BHop vs Kovalev Discussion

[rampage]

I'm surprised so many people think Kovalev wins. This looks like another easy win for Hopkins, IMO. Kovalev sucks. He has power, but his footwork and balance are atrocious, he's slow, he holds his hands way too loose and his head movement is mediocre making him an easy target, and it is easy to lull him to sleep, which is Hopkins' specialty. People talk about his work rate, but he is only busy when he hurts you, and I don't think he is a good enough boxer to be able to set Hopkins up for too many power shots. I see Hopkins keeping the pace slow and frustrating him with pot shots and movement, just as he always does, and then catching him with hard shots when Kovalev squares up and gets off balance, which he seems to do about 5-10 times each round.

Hopkins went down twice against Pascal in first fight. And got hurt bad late in in the 2nd fight. Pascal is the only solid puncher he has faced in many years whom is a bigger guy. And pascal doesn't have half the power Kovalev possesses. If Pascal had fought Cleverly and Campillo there's no way he ends both those fights within 3 rounds.

When Kovalev hits you, you stay hurt. Can easily see Kovalev scoring a couple knockdowns here. Even of the flash variety. Bernard is gonna be 50 yrs old. Not the best time to be taking on by far the biggest puncher of your career.

Kovalev definitely has much more power than Pascal, and you are right--if Kovalev catches him, it could be game over. But you aren't considering the fact that Pascal is much more athletic, and a much better boxer than Kovalev is. That is why he was able to set Hopkins up and catch him. Kovalev, while he has thunderous power that is usually enough to get his (mostly weak) opponents out early, is a terrible boxer, and I don't think he will be able to catch Hopkins like Pascal did. You can't hurt what you can't hit.

[ikorolev]

Pascal is not a better boxer than Kovalev.

[hulkmaniac]

Pascal is more explosive and his punches are sneaky at times. But obviously not as powerful as Kovalevsl. But Pascal's biggest weakness is his stamina. If Pascal could fight 8 rounds like he did the first 4 he would have beaten Hopkins. I actually think Pascal would fare better against Kovalev, even beat him.

[ikorolev]

Pascal is more explosive and his punches are sneaky at times. But obviously not as powerful as Kovalevsl. But Pascal's biggest weakness is his stamina. If Pascal could fight 8 rounds like he did the first 4 he would have beaten Hopkins. I actually think Pascal would fare better against Kovalev, even beat him.

He will have a chance when Kovalev has 3 belts. He will be a warmup guy before Stevenson.

[eastezrider]

Today in History

August 4th, 1993. Robin Ventura makes an ill advised "charge to the Mound" after Rangers' Nolan Ryan hits him with a non-breaking curve ball.

Just sayin'... sometimes it's best not to mess with old dudes...

[Brut]

Fair enough. Are you sure about "gladly" though ? If Hopkins wins, I will accept that he is a true Alien.

Listen dude, one thing about me that you might not really understand; I say a lot of crazy things and most of the time I'm just getting a kick out of the responses I get but I'm a true/diehard boxing fan through and through and I've probably only known about 1 or 2 fighters that I actually despise and never wished them well in this sport (Butler is one of them) but I'm fair enough and impartial enough to congratulate and even offer well wishes to someone who beats a boxer's style I prefer over another.

When Vernon Forrest beat Shane, I was very happy for Forrest even though I wanted Shane to win, so if Kovalev pulls off the upset and especially by a devastating KO fashion then he will have rightfully earned his place in the Championship and definitely and without a doubt earned my utmost respect and well wishes for his career and I will be happy for him especially if he dominates it for years to come (something we haven't seen at LHW in years).

[crusader]

Kovalev sucks.

Does that mean Hopkins sucks too if he loses? Would it also mean that every light heavyweight in the world sucks?

Um, no. It would mean that he will be two months shy of 50. Let that sink in for a minute.

I don't think it's any secret that the light heavyweight division is very weak at the moment, so yeah--pretty much every light heavy sucks right now or is older than the hills (mind you, when I say sucks, I'm comparing them to other successful pros--obviously, they don't suck in the same way that Charlie Zelenoff sucks).

I won't knock anyone for thinking Kovalev will win--you may be right. His power may get him through. I just happen to think that he is no more talented a boxer than Murat or Shumenov. But make no mistake, if he does win it will only be because Bhop is 50. Kovalev isn't a talented boxer, and he's exactly the kind of guy that Hopkins, Tarver, and Jones would have boxed circles around in their primes.

It seems to me that if a 50 year old Hopkins loses to a boxer who sucks, he probably also sucks in his current form even if he was once good. Let that sink in for a minute (lol). You say that Kovalev sucks compared to other successful pros, but considering there are roughly 1000 pros in most divisions I'd say anyone in the top 50 has succeeded, let alone someone who is top 3 in their division, a world title holder, and destroying everyone they face. Do you not think that Kovalev would be at least a contender in most divisions, keeping in mind that power is an ability just like boxing skills are?

