Page 5 of 10
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:32
by No Tomorrow
Would be awesome if Hopkins got the stoppage. That'd be huge
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:32
by lefty
MachoTime wrote:columbo wrote:Is it me or is Shumenov looking very gaunt?
Ditto. Or is it he looks like he has the lack of "Eye of The Tiger"
.... he looks like he's shitting himself aswell lol
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:34
by lefty
This is gonna be a complete stinker I can sense it...
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:35
by No Tomorrow
Probably
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:35
by lefty
1-0 Shumenov
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:36
by diddy
Omg Shumenov stinks.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:36
by gilgamesh
I rarely score rounds even, but I couldn't find any reason to score that 1st round for anybody.
10-10
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:36
by Baby Face Finster
First round to Shumenov. I hope the rest of the fight isn't like the first because if it is we are in for one boring and brutal fight.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:36
by crusader
1-0 Shumenov but not much to split them.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:36
by expe
10-10
Neither fighter did anything worth shouting about, took Hopkins a minute to throw a punch.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:37
by lefty
gilgamesh wrote:I rarely score rounds even, but I couldn't find any reason to score that 1st round for anybody.
10-10
I thought Shumenov landed some more jabs
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:37
by MachoTime
gilgamesh wrote:I rarely score rounds even, but I couldn't find any reason to score that 1st round for anybody.
10-10
9-9 no?
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:39
by lefty
2-0 Shumenov .... just on output more than anything. Not much going on at all.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:40
by gilgamesh
MachoTime wrote:gilgamesh wrote:I rarely score rounds even, but I couldn't find any reason to score that 1st round for anybody.
10-10
9-9 no?
I don't think so, but like I said I rarely score rounds even.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:40
by Baby Face Finster
2nd to Shumenov also. He did slightly better than Hopkins.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:40
by crusader
columbo wrote:2-0 Shumenov .... just on output more than anything. Not much going on at all.
I agree.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:40
by gilgamesh
columbo wrote:2-0 Shumenov .... just on output more than anything. Not much going on at all.
20-19 Shumenov for me, and yeah not much happening.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:40
by expe
20-19 Shumenov
Nicked it purely on workrate, Hopkins landed a couple of right hands but nothing else.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:41
by Jaywheel
Shumenov is composed, should use hos jab more
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:43
by gilgamesh
30-28 Shumenov
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:44
by Baby Face Finster
3rd to Hopkins.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:44
by lefty
Found that 3rd round to score. Probably Hopkins as he scored the more eye catching shots. Hopkins seems to be only throwing about 5 punches per round though!
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:44
by expe
29-29
Hopkins landed some clean punches, including a good right hand while Shumenov was complaining, another close round.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:45
by lefty
Both of these guys would/will get massacred by Stevenson and Kovalev though I think.
Re: Hopkins/Shumenov (with undercard)
Posted: 19 Apr 2014, 23:46
by lefty
Hopkins starting to get into a bit of a groove now.