"There's no proof"... man, you're testing me now: if you got at least one decently-working eye, you should notice the difference: for how much of a powerpuncher Pavlik was, Hopkins had a serious size/complexion advantage... heavier hands, as we say.
Hopkins was no bigger than Pavlik.
Oh, yes he was, dude: same reach, but heavier complexion: splitting all of my ballsack hair in 4 parts, would be a better way to spend your precious time, than trying to prove the opposite...
I strongly doubt you got a ballsack, idiot.
Quite a few times Hopkins was weighing in at 172-173 while fighting at LHW. He wasn't big enough for that weight, and Pavlik was too big for MW. Hopkins outsmarted Pavlik, not overpowered him.
boxing_rocks wrote: ↑03 Jan 2019, 16:21
Hopkins was no bigger than Pavlik.
Oh, yes he was, dude: same reach, but heavier complexion: splitting all of my ballsack hair in 4 parts, would be a better way to spend your precious time, than trying to prove the opposite...
I strongly doubt you got a ballsack, idiot.
I'm vernacular, you're offensive: goes to show you have no arguments... so, mind your terminology, please.
boxing_rocks wrote: ↑03 Jan 2019, 23:16
Quite a few times Hopkins was weighing in at 172-173 while fighting at LHW. He wasn't big enough for that weight, and Pavlik was too big for MW. Hopkins outsmarted Pavlik, not overpowered him.
There are fighters and fighters... Hopkins did great against most of them, but all obviously different from each other...
Hopkins has bigger bone-complexion than Pavlik, therefore more chances to hit harder: until proven wrong, I'll believe what my eyes have seen.
Re: GGG vs Pavlik
Posted: 04 Jan 2019, 09:41
by Jacopodb
jamamb wrote: ↑03 Jan 2019, 18:24
jaco turns thread bizarre
Yeah, I got some bizarre I.Q....
Re: GGG vs Pavlik
Posted: 04 Jan 2019, 10:52
by Counter-puncher
Jacopodb wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 09:39
Hopkins has bigger bone-complexion than Pavlik, therefore more chances to hit harder:
oh, sure, it was bone-complexion that gave Hopkins more chances to hit harder.
skill, and ringcraft, and natural ability, and ring IQ, and experience, were obviously very marginal in the process of Hopkins completely outboxing the tragically thin-wristed Pavlik.
Jacopodb wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 09:39
Hopkins has bigger bone-complexion than Pavlik, therefore more chances to hit harder:
oh, sure, it was bone-complexion that gave Hopkins more chances to hit harder.
skill, and ringcraft, and natural ability, and ring IQ, and experience, were obviously very marginal in the process of Hopkins completely outboxing the tragically thin-wristed Pavlik.
Might be a little romantic, but veritable-enough, to me.
Oh, among Hopkins' great assets you listed above, put also some B-Hop's dirty tricks, way dirtier than "the tragically thin-wished Pavlik"'s ones...
...Pavlik was defeated, but not schooled by Hopkins (as Canelo was schooled by Floyd Jr., for example...).
Re: GGG vs Pavlik
Posted: 04 Jan 2019, 11:36
by Jacopodb
Here's a little treat for you guys.
This video shows two things: my same kind of respect that Hopkins has for Pavlik, and the same old, infamous complexion-gap, again.
Enjoy:
Re: GGG vs Pavlik
Posted: 04 Jan 2019, 11:49
by boxing_rocks
Photos and videos are often misleading. You don't have any real evidence that Bernard's bones are thicker. In any case, siting that as a major reason of his win is laughable.
Jacopodb wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 09:39
Hopkins has bigger bone-complexion than Pavlik, therefore more chances to hit harder:
oh, sure, it was bone-complexion that gave Hopkins more chances to hit harder.
skill, and ringcraft, and natural ability, and ring IQ, and experience, were obviously very marginal in the process of Hopkins completely outboxing the tragically thin-wristed Pavlik.
Might be a little romantic, but veritable-enough, to me.
Oh, among Hopkins' great assets you listed above, put also some B-Hop's dirty tricks, way dirtier than "the tragically thin-wished Pavlik"'s ones...