Kovalev does many things better than Murat and Shumenov besides punch, including everything I listed in an earlier post (e.g. timing). Can you name examples of them consistently showing those abilities against opponents like Campillo and Cleverly? He was easily beating both opponents before he hurt and then quickly stopped them, showing the ability to dominate with more than power. Murat, on the other hand, struggled greatly with Campillo and Cleverly, the former of whom outboxed in many rounds, the latter of whom battered and stopped him, while Shumenov lost the first bout to Campillo and was schooled by his superior boxing skills in the rematch, much like Cloud was without the knockdowns. Kovalev was never befuddled like this, because he had the skills to deal with them before his power took over.

[rampage]

It seems to me that if a 50 year old Hopkins loses to a boxer who sucks, he probably also sucks in his current form even if he was once good. Let that sink in for a minute (lol). You say that Kovalev sucks compared to other successful pros, but considering there are roughly 1000 pros in most divisions I'd say anyone in the top 50 has succeeded, let alone someone who is top 3 in their division, a world title holder, and destroying everyone they face. Do you not think that Kovalev would be at least a contender in most divisions, keeping in mind that power is an ability just like boxing skills are?

Kovalev does many things better than Murat and Shumenov besides punch, including everything I listed in an earlier post (e.g. timing). Can you name examples of them consistently showing those abilities against opponents like Campillo and Cleverly? He was easily beating both opponents before he hurt and then quickly stopped them, showing the ability to dominate with more than power. Murat, on the other hand, struggled greatly with Campillo and Cleverly, the former of whom outboxed in many rounds, the latter of whom battered and stopped him, while Shumenov lost the first bout to Campillo and was schooled by his superior boxing skills in the rematch, much like Cloud was without the knockdowns. Kovalev was never befuddled like this, because he had the skills to deal with them before his power took over.

Hopkins does suck now compared to himself in his prime--I never said otherwise. But so far, being one of the greatest boxers of all time, he has still had enough to beat the other boxers in a weak division, and I think Kovalev fits that description as well.

I also never said that Kovalev hasn't succeeded. Of course he has--he is a popular and entertaining fighter who has a belt and regularly fights on premium networks. What I said was that he has succeeded, but in a weak division, and that he has done so mostly based on his power, rather than any kind of real boxing skill.

Are you asking if I think he would succeed in other current divisions if he happened to be a different size, or if he would succeed in other eras at light heavy? If you're asking the former, then yes--there are plenty of watered down divisions with a weak list of top fighters, so I think his power could carry him into the top 5 in many current divisions--though not all. He would get outclassed by most boxers in the top ten at welter and jr. welter, for example. There are other divisions where he may crack the top 5, but he would get thoroughly dominated by guys in the top 3-5, such as super middle and jr. middle. And there aren't too many number one fighters that I think he would beat--guys like Klitschko, Rigondeaux, etc. would play with him.

If you mean the latter, then no--when you think of past eras, the best fighters would make him look stupid. Fighters like Moore, Spinks, Qawi, Saad Muhammad, Jones, Tarver, etc. would embarrass him. He would be dominated in much the same fashion as David Sears, Richard Hall, David Telesco, etc., and forgotten just as quickly.

I agree that power is a skill, and it can take you a long way. It has taken him to the WBO championship and near the top of the division. I'm simply saying that it is basically his only real skill (again, in comparison with top boxers--he obviously is quite skilled when compared to 99.999999 percent of the population or with the majority of "professional" boxers).

As for that last paragraph--I highly doubt Kovalev would have had as easy a time outboxing Campillo and Cleverly if you take away his power (I understand that it is silly to do that because a fighter's attributes are what determines his style--kind of like saying "well if Mayweather wasn't so fast he'd get hit more". But since we are debating his boxing skills and technique as such, aside from his power, it fits here). As far as simple boxing technique goes, he is on similar levels as Cloud and Murat, and probably only slightly higher than Shumenov. And Campillo is a much better boxer as such. It was still his power that dictated those fights--just because Campillo and Cleverly may not have been showing that they were hurt doesn't mean that his power or pressure wasn't bothering them early on and affecting the flow of the fight. On the other hand, I don't think that Kovalev will be able to find Hopkins as easily as he found them, so his power is negated more. Again, if he is able to land, then it may be a wrap. But he will have to deal with much more against Hopkins as far as defense, ring generalship, movement, counter-punching, pace-setting, etc., than he has against anyone else he's fought.

[diddy]

Pascal is more explosive and his punches are sneaky at times. But obviously not as powerful as Kovalevsl. But Pascal's biggest weakness is his stamina. If Pascal could fight 8 rounds like he did the first 4 he would have beaten Hopkins. I actually think Pascal would fare better against Kovalev, even beat him.

Pascal would beat Kovalev?

Please never post again. Thanks.

[diddy]

For those who are wondering, Kovalev has opened as a -300 favorite.

Also, has anyone ever hit Bernard with a really good body shot? Kovalev has been ending fights with straight body shots that appear to be merely jabs. That's how hard he hits. Hopkins says the hardest hitter he ever faced was Antwun Echols. The answer to that question is definitely about to change. Thing about Kovalev - he's not a headhunter. He punches at everything. Liver, Sternum, Chest, Neck, Shoulders, Arms. He just....throws. And everything is hard. He's not trying to land a perfect shot. He's just trying to hurt you badly. Even when he's on the move he's hitting guys with shots that are making them crumble. That is what sets him apart from other big punchers. His ability to hurt you even when he isnt even planted and "sitting down" on his punches.

