!

Eastman would beat Trinidad. Trinidad would do what Hopkins was afraid to do..he would come right at Howard and get stopped.

Chicken Dinner ( ODLH ) may win but he would have to run like..............a chicken!

Don't talk bollocks mate. It took Hopkins the entire fight to wear Trinidad down in a carefully controlled performance. The best Eastman managed was getting shot old man Cherifi to quit on his stool at the end of the 9th, the same Cherifi which Trinidad kicked the crap out of.

Eastman has never beaten, let alone stopped a fighter of Trinidad's class. Trinidad would do what Hopkins wasn't prepared to do, and that's punch the fornicate out of Eastman. Sorry, they are in two different classes.

Agreed, Eastman needs to work on his workrate (desire?) if he wants to be remembered as one of the best.

[DG.]

That's the most ridiculous statement that I can ever recall another boxer ever making! I'm sure there have been many silly complaints, but that takes the cake! In my opinion, Eastman is a nothing more than a journeyman fighter who got the chance to prove himself for a second time and again failed miserably! I think Trinidad would destroy him and De La Hoya, although smaller, I believe would certainly out-point Eastman!

Eastman would beat Trinidad. Trinidad would do what Hopkins was afraid to do..he would come right at Howard and get stopped.

Chicken Dinner ( ODLH ) may win but he would have to run like..............a chicken!

Don't talk bollocks mate. It took Hopkins the entire fight to wear Trinidad down in a carefully controlled performance. The best Eastman managed was getting shot old man Cherifi to quit on his stool at the end of the 9th, the same Cherifi which Trinidad kicked the crap out of.

Eastman has never beaten, let alone stopped a fighter of Trinidad's class. Trinidad would do what Hopkins wasn't prepared to do, and that's punch the fornicate out of Eastman. Sorry, they are in two different classes.

A carefully controlled Hopkins beat trinidad. 'Carefully controlled' !

A fighter meeting Trinidad head on - well - different story.

What about Chicken Dinner - do you thinkmhe beats Eastman without runnning ?.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Yes, carefully controlled, as in using footwork to prevent Trinidad getting said. Eastman doesn't have good footwork, he is mechanical and flat footed. Hopkins ran bloody rings around him all night.

Eastman would just stand in front of Trinidad, and would get clattered with 3-4 shots for every one of his. Eastman's balance is not as good as Trinidad's, despite Trinidad's shortcomings, only fighters with excellent footwork have beaten him. Everyone else has been annihilated.

Depends what you mean by running. Oscar would probably beat him on workrate, though Eastman would have a chance of hurting him, provided Oscar stayed in one place long enough.

[DG.]

Yes, carefully controlled, as in using footwork to prevent Trinidad getting said. Eastman doesn't have good footwork, he is mechanical and flat footed. Hopkins ran bloody rings around him all night.

Eastman would just stand in front of Trinidad, and would get clattered with 3-4 shots for every one of his. Eastman's balance is not as good as Trinidad's, despite Trinidad's shortcomings, only fighters with excellent footwork have beaten him. Everyone else has been annihilated.

Depends what you mean by running. Oscar would probably beat him on workrate, though Eastman would have a chance of hurting him, provided Oscar stayed in one place long enough.

I actually agree with most of what you say.

I can't even watch the Hopkins fight again. Too annoying - Howard copuld have won if he applied himself more.

[barry]

>>>A fighter meeting Trinidad head on - well - different story.<<<

You are correct, every fighter that has met Trinidad head on has been demolished very early in a fight!

[jamesmcdonnell]

Yes, carefully controlled, as in using footwork to prevent Trinidad getting said. Eastman doesn't have good footwork, he is mechanical and flat footed. Hopkins ran bloody rings around him all night.

Eastman would just stand in front of Trinidad, and would get clattered with 3-4 shots for every one of his. Eastman's balance is not as good as Trinidad's, despite Trinidad's shortcomings, only fighters with excellent footwork have beaten him. Everyone else has been annihilated.

Depends what you mean by running. Oscar would probably beat him on workrate, though Eastman would have a chance of hurting him, provided Oscar stayed in one place long enough.

He's just too mechanical, whatever he did, Bernard would have changed tactics and left him all at sea.


I actually agree with most of what you say.

I can't even watch the Hopkins fight again. Too annoying - Howard copuld have won if he applied himself more.

[barry]

Hopkins is one of my least favorites of all time and unlike a lot of people, I certainly don't think he is hall of fame worthy, nor do I think he is one of the top 10 middleweights of all-time and maybe not even top 20, I'll let you know in June when I have the 20 top lt. hvys and 20 middles completed! I don't think he has beat Monzon, or Hagler in title defenses because he did not unify the title until he beat Trinidad, so any defense after that should be counted as proper lineal defenses and none before!

[jamesmcdonnell]

Monzon didn't have all the titles either though.

[barry]

But he (Monzon) did beat the man, who beat the man and was already champion when the WBC came into being and made the term dual champions common. Hopkins did not until he beat Trinidad because even though Hopkins held the IBF title for all those years he did not become the man until he beat the man, who beat the man, who was Trinidad.

[Freiheit]

Monzon didn't have all the titles either though.

He forught for WBC 12 and WBA 15 times.

[barry]

I think thats correct, but I may be wrong!

[barry]

Actually, I don't think the titles had been unified since Hagler and Ray Leonard, but either way, Hopkins became the true, undisputed champion when he defeated Trinidad!

[knockout]

and Monzon went on to beat the man he was stripped for not fighting TWICE!!!!

[J]

Hopkins is one of my least favorites of all time and unlike a lot of people, I certainly don't think he is hall of fame worthy, nor do I think he is one of the top 10 middleweights of all-time and maybe not even top 20, I'll let you know in June when I have the 20 top lt. hvys and 20 middles completed! I don't think he has beat Monzon, or Hagler in title defenses because he did not unify the title until he beat Trinidad, so any defense after that should be counted as proper lineal defenses and none before!

blimey he is one of my faves guess theres no accounting for taste hey.
i think he is one of the finest "thinking fighters" as in able to adapt the best style to his opponents Ive ever seen and for that Id definitely have him top five he would give anyone murders, no one would steamroller Nard in my opinion.
Ive thought this for some considerable time not just since he became hot property.

interesitng though to hear a different point of view.

[jamesmcdonnell]

But he (Monzon) did beat the man, who beat the man and was already champion when the WBC came into being and made the term dual champions common. Hopkins did not until he beat Trinidad because even though Hopkins held the IBF title for all those years he did not become the man until he beat the man, who beat the man, who was Trinidad.

Yes, but you cannot really blame Hopkins for not holding all the titles, what was he supposed to do, nobody wanted to face him? Seeing as he faced off against just about everyone the middleweight division had to offer, including Holmes and Joppy, and Trinidad who held the other titles, and beat them all, do you not think it fair to assume that had he been able to get a tilt at the unified titles earlier, he would have won and held on to them, after all, he beat the supposed new middleweight king Tito at the age of 37.

I think it's unfair to blame Hopkins that the division was fractured (thanks Sugar Ray, you wanker) when there's little or nothing he could have done about it anyhow.