...Pavlik was defeated, but not schooled by Hopkins (as Canelo was schooled by Floyd Jr., for example...).
lol, Hopkins was sure great at the 'dirty trick' of punching Pavlik repeatedly in the face, whereas the tragically clean-fighting Pavlik was simply too fair and scrupulous and kept eating punches like pacman in the interests of sportsmanship and fairness, unlike the nasty cheat Hopkins who dirtily slipped punches using head movement and angles (its almost as though- gasp- he was better at boxing or something, almost as though something much bigger than wrist thickness is going on here), when you look at it in that light no wonder Pavlik lost, you got any more bizarre theories on how he lit him up with multiple-punch combinations due to a combination of thick wrists and dirty tricks?
Might be a little romantic,
don't flatter yourself, your schtick just reads like the musings of a housebound dilettante who 'learned boxing' by reading some 1930s newspaper articles, people read it and yuk-yuk,
Pavlik was defeated, but not schooled by Hopkins
he lost nearly every minute of nearly every round, your credibility and objectivity is about on a level with pavlik's performance that night. Hopkins was winding his right hand several times before peppering him with combinations, you're done mate, you don't have the faintest clue what you're watching.
oh, sure, it was bone-complexion that gave Hopkins more chances to hit harder.
skill, and ringcraft, and natural ability, and ring IQ, and experience, were obviously very marginal in the process of Hopkins completely outboxing the tragically thin-wristed Pavlik.
Might be a little romantic, but veritable-enough, to me.
Oh, among Hopkins' great assets you listed above, put also some B-Hop's dirty tricks, way dirtier than "the tragically thin-wished Pavlik"'s ones...
...Pavlik was defeated, but not schooled by Hopkins (as Canelo was schooled by Floyd Jr., for example...).
lol, Hopkins was sure great at the 'dirty trick' of punching Pavlik repeatedly in the face, whereas the tragically clean-fighting Pavlik was simply too fair and scrupulous and kept eating punches like pacman in the interests of sportsmanship and fairness, unlike the nasty cheat Hopkins who dirtily slipped punches using head movement and angles (its almost as though- gasp- he was better at boxing or something, almost as though something much bigger than wrist thickness is going on here), when you look at it in that light no wonder Pavlik lost, you got any more bizarre theories on how he lit him up with multiple-punch combinations due to a combination of thick wrists and dirty tricks?
Might be a little romantic,
don't flatter yourself, your schtick just reads like the musings of a housebound dilettante who 'learned boxing' by reading some 1930s newspaper articles, people read it and yuk-yuk,
Pavlik was defeated, but not schooled by Hopkins
he lost nearly every minute of nearly every round, your credibility and objectivity is about on a level with pavlik's performance that night. Hopkins was winding his right hand several times before peppering him with combinations, you're done mate, you don't have the faintest clue what you're watching.
Without taking anything from Hopkins' skills, which I respect no-less than Pavlik's, hittin' while holdin' isn't something to brag about, much like Joshua did against Cammarelle: now, there's people saying that Joshua deserved his 2012 Olympic gold, and there's people saying that Hopkins had even won against Calzaghe... so I'm psychologically prepared to hear and read anything else.
Goes to show that Hopkins, like Joshua, is very much hyped-up. Same doesn't go for Youngstown, Ohio's Pavlik.
Re: GGG vs Pavlik
Posted: 04 Jan 2019, 12:28
by Jacopodb
boxing_rocks wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 11:49
Photos and videos are often misleading. You don't have any real evidence that Bernard's bones are thicker. In any case, siting that as a major reason of his win is laughable.
Sorry, but I guess I still have the means to believe my eyes more than your opinion.
Re: GGG vs Pavlik
Posted: 04 Jan 2019, 12:36
by Jacopodb
Counter-puncher wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 12:00Might be a little romantic,
don't flatter yourself, your schtick just reads like the musings of a housebound dilettante who 'learned boxing' by reading some 1930s newspaper articles, people read it and yuk-yuk,
As much as I didn't have any business in boxing (no shame in that), I still think that your yuk-yuk for general hype isn't more respectable than my yuk-yuk for general knowledge.
Jacopodb wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 09:39
Hopkins has bigger bone-complexion than Pavlik, therefore more chances to hit harder:
oh, sure, it was bone-complexion that gave Hopkins more chances to hit harder.
skill, and ringcraft, and natural ability, and ring IQ, and experience, were obviously very marginal in the process of Hopkins completely outboxing the tragically thin-wristed Pavlik.
Might be a little romantic, but veritable-enough, to me.
Oh, among Hopkins' great assets you listed above, put also some B-Hop's dirty tricks, way dirtier than "the tragically thin-wished Pavlik"'s ones...