[Bard of Boxrec]

Even when he's on the move he's hitting guys with shots that are making them crumble. That is what sets him apart from other big punchers. His ability to hurt you even when he isnt even planted and "sitting down" on his punches.

Agree, his mobility, technique and being in the right position to punch with authority are all just as impressive as his power.

-300 actually looks like value to me. I'm hoping money will come in on Hopkins from people like Brut who think they're being clever.

I've been thinking. Seriously, I can't rule out Kovalev walking through Bernard in the first half of the fight. When was the last time Hopkins faced a challenge like this? He will quickly discover he is out of his depth here at his age. I don't see any weapons he has in this fight to even survive the 12 rounds. Kovalev is going to cut him off and shut him down, he's a bulldozer. I expect Sergey to stop him but there's a good chance it happens early. I'm going to be betting on Kovalev 1-6.

[crusader]

Hopkins does suck now compared to himself in his prime--I never said otherwise.

But if he loses would he suck like Kovalev sucks now? I'm not too sure what your position is because you're claiming you didn't say otherwise, but when I asked you if Hopkins would suck if he lost you said "Um, no. It would mean that he will be two months shy of 50. Let that sink in for a minute."

I also never said that Kovalev hasn't succeeded. Of course he has--he is a popular and entertaining fighter who has a belt and regularly fights on premium networks. What I said was that he has succeeded, but in a weak division, and that he has done so mostly based on his power, rather than any kind of real boxing skill.

I think his power could carry him into the top 5 in many current divisions--though not all. He would get outclassed by most boxers in the top ten at welter and jr. welter, for example. There are other divisions where he may crack the top 5, but he would get thoroughly dominated by guys in the top 3-5, such as super middle and jr. middle. And there aren't too many number one fighters that I think he would beat--guys like Klitschko, Rigondeaux, etc. would play with him.

I never claimed that you said Kovalev hasn't succeed. You said he sucks relative to other successful pros, and I'm suggesting he's done well relative to most successful pros, especially when you consider that there are about 1000 per division.

I also don't see how your admission that he would be top 5 in many divisions is consistent with your claim that Kovalev sucks. He's top 3 in his division and you concede that he's be a top fighter in numerous divisions, which would mean he's good relative to the overwhelming majority of pro fighters and a sizable number of highly ranked pros. He may not be as good as the absolute elite of the sport, but I don't think that equates to him sucking, and if you simply mean he sucks relative to fighters like Rigo perhaps you should've qualified 'Kovalev sucks'.

I don't think your claim that he'd be 'thoroughly dominated by guys in the top 3-5, such as super middle and jr. middle' is well supported. Even assuming he'd be dominate by Ward (which I can see) and Froch (which I can't see) at 168, who are the other 3 fighters who would outclass him? Arthur Abraham, Robert Stieglitz, George Groves, post-prime, injury ridden Kessler? And why should people think Kovalev would be incapable of being competitive with these fighters? At 154 I'll be conservative and assume that he would get dominated by Canelo and Lara, but who are the other 3? Carlos Molina? Ishe Smith? Jermell Charlo? Demetrius Andrade? Again, why should I believe that Kovalev couldn't compete with these types of opponents?

when you think of past eras, the best fighters would make him look stupid. Fighters like Moore, Spinks, Qawi, Saad Muhammad, Jones, Tarver, etc. would embarrass him. He would be dominated in much the same fashion as David Sears, Richard Hall, David Telesco, etc., and forgotten just as quickly.

I disagree.

I agree that power is a skill, and it can take you a long way. It has taken him to the WBO championship and near the top of the division. I'm simply saying that it is basically his only real skill (again, in comparison with top boxers--he obviously is quite skilled when compared to 99.999999 percent of the population or with the majority of "professional" boxers).

I think he does many other things better than top boxers and I mentioned them in a previous post. What makes you disagree with me on those points, and do you think Hopkins in particular has recently shown a wider punch selection, better combination punching, or superior finishing ability?

As for that last paragraph--I highly doubt Kovalev would have had as easy a time outboxing Campillo and Cleverly if you take away his power (I understand that it is silly to do that because a fighter's attributes are what determines his style--kind of like saying "well if Mayweather wasn't so fast he'd get hit more". But since we are debating his boxing skills and technique as such, aside from his power, it fits here). As far as simple boxing technique goes, he is on similar levels as Cloud and Murat, and probably only slightly higher than Shumenov. And Campillo is a much better boxer as such. It was still his power that dictated those fights--just because Campillo and Cleverly may not have been showing that they were hurt doesn't mean that his power or pressure wasn't bothering them early on and affecting the flow of the fight. On the other hand, I don't think that Kovalev will be able to find Hopkins as easily as he found them, so his power is negated more. Again, if he is able to land, then it may be a wrap.

I never said that Kovalev would have an easy time out-boxing Campillo and Cleverly if he didn't have his power, but I think he could hold his own. Campillo was getting hit regularly, from different angles, at a fairly high percentage, and struggled to land whenever he threw, so while the power likely played a role in Kovalev's dominance he was also having success in ways that are not highly related to power. You mention workrate, but Shumenov and Murat had highwork rates as well and they struggled greatly against Campillo. Cleverly was cautious with his punches, but he was moving forward regularly and jabbing fairly consistently, and Kovalev showed an ability to time his attacks that Murat never showed when he fought Clev.

