B-Hop, B careful what you wish, Tarver unbeaten in rematches

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 12 Jun 2006, 04:45

Tarver is a state of the art cyber tracker programmed to take down boxing legends. His programming can be slow to kick in, so he's most efficient and devastating at the second and third times of asking. Hopkins said he wanted a rematch. Watch out, Hopkins!

only joking

what now are the chances of Calzaghe-Tarver, I ask. Could Warren tempt him to come over to Wales?

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 12 Jun 2006, 05:18

There would never be enough money on the table.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 12 Jun 2006, 05:22

Tarver might be desperate to get back in the mix. Not that he was ever a marquee name anyhow.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 12 Jun 2006, 05:23

Only in his own mind. Tarver really thought he was a superstar, especially after the Rocky film, glad he got humbled.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 12 Jun 2006, 05:27

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Only in his own mind. Tarver really thought he was a superstar, especially after the Rocky film, glad he got humbled.

absolutely. he's been pissing a lot of ppl off & i reckon many ppl are glad he wore that look of utter despair from the end of the 1st round onward. it was funny, between rd11 and 12, McGirt telling Tarver "You're taking too many shots, hold on to him and walk around".

But what an offensive mouth, especially in the last few weeks, "I am a living legend", "Who does Hopkins think he is challenging the #1 light heavy, he should fight guys I beat", "I don't get any respect, I should be ranked p4p higher than Winky, Winky got a lucky win against Soliman", "Castillo is a quitter"

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 12 Jun 2006, 06:19

Man the hype Hopkins is getting for this win is ridiculous on some forums. Was a good solid win but if it was Tarver who won he'd get no credit for it.

If Tarver wasn't draining himself to make LHW and had a little workrate, maybe he would of won a few rounds since Hopkins takes rounds off.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 12 Jun 2006, 06:51

I find it especially ironic that after gaining lots of weight to appear in a sodding Rocky Movie, he turns up jaded and listless when making LHW for the first time in many months, after saying that Jones Jr's claims about having to lose weight were nonsense. Drained looked 100 the night of the 1st Tarver fight, and fought like it too.

I'd be interested in a rematch to see if Tarver would perform better and to see if it was down to poor preparation, because it sounds like Tarver did nothing at all on the night.

TerribleTerry · Post by **TerribleTerry** » 12 Jun 2006, 07:52

Max Molyneux wrote:Man the hype Hopkins is getting for this win is ridiculous on some forums. Was a good solid win but if it was Tarver who won he'd get no credit for it.

If Tarver wasn't draining himself to make LHW and had a little workrate, maybe he would of won a few rounds since Hopkins takes rounds off.

Hopkins deserves great credit. He is a 41 year old career middleweight who stepped up two divisions and schooled the consensus No1 at Light Heavy.

Not many can say they have done that. I thoroughly enjoyed Hopkins performance, a great display of ring generalship and savy boxing

BigEars · Post by **BigEars** » 12 Jun 2006, 08:12

After Johnson v Calzaghe fight having to be scrapped and Tarver losing things have really opened up for Clinton Woods . He's fighting Johnson next and I believe the new improved Woods will beat him . After that the most logical fight will be Tarver(the tv networks will probably want it too) for Woods and I think he could win that fight also .

if he can beat those two he is bound to be recognized as the man at Light-heavyweight(will probably get the RING belt) , so it's all there for Clinton Woods . He just has to step up to the plate and take his chance .

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 12 Jun 2006, 09:20

viciousmaussa wrote:Tarver is a state of the art cyber tracker programmed to take down boxing legends. His programming can be slow to kick in, so he's most efficient and devastating at the second and third times of asking. Hopkins said he wanted a rematch. Watch out, Hopkins!

only joking

what now are the chances of Calzaghe-Tarver, I ask. Could Warren tempt him to come over to Wales?