...Pavlik was defeated, but not schooled by Hopkins (as Canelo was schooled by Floyd Jr., for example...).
He was schooled worse than Floyd schooled Canelo. Pavlik was bloody by the end and dominated in every round. Hopkins was throwing bolo punches twice in the fight.
oh, sure, it was bone-complexion that gave Hopkins more chances to hit harder.
skill, and ringcraft, and natural ability, and ring IQ, and experience, were obviously very marginal in the process of Hopkins completely outboxing the tragically thin-wristed Pavlik.
Might be a little romantic, but veritable-enough, to me.
Oh, among Hopkins' great assets you listed above, put also some B-Hop's dirty tricks, way dirtier than "the tragically thin-wished Pavlik"'s ones...
...Pavlik was defeated, but not schooled by Hopkins (as Canelo was schooled by Floyd Jr., for example...).
He was schooled worse than Floyd schooled Canelo. Pavlik was bloody by the end and dominated in every round. Hopkins was throwing bolo punches twice in the fight.
Pavlik was a little bruised after Hopkins, less than GGG was against Canelo, and still we have people in this forum, raving about GGG outboxing Canelo...
Hopkins won by decision... if he had asphalted Pavlik, or TKO'd him, I would be talking in a different fashion.
Floyd Jr. schooled Canelo, also considering the fact that Floyd Jr. is naturally smaller than Canelo, and the fact that Floyd didn't pull out as many dirty tricks as Hopkins pulled out against naturally-smaller Pavlik.
Might be a little romantic, but veritable-enough, to me.
Oh, among Hopkins' great assets you listed above, put also some B-Hop's dirty tricks, way dirtier than "the tragically thin-wished Pavlik"'s ones...
...Pavlik was defeated, but not schooled by Hopkins (as Canelo was schooled by Floyd Jr., for example...).
He was schooled worse than Floyd schooled Canelo. Pavlik was bloody by the end and dominated in every round. Hopkins was throwing bolo punches twice in the fight.
Pavlik was a little bruised after Hopkins, less than GGG was against Canelo, and still we have people in this forum, raving about GGG outboxing Canelo...
Hopkins won by decision... if he had asphalted Pavlik, or TKO'd him, I would be talking in a different fashion.
Floyd Jr. schooled Canelo, also considering the fact that Floyd Jr. is naturally smaller than Canelo, and the fact that Floyd didn't pull out as many dirty tricks as Hopkins pulled out against naturally-smaller Pavlik.
Pavlik has never been as good as GGG. End of story. Good fighter but not too many dimensions.
He was schooled worse than Floyd schooled Canelo. Pavlik was bloody by the end and dominated in every round. Hopkins was throwing bolo punches twice in the fight.
Pavlik was a little bruised after Hopkins, less than GGG was against Canelo, and still we have people in this forum, raving about GGG outboxing Canelo...
Hopkins won by decision... if he had asphalted Pavlik, or TKO'd him, I would be talking in a different fashion.
Floyd Jr. schooled Canelo, also considering the fact that Floyd Jr. is naturally smaller than Canelo, and the fact that Floyd didn't pull out as many dirty tricks as Hopkins pulled out against naturally-smaller Pavlik.
Pavlik has never been as good as GGG. End of story. Good fighter but not too many dimensions.
While you are 100% correct, it won't stop more incessant posting.
Pavlik was a little bruised after Hopkins, less than GGG was against Canelo, and still we have people in this forum, raving about GGG outboxing Canelo...
Hopkins won by decision... if he had asphalted Pavlik, or TKO'd him, I would be talking in a different fashion.
Floyd Jr. schooled Canelo, also considering the fact that Floyd Jr. is naturally smaller than Canelo, and the fact that Floyd didn't pull out as many dirty tricks as Hopkins pulled out against naturally-smaller Pavlik.
Pavlik has never been as good as GGG. End of story. Good fighter but not too many dimensions.
While you are 100% correct, it won't stop more incessant posting.
I know I'm poking a little bit at fashion/hype-victims' wounded prides... I'm getting the usual insults and hysterical laughs you get from false hopes, wet dreams, ostented "grit" and "class", crumbling.
Pavlik is a bit like Tyson: not the most strong-minded, but definitely one of the most gifted boxers ever. Considering GGG's whole career span, it's clear that he's psychologically more balanced, but no more. Peaking Pavlik had more means than Golovkin.