One of the several qualities that sets Kovalev apart from Shumenov, Cloud, and Murat is his mobile power, as others mention. He doesn't have to be set to punch and regularly hurts opponents and attacks them while on the move, while the others are much more dependent on having their feet planted, which works to Hopkins' advantage. I also think he's clearly shown better timing than those fighters have, consistently landing countershots in ways the others don't, which would likely help him offset any speed advantage Hopkins may have.

But he will have to deal with much more against Hopkins as far as defense, ring generalship, movement, counter-punching, pace-setting, etc., than he has against anyone else he's fought.

I think Sillakh has better movement than Hopkins, though obviously he is inferior in the other respects and I agree that Hopkins will be the best Kovalev has faced in those areas. That doesn't mean, however, that he's not capable of dealing with those abilities, and I'd also say that the current version of Hopkins hasn't had to deal with anyone like Kovalev. Even assuming he's the limited slugger you think he is, results clearly show a difference in quality between him, Cloud, Shumenov, and Murat, and I don't think you should assume that BHOP easily takes his power away and widely (though I gave Cloud and Murat 4 rounds, is that wide?) beats him just like them.

As for comments you made in other posts, can you give me examples of rounds in which Kovalev falls off balance 5-10 times? I have only noticed him do it a few times across several fights, and assuming he does it a lot Hopkins would still have to spot this, decide to attack, and actually land for it to be meaningful. And in which bouts was he lulled to sleep, as in decreased his workrate and intensity due to his opponent's efforts? If he consistently fights at the same pace from start to finish I don't think that's better evidence of him being lulled to sleep than it is of him making an effort to fight in a more measured way, which he may have seen fit for the given opponent.

Kovalev's hands aren't fast but I don't think they're slow, and while Hopkins is a skilled boxer I don't think he's particularly fast either, which is part of the reason he struggled with Dawson and Pascal. As for Pascal, I just watched each knockdown and the 12th of the rematch, and I think you're reaching when you suggest that he was able to drop Hopkins because he's more athletic and a much better boxer than Kovalev. He first dropped Hopkins with a swinging right hand while he was against the ropes, he dropped him for the second time when he wildly rushed him and caught him with a left hand as Hopkins was himself on the ropes, and he hurt him in the 12th of the rematch with another swinging right hand. Perhaps you can rewatch these cases and explain what superior boxing ability had to do with any of this, and why Kovalev wouldn't be capable of it.

[Chepppaaa]

pressure + high punch rate beats X

joe did it this way

taylor did it this way


this fight is all wrong for X. because kovalev has as much power as joe and taylor combined , on top he is realy good at not only punching hard, but punching to the right spots.
kovalev is my winner, i have no doubt about it. but one thing is for sure, if X pulled it off and win, than it would be one of the most remarkable things i've ever witnessed ever in boxing.

I'm so glad that we're on opposite sides of the equation because knowing a tard like you is going with Kovalev insures a victory for Hopkins, you are the most bandwagon flip-floppinest MoFo on this site. A bet you'll be hobknobbing Hopkins after he wins.

i am better at predicting fights than you so v...off

[Ezzard]

Really enjoy watching Kov. But I think Hopkins wins. He'll slow the pace right down. Annoy Kov. Have him reaching. Hopkins will look away and punch. Pop and lock. fall into clinches. Kov will take more and more chances. When Kov has landed nothing of note in the first 3 rounds he will begin to doubt himself. Hopkins will be enjoying the fact that nothing is happening.

Hope I'm wrong.

[SenorPipino]

So many guys who have fallen in love with Kovalev, after what? A whole three or four fights in the semi-spotlight. Wow.
He must be the latest Flavor of the Month for some of you fight fans.

Were you the same one who rhapsodized endlessly in 2012 and 2013 about Matthysse? Some monster destroyer who couldn't tamed? A ferocious animal with unlimited power.
Only took a pretty good, but hardly great boxer like Garcia to reduce the Argentine into something as appealing as day-old oatmeal.

Now Kovalev has become the Next Great Monster (Unless your partial to Triple G).
It will be a pleasure to see Hopkins smack him around like a novice pansy for 12 rounds, and take the unified title back to Philly.
Who would object besides Kovalev's ardent forum fans and maybe a fuming Putin.

[ikorolev]

So many guys who have fallen in love with Kovalev, after what? A whole three or four fights in the semi-spotlight. Wow.
He must be the latest Flavor of the Month for some of you fight fans.

Were you the same one who rhapsodized endlessly in 2012 and 2013 about Matthysse? Some monster destroyer who couldn't tamed? A ferocious animal with unlimited power.
Only took a pretty good, but hardly great boxer like Garcia to reduce the Argentine into something as appealing as day-old oatmeal.

Now Kovalev has become the Next Great Monster (Unless your partial to Triple G).
It will be a pleasure to see Hopkins smack him around like a novice pansy for 12 rounds, and take the unified title back to Philly.
Who would object besides Kovalev's ardent forum fans and maybe a fuming Putin.