It'd be a shit fight that looks good on the overall resume, but everyone who knows about both fighters knows the truth in the fight. I've had Tarver #1 p4p because he beat the #1 long ago. He's also been king of LHW for a bit, so that played into it. However, he was never really that talented, and it always seemed a matter of time before he lost focus again.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 12 Jun 2006, 10:32

One swallow doth not a summer make and all that. I never rated Tarver all that highly, credit though to Hopkins for taking on a genuine LHW champion and winning in style. One win over Jones and a loss and win against Johnson don't make you top P4P, or even top 5, I didn't even have Tarver in my top 10, as it was so clear how shot to shite Jones was by his performance in their first fight.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 12 Jun 2006, 10:40

Can I ask, the people who have been saying "hold your fire" about rating Jermain Taylor in the P4P bracket.... Does this Hopkins win change some of your opinion.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 12 Jun 2006, 10:45

I said it before now, and I'll say it again, I think Taylor is underrated, despite his technical flaws, and the closeness of the fights, he did something that none of the more experienced middleweights could do, force the fight against an older and craftier foe. His size, strength and power, and more imporantly speed and workrate kept Hopkins negative for large stretches.

I predict a taylor win over Wright, perhaps controversially, but I think we will see Winky kept in a box for large periods by Taylor's aggression, and his punch power will shock Winky.

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 12 Jun 2006, 13:38

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I said it before now, and I'll say it again, I think Taylor is underrated, despite his technical flaws, and the closeness of the fights, he did something that none of the more experienced middleweights could do, force the fight against an older and craftier foe. His size, strength and power, and more imporantly speed and workrate kept Hopkins negative for large stretches.

I predict a taylor win over Wright, perhaps controversially, but I think we will see Winky kept in a box for large periods by Taylor's aggression, and his punch power will shock Winky.

Taylor beats Wright by some margin.

Taylor will make him fight and may even floor him.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 12 Jun 2006, 15:56

TerribleTerry wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote:Man the hype Hopkins is getting for this win is ridiculous on some forums. Was a good solid win but if it was Tarver who won he'd get no credit for it.

If Tarver wasn't draining himself to make LHW and had a little workrate, maybe he would of won a few rounds since Hopkins takes rounds off.
Hopkins deserves great credit. He is a 41 year old career middleweight who stepped up two divisions and schooled the consensus No1 at Light Heavy.

Not many can say they have done that. I thoroughly enjoyed Hopkins performance, a great display of ring generalship and savy boxing

He beat a top 10 not the NO 1 light Heavy.

I'm just laughing at a lot of hype and crap I'm reading on ESB about how there thinking that Hop would rape Calzaghe.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 13 Jun 2006, 04:52

Yes, that is silly talk, if he did win it would be in an exceptionally cagey fight where Calzaghe was unable to land many punches. Personally, I think that if Taylor, an inferior fighter to Calzaghe technically could outwork Hopkins (in the judges eyes) Joe certainly would.

Tarver is a much slower and less active fighter than Joe, and as it turned out that suited B-hop down to the ground. I didn't think he had it in him, and thought Tarver would win a snoozer, but I don't see Hopkins beating someone who is faster, younger, and aggressive.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 13 Jun 2006, 05:03

Hopkins is quite physically strong inside now. He was pretty fast with his shots. That counter shot that dropped Tarver was a wonderful shot. Hopkins feinted his punch, Tarver tried to counter, Hopkins slipped Tarver's counter and hit him with a lovely right. But obviously Calzaghe can be a punching machine. By the end, Hopkins was backing up Tarver, bullying him, and he'll be very hard to fight.

a lot of ppl - including mackie shilstone - are saying Hopkins should have been a light heavy at least a few yrs ago.

IMO this is the fight everyone should be talking about. Both men were awesome in their previous fights. The super middle king vs the light heavy king. But would Calzaghe want to go to America to fight the trickiest guy there is? On top of that, Hopkins seems to enjoy fighting lefties. He's beaten Robert Allen twice, Syd Vanderpool, Tarver, JD Jackson, Carl Daniels, Keith Holmes quite emphatically, though Calzaghe would be a different beast entirely.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 13 Jun 2006, 06:38

Calzaghe always sounds very bullish whenever Hopkins name is mentioned. Hopkins WAS offered a very nice payday to face Calzaghe, at a time when there were bugger all offers on the table, and Hopkins turned it down at the last minute and demanded 5 million, when the contracts were ready to be signed. I think, rightly or wrongly, Calzaghe has always fancied his chances against an aged B Hop.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 13 Jun 2006, 06:41

Well Hopkins even at 41 is far superior to anyone Calzaghe has fought.