I don't mind withstanding some of hype's side-effects and related frustrations, if I need to speak my mind.
Re: GGG vs Pavlik
Posted: 04 Jan 2019, 15:45
by boxing_rocks
Jacopodb wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 15:42
Peaking Pavlik had more means than Golovkin.
Pavlik was a little bruised after Hopkins, less than GGG was against Canelo, and still we have people in this forum, raving about GGG outboxing Canelo...
Hopkins won by decision... if he had asphalted Pavlik, or TKO'd him, I would be talking in a different fashion.
Floyd Jr. schooled Canelo, also considering the fact that Floyd Jr. is naturally smaller than Canelo, and the fact that Floyd didn't pull out as many dirty tricks as Hopkins pulled out against naturally-smaller Pavlik.
Pavlik has never been as good as GGG. End of story. Good fighter but not too many dimensions.
While you are 100% correct, it won't stop more incessant posting.
Jacopodb wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 15:42
Peaking Pavlik had more means than Golovkin.
The most ridiculous statement ever.
GGG was a long-term amateur: terrific amateur, but pro-boxing is different.
Pavlik was a phenom from the start, had a great amateur career, but shorter than GGG's.
It's no shame starting a pro career as late as GGG started it, but Pavlik summed up a more precocious professional experience (same goes for Canelo): this would give him a big advantage over Golovkin: GGG made his pro debut so late that, while peaking physically, he couldn't have summed up enough professional experience to be considered more dangerous than Pavlik. This is a common issue, among great amateurs going pro quite late.
I've never said I won't change my mind on this, but the arguments exposed here still don't prove me wrong.
Jacopodb wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 15:42
Peaking Pavlik had more means than Golovkin.
The most ridiculous statement ever.
GGG was a long-term amateur: terrific amateur, but pro-boxing is different.
Pavlik was a phenom from the start, had a great amateur career, but shorter than GGG's.
It's no shame starting a pro career as late as GGG started it, but Pavlik summed up a more precocious professional experience (same goes for Canelo): this would give him a big advantage over Golovkin: GGG made his pro debut so late that, while peaking physically, he couldn't have summed up enough professional experience to be considered more dangerous than Pavlik. This is a common issue, among great amateurs going pro quite late.
I've never said I won't change my mind on this, but the arguments exposed here still don't prove me wrong.
Pavlik was never close to 2012-2015 version of Golovkin who was better than Pavlik in basically every aspect of boxing.
boxing_rocks wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 15:45
The most ridiculous statement ever.
GGG was a long-term amateur: terrific amateur, but pro-boxing is different.
Pavlik was a phenom from the start, had a great amateur career, but shorter than GGG's.
It's no shame starting a pro career as late as GGG started it, but Pavlik summed up a more precocious professional experience (same goes for Canelo): this would give him a big advantage over Golovkin: GGG made his pro debut so late that, while peaking physically, he couldn't have summed up enough professional experience to be considered more dangerous than Pavlik. This is a common issue, among great amateurs going pro quite late.
I've never said I won't change my mind on this, but the arguments exposed here still don't prove me wrong.
Pavlik was never close to 2012-2015 version of Golovkin who was better than Pavlik in basically every aspect of boxing.
Both Pavlik and GGG have gathered impressive winning-streaks with fearsome KO-rate, but Pavlik's one includes an unquestionable work of a then-unbeaten Taylor: Golovkin has never ever KO'd an unbeaten, former-unified-world champion as dangerous as Taylor. The closest thing to that GGG ever did is, in my opinion, beating Brook: a welterweight who, with all due respect, has never unified anything.
If you're among the ones considering Lemieux as "great opposition", our conversation might end now, without making a dime of damage.
If you consider GGG's victories as having been obtained against more-dangerous opposition than Pavlik's, I might give you some time to get a grip about this, as it's not as grievous as the above-stated issue would be.
Pavlik has never been as good as GGG. End of story. Good fighter but not too many dimensions.
While you are 100% correct, it won't stop more incessant posting.
I know I'm poking a little bit at fashion/hype-victims' wounded prides... I'm getting the usual insults and hysterical laughs you get from false hopes, wet dreams, ostented "grit" and "class", crumbling.
Pavlik is a bit like Tyson: not the most strong-minded, but definitely one of the most gifted boxers ever. Considering GGG's whole career span, it's clear that he's psychologically more balanced, but no more. Peaking