You will not have that pleasure. It is highly unlikely that Hopkins will last 12 rounds. If he doesn't withdraw before the fight, he will be running for his life for a few rounds and then decide that he took enough punishment.

[punchoutsb]

So many guys who have fallen in love with Kovalev, after what? A whole three or four fights in the semi-spotlight. Wow.
He must be the latest Flavor of the Month for some of you fight fans.

Were you the same one who rhapsodized endlessly in 2012 and 2013 about Matthysse? Some monster destroyer who couldn't tamed? A ferocious animal with unlimited power.
Only took a pretty good, but hardly great boxer like Garcia to reduce the Argentine into something as appealing as day-old oatmeal.

Now Kovalev has become the Next Great Monster (Unless your partial to Triple G).
It will be a pleasure to see Hopkins smack him around like a novice pansy for 12 rounds, and take the unified title back to Philly.
Who would object besides Kovalev's ardent forum fans and maybe a fuming Putin.

Another dig against Russians there (Putin comment) hidden amongst your faux-intellectual post. Please try to hide your hatred and bias better next time.

[rampage]

-Crusader, my position is this. Hopkins is a tremendously talented fighter. The fact that he is a two belt champion in any division and any era at age 49 and has a real chance to grab a third belt is testament to this. He is one of the greatest boxers to ever live, and I think his accomplishments prove this. However, I also believe that a big part of why he has two belts and maybe a third soon is due to the fact that the light heavyweight division is extremely week right now. Neither Cloud nor Shumenov are very good, Kovalev isn't much better (although his power is impressive), and Stevenson is mediocre. If Hopkins were competing in another era at light heavy, or if he were in a better division today, we wouldn't be having this discussion. I guess what I'm trying to say is that it isn't so much that Hopkins would suck per se, but moreso that he is just getting old. It's two different things. Sorry if I didn't clarify that well.

-Succeeding and being talented are two completely different things. I am not speaking at all about his success level, either as an individual or as compared to anyone else. I am speaking of his talent as such. Also, you can't say that he is successful compared to other successful pros, then cite the 1000 other pros per division--only about the top 50 in each division would be cited as successful in any capacity, and really only top 10 or 20 would be successful enough to compare with him.

-I did qualify my "Kovalev sucks" statement in my last post--once again, I'm using sucks as far as comparing him to other elite or so-called elite fighters. Again, he clearly doesn't suck when compared to most pro fighters--however, you also must realizes that the vast majority of pro fighters have no business being pro fighters and wouldn't even be pro level in any other sport.

-He would be top 5 in many of the 17 divisions. If we still only had 8 divisions, the way it should be, the talent would be consolidated into those 8 divisions instead of spread out over 17, and he would be lucky to crack the top 10 in most if not all, and I'm not sure he would be top 5 in any. He would basically be a fringe contender at best.

-I said top 3-5, meaning anywhere from the top three to the top 5 depending on the division. For super middle, Ward and Froch would beat him for sure, and I think there's a good chance even someone like Chavez Jr. gets him. For junior middle, Mayweather, Alvarez, Lara, and even Andrade all get him. Why should you believe it? That's up to you. I pointed out Kovalev's shortcomings in other posts--poor balance and footwork, mediocre defense, mediocre technique--it is up to you to think about it, study him, and either change your mind or stay with your current thinking.

-You disagree with which part? That he would get dominated by those fighters I mentioned (Qawi, Spinks, Jones, etc.)? Or that he would be forgotten today like Sears, etc.?

-I don't think he does those things well. I think everything that you say he does well is just an extension of his power and the fact that he has fought, other than an older Campillo, a list of par or sub-par fighters. His timing isn't anything to write home about. He is a good finisher against the level of opposition he's been facing, but being able to finish Blake Caparello when he hurts him isn't the same as being able to finish Hopkins or, better yet, a prime elite fighter, when he hurts him--and that is assuming that he can hurt him first. Curtis Stevens was seen as a great finisher too--until he stepped up his competition (for the record, I do think Kovalev is better than Stevens, but that isn't saying an awful lot).

-Hopkins has never really been much of a combination puncher or a finisher, at least not in the last 10-12 years. His game is to slow the pace down, pot shot, frustrate you, and take advantage of the mistakes his opponent makes with sneaky single shots and ring generalship/craftiness. He does show a better punch selection, just not necessarily in combination.

-Again, just because his Campillo/Cleverly weren't showing visible signs of being hurt doesn't mean that his power wasn't affecting them. They can still feel his power, they still know about it, and as a result they are going to fight differently or try to adjust to it, which may make them vulnerable in ways they wouldn't normally be if his power weren't a factor. You may now ask why it would be any different with Hopkins then. I'll tell you--it is because Hopkins is much more talented and experienced then they are, so he knows how to handle it better.

-I agree that Kovalev has good mobile power--but he still has to show an ability to land against Hopkins. You're right that his timing, if it is as good as you say, would offset the speed advantage, but I don't think his timing is better than Hopkins'.

-Sillakh moves more than Hopkins, but that doesn't mean his movement is better. Sillakh is a classic example of someone who moves too much so that he is frequently vulnerable and out of position and never set to do much of anything. He fought a terrible fight against Kovalev, floating around the ring and basically running with his chin up in the air. There is a difference between frequent movement and intelligent movement--Sillakh displays the former, Hopkins displays the latter.

-Kovalev won't bring anything to the fight that Hopkins hasn't already seen except for his power (and even that is debatable--I'm not sure his power his better than Jones or Pavlik, for example, although it is more of a thudding, heavy handed power than their sharper power)--the question is whether or nor he still has what it takes to neutralize it. I think he does, but we shall see. Also, styles make fights, so you can't say that "well, Kovalev destroyed Campillo who boxed circles around Shumenov, who only lost a decision to Hopkins, therefore...." It doesn't quite work that way. That whole Ali/Foreman/Frazier/Norton situation is an easy comparable example of that.

-I exaggerated when I said he falls off balance 5-10 times per round. But he does it quite frequently, enough that it was one of the first things I noticed when I first started watching him. I won't say every time, but quite frequently when someone steps to him he will bring his left foot back much further than his right foot, leaving him squared up, off balance, and vulnerable. That is why he went down against Caparello--yes, I know he also had his foot stepped on, but had he not been square that wouldn't have mattered. Do you not think that Hopkins is a smart enough fighter to spot this and find a way to capitalize? Do you not think he is talented or accurate enough to land on a squared up, vulnerable fighter?

-I don't feel like it's my job to look through his fights and find examples for you--I've pointed it out. If you want, feel free to watch his fights on your own and tell me I'm wrong. I feel like he was doing it a lot against both Cleverly and Agnew, but I'm not going to watch the fights again right now to look.

-Maybe it wasn't right to say that others have lulled him to sleep, but I do believe Hopkins can and will. That is his specialty, and I don't see anything in Kovalev that leads me to believe he is any different in that area from others Hopkins has fought.

-I wouldn't say he struggled with Pascal. He beat him clearly twice (despite the poor judging in the first fight). Yes he got caught a few times, and yes Kovalev could do the same, but struggled is a stretch. If I remember correctly, at least one of those knockdowns was a flash knockdown and he wasn't really hurt, maybe both of them, and he just got a little stunned but not badly hurt in the second fight. Dawson was just a bad style match up at that stage in his career, but I don't think Kovalev presents the same problems--he isn't as quick, as busy, or as rangey as Dawson, and those were the problems for Hopkins more than anything.

-For the Pascal knockdowns--do you remember what rounds they occurred in? I will take a look. My initial response would be that, even if he swung wildly to put Hopkins down, his better boxing skill and athleticism set it up in the first place, but I will try to provide a better breakdown if you would like.

[ikorolev]

rampage, you shouldn't have wasted time to write a whole page of crap.

[crusader]

Succeeding and being talented are two completely different things. I am not speaking at all about his success level, either as an individual or as compared to anyone else. I am speaking of his talent as such. Also, you can't say that he is successful compared to other successful pros, then cite the 1000 other pros per division--only about the top 50 in each division would be cited as successful in any capacity, and really only top 10 or 20 would be successful enough to compare with him.

You said he sucks relative to other successful pros, so you are speaking about success. The issue for me is how you define that, because you make that comment but then say he'd be top 5 in many divisions, which seems inconsistent with your assertion.

-I did qualify my "Kovalev sucks" statement in my last post--once again, I'm using sucks as far as comparing him to other elite or so-called elite fighters. Again, he clearly doesn't suck when compared to most pro fighters--however, you also must realizes that the vast majority of pro fighters have no business being pro fighters and wouldn't even be pro level in any other sport.

Ok, so now you say elite fighters, but earlier it was simply 'other successful pros' which seemed to be much more inclusive. I also don't get why you would make an unqualified statement when you mean that he sucks compared to the absolute best of the best. Basically you're suggesting that someone sucks if they're not an elite fighter.

-He would be top 5 in many of the 17 divisions. If we still only had 8 divisions, the way it should be, the talent would be consolidated into those 8 divisions instead of spread out over 17, and he would be lucky to crack the top 10 in most if not all, and I'm not sure he would be top 5 in any. He would basically be a fringe contender at best.

Again, that doesn't scream 'he sucks compared to other successful pros" to me, and I disagree that he'd be a fringe-contender at best. I think he'd be a serious contender at 175, for example, even assuming that guys like Froch and Ward moved up rather than down.

For super middle, Ward and Froch would beat him for sure, and I think there's a good chance even someone like Chavez Jr. gets him.

This sure doesn't sound like the comment you made earlier about him being dominated be everyone in the top 3-5 at SMW. Who is the third, and perhaps 4th and 5th guys who would do this? You mention Chavez, but do you actually think it's safe to say that he dominates Kovalev? The same guy who had close fights with Zbik and Vera? The same guy with the shortcomings in footwork, defense, and technique that you claim Kovalev has?

For junior middle, Mayweather, Alvarez, Lara, and even Andrade all get him. Why should you believe it? That's up to you. I pointed out Kovalev's shortcomings in other posts--poor balance and footwork, mediocre defense, mediocre technique--it is up to you to think about it, study him, and either change your mind or stay with your current thinking.

I can see some of those names beating him, and Mayweather dominating him, but not the others. I'll be very conservative and give you Alvarez (though I disagree), but I think Lara would be overly passive and allow him to outwork him for many rounds, and even fighters like Angulo and Molina were highly competitive with him. You criticize Kovalev's opponents and claim that much of his success is down to their mediocrity, but what about Andrade? His best win is over Vanes, another fighter who is fairly unproven himself, and aside from that his best opponents are probably Grady Brewer and Freddy Hernandez. He looks promising, but I also think his chin is questionable, he seems to have balance issues as well to me, and I've yet to see him produce the type of showing against a good enough opponent to conclude that he dominates Kovalev.

-You disagree with which part? That he would get dominated by those fighters I mentioned (Qawi, Spinks, Jones, etc.)? Or that he would be forgotten today like Sears, etc.?

I think Kovalev would be successful enough and produce the type of knockouts that would prevent people from forgetting about him. I also think he'd have a very good chance of being compeitiive with Tarver, Saad (look at all the fighters who were competitive with him), and perhaps Qawi.

I don't think he does those things well. I think everything that you say he does well is just an extension of his power and the fact that he has fought, other than an older Campillo, a list of par or sub-par fighters. His timing isn't anything to write home about. He is a good finisher against the level of opposition he's been facing, but being able to finish Blake Caparello when he hurts him isn't the same as being able to finish Hopkins or, better yet, a prime elite fighter, when he hurts him--and that is assuming that he can hurt him first. Curtis Stevens was seen as a great finisher too--until he stepped up his competition (for the record, I do think Kovalev is better than Stevens, but that isn't saying an awful lot).

Right, no matter what I mention you just conveniently dismiss it as an extension of his power; what would it take for him to show you that he has good abilities that are not just extensions of his power? I've given several examples and can give several more examples of his punch diversity, combination punching, finishing ability, and other abilities, but no....he doesn't actually posses those because of his power and opposition, even though loads of fighters who are generally considered hard punchers (I'm surprised you're not saying his power is unproven because of his opposition) don't show the same abilities against the same type of opposition. We'll have to disagree on his abilities.

And when did Stevens show that he wasn't a good finisher? Aside from the fact that he's never even beaten guys like Cleverly and Campillo, I can't remember instances of him stepping up his opposition, hurting them, and being unable to finish them.

Hopkins has never really been much of a combination puncher or a finisher, at least not in the last 10-12 years. His game is to slow the pace down, pot shot, frustrate you, and take advantage of the mistakes his opponent makes with sneaky single shots and ring generalship/craftiness. He does show a better punch selection, just not necessarily in combination.

How is Hopkins' punch selection better? I already gave examples of Kovalev's offensive diversity, and I don't see how Hopkins' has shown he's superior in this respect. If anything I think he's overly reliant on jabs and overhand rights and somewhat predictable in that respect.

Again, just because his Campillo/Cleverly weren't showing visible signs of being hurt doesn't mean that his power wasn't affecting them. They can still feel his power, they still know about it, and as a result they are going to fight differently or try to adjust to it, which may make them vulnerable in ways they wouldn't normally be if his power weren't a factor. You may now ask why it would be any different with Hopkins then. I'll tell you--it is because Hopkins is much more talented and experienced then they are, so he knows how to handle it better.

I agree that Kovalev has good mobile power--but he still has to show an ability to land against Hopkins. You're right that his timing, if it is as good as you say, would offset the speed advantage, but I don't think his timing is better than Hopkins'.

So on what basis could you say that Kovalev showed abilities that weren't simply a product of his power?

His timing doesn't have to be better than Hopkins' to mitigate a speed disadvantage. Hopkins being able to time his punches better doesn't mean that he wouldn't also be able to effectively time Hopkins' attacks, and hence do better than he would without such an ability.

Sillakh moves more than Hopkins, but that doesn't mean his movement is better. Sillakh is a classic example of someone who moves too much so that he is frequently vulnerable and out of position and never set to do much of anything. He fought a terrible fight against Kovalev, floating around the ring and basically running with his chin up in the air. There is a difference between frequent movement and intelligent movement--Sillakh displays the former, Hopkins displays the latter.

I think Sillakh moves significantly faster than Hopkins does, and if he had his other abilities would be the better fighter. To pull a page out of your book, what you see as Hopkins' better movement is simply an extension of his other qualities, such as his better chin, better defense, and hence reduced vulnerability.

Kovalev won't bring anything to the fight that Hopkins hasn't already seen except for his power (and even that is debatable--I'm not sure his power his better than Jones or Pavlik, for example, although it is more of a thudding, heavy handed power than their sharper power)--the question is whether or nor he still has what it takes to neutralize it. I think he does, but we shall see. Also, styles make fights, so you can't say that "well, Kovalev destroyed Campillo who boxed circles around Shumenov, who only lost a decision to Hopkins, therefore...." It doesn't quite work that way. That whole Ali/Foreman/Frazier/Norton situation is an easy comparable example of that.

I agree that Hopkins possesses many abilities to degrees that Kovalev hasn't seen, but then against Taylor was in the same situation against Hopkins and Pavlik was in the same situation against Taylor. I also believe that the current version of Hopkins, with his existing set of abilities, hasn't dealt with someone who holds Kovalev's power and other abilities, although of course you dismiss the later.

I agree about styles making fights, but it seems to me that you're just lumping Kovalev in with Shumenov, Cloud, and Murat in considering them nothing more but crude sluggers. If that's true, and given that each of them has a fairly high workrate, what is it about Kovalev that enabled him to beat common opponents far more easily than each of them?

I exaggerated when I said he falls off balance 5-10 times per round. But he does it quite frequently, enough that it was one of the first things I noticed when I first started watching him. I won't say every time, but quite frequently when someone steps to him he will bring his left foot back much further than his right foot, leaving him squared up, off balance, and vulnerable. That is why he went down against Caparello--yes, I know he also had his foot stepped on, but had he not been square that wouldn't have mattered. Do you not think that Hopkins is a smart enough fighter to spot this and find a way to capitalize? Do you not think he is talented or accurate enough to land on a squared up, vulnerable fighter?

Again, I don't see it happen that often and you haven't given me any reasons to believe otherwise. Without examples I could easily say "no, he falls off-balance only once every three or four rounds". Hopkins is good enough to exploit a lot of flaws, but I doubt he's able to exploit every mistake a fighter makes and even if he is there's only so much success he can have if the fighter is making the mistake a few times over several rounds.

Also, if you watch Kovalev-Caparello you'll see that Kovalev squares up and drops his hands for a moment because he's hit with a lowblow that the referee doesn't notice, so I think that is better evidence of his reaction to a foul than of a fundamental flaw.

I don't feel like it's my job to look through his fights and find examples for you--I've pointed it out. If you want, feel free to watch his fights on your own and tell me I'm wrong. I feel like he was doing it a lot against both Cleverly and Agnew, but I'm not going to watch the fights again right now to look.

You're wrong. He fell off-balance only one time that I noticed against Cleverly, and I think a lot of that had to due with him not having respect for the latter's ability. I rarely saw him off balance against Agnew, and if he was it would hardly be enough to make a significant difference in a bout even if his opponent exploited it every time.

Maybe it wasn't right to say that others have lulled him to sleep, but I do believe Hopkins can and will. That is his specialty, and I don't see anything in Kovalev that leads me to believe he is any different in that area from others Hopkins has fought.

Hopkins is good at lulling opponents to sleep, but I don't think he did so against Dawson, Pascal, or even Murat, who was about as aggressive as his stamina allowed him to be.

I wouldn't say he struggled with Pascal. He beat him clearly twice (despite the poor judging in the first fight). Yes he got caught a few times, and yes Kovalev could do the same, but struggled is a stretch. If I remember correctly, at least one of those knockdowns was a flash knockdown and he wasn't really hurt, maybe both of them, and he just got a little stunned but not badly hurt in the second fight. Dawson was just a bad style match up at that stage in his career, but I don't think Kovalev presents the same problems--he isn't as quick, as busy, or as rangey as Dawson, and those were the problems for Hopkins more than anything.

I thought the draw was fair in the first Pascal bout and so did many the others. He won the second fight clearly but I think 4-5 rounds could've been scored for Pascal and obviously he was seriously hurt in the final round.

-For the Pascal knockdowns--do you remember what rounds they occurred in? I will take a look. My initial response would be that, even if he swung wildly to put Hopkins down, his better boxing skill and athleticism set it up in the first place, but I will try to provide a better breakdown if you would like.

Rounds 1 and 3.

I think no matter what Pascal did you'd explain it as being due to something Kovalev doesn't possess. What exactly does superior boxing skill have to do with swinging wildly and catching someone? How did setting up those punches rely on skills that Kovalev doesn't have?

[ikorolev]

Crusader, if you are not a shrink, you should become one. Taking time to persuade somebody saying total crap ... Of course, it would help if you could give the guy some medication.

[crusader]

Crusader, if you are not a shrink, you should become one. Taking time to persuade somebody saying total crap ... Of course, it would help if you could give the guy some medication.

LOL....I don't think becoming a shrink is in my future. I just strongly disagree with the idea that Kovalev sucks and is nothing more than a power-puncher.

[Ezzard]

It will be a pleasure to see Hopkins smack him around like a novice pansy for 12 rounds

Pipino, how will you have time to enjoy the fight what with measuring the grass every 15 minutes and counting rain drops on window panes?

[crusader]

So many guys who have fallen in love with Kovalev, after what? A whole three or four fights in the semi-spotlight. Wow.
He must be the latest Flavor of the Month for some of you fight fans.

Were you the same one who rhapsodized endlessly in 2012 and 2013 about Matthysse? Some monster destroyer who couldn't tamed? A ferocious animal with unlimited power.
Only took a pretty good, but hardly great boxer like Garcia to reduce the Argentine into something as appealing as day-old oatmeal.

Now Kovalev has become the Next Great Monster (Unless your partial to Triple G).
It will be a pleasure to see Hopkins smack him around like a novice pansy for 12 rounds, and take the unified title back to Philly.
Who would object besides Kovalev's ardent forum fans and maybe a fuming Putin.

You sound like you did just before Stevenson-Dawson. There was just no chance a puncher like Stevenson was going to win against a more proven and superior boxer, right?

This fight isn't between Garcia and Matthysse by the way.

[Bard of Boxrec]

Wow. A lot of analysis. All I'll say is I hope to see some of the Kovalev bashers in the thread after he beats the brakes off Bernard.