I'd like to see them fight at 175 now.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 13 Jun 2006, 07:57

Terence wrote:To be fair when the fight between Hopkins and Joe was mooted Calzaghe brought very little to the table other than a load of TBA's and big wins over Eubank and Reid. All Hopkins had to gain was finance, the USA was "So What?" about Joe big-time then. Even now it is hard with Joe, I still feel he got the Lacy fight despite his profile rather than because of it, Showtime wanted to show Lacy off and launch his big year versus a respected name and I assume they felt Joe would be powered aside. Now Joe has that win his respect has gone up but his profile is still not red-hot, he is just not a superstar yet wants superstars to come over here and take a lower end of the wedge to fight him. The Lacy win has made him even less realistic as to what he brings to a fight.

To be fair then Hopkins wasn't a big draw in the US at the time so that offer wasn't bad.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 13 Jun 2006, 07:59

Max Molyneux wrote:
Terence wrote:To be fair when the fight between Hopkins and Joe was mooted Calzaghe brought very little to the table other than a load of TBA's and big wins over Eubank and Reid. All Hopkins had to gain was finance, the USA was "So What?" about Joe big-time then. Even now it is hard with Joe, I still feel he got the Lacy fight despite his profile rather than because of it, Showtime wanted to show Lacy off and launch his big year versus a respected name and I assume they felt Joe would be powered aside. Now Joe has that win his respect has gone up but his profile is still not red-hot, he is just not a superstar yet wants superstars to come over here and take a lower end of the wedge to fight him. The Lacy win has made him even less realistic as to what he brings to a fight.
To be fair then Hopkins wasn't a big draw in the US at the time so that offer wasn't bad.

Calzaghe was hardly big box office at the time, often failing to fill 5,000 seater venues in Cardiff!

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 13 Jun 2006, 08:07

Terence wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote:
Terence wrote:To be fair when the fight between Hopkins and Joe was mooted Calzaghe brought very little to the table other than a load of TBA's and big wins over Eubank and Reid. All Hopkins had to gain was finance, the USA was "So What?" about Joe big-time then. Even now it is hard with Joe, I still feel he got the Lacy fight despite his profile rather than because of it, Showtime wanted to show Lacy off and launch his big year versus a respected name and I assume they felt Joe would be powered aside. Now Joe has that win his respect has gone up but his profile is still not red-hot, he is just not a superstar yet wants superstars to come over here and take a lower end of the wedge to fight him. The Lacy win has made him even less realistic as to what he brings to a fight.
To be fair then Hopkins wasn't a big draw in the US at the time so that offer wasn't bad.
No but he was P4P #1 and at this time the WBO belt was a laughing stock Stateside and particularly Joe's claims in his division. Joe was routinely being called a contender with a bauble in some circles.

Fighting Tito gave him p4p 1?

Thought he never got that spot till later on.

I thought belts don't matter? Another contridiction, their both great fighters so they matter more.

So these people who said he was a contender with a bauble then, were they credible enough to realise he was talented regardless?

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 13 Jun 2006, 08:07

What do people consider the better win Calzaghe over Lacy or Hopkins over Trinidad?

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 13 Jun 2006, 08:10

Lenny Albert wrote:What do people consider the better win Calzaghe over Lacy or Hopkins over Trinidad?

I didn't say I did. But Trinidad is a limited puncher as well and Calzaghe was more dominating.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 13 Jun 2006, 08:41

No he got it for that sole win. The logic was that Jones was not fighting a high standard of fighter and Hopkins pushed him aside before Jones came back by fighting Ruiz, depending on who was doing the list there would be 5-6 P4P #1's per year.

The belt thing is not a contradiction. If you can remove your pro-Joe bias think on this.

So just like Jones got his for Toney then.

The belt thing is a contridiction, some posters use them say how a fighter is better but then say it's the fighter that makes the belt or love it when they give it up to fight the best.

KO'ing one p4p fighter doesn't give you P4P no 1. FLoyd hasn't fought no P4P fighters yet gets the No 1 spot. I wouldn't mention bias, I wouldn't really say that as we all get biased. Seems the Americans are more biased than me then if their giving it to people on one win or guys who have fought no P4p fighters like FLoyd even if he's talented.

Joe looking poor against Ashira?

Outboxing with one hand, him winning every round doesn't make you look poor.

B-Hop, B careful what you wish, Tarver unbeaten in rematches

B-Hop, B careful what you wish, Tarver unbeaten in rematches

Re: B-Hop, B careful what you wish, Tarver unbeaten in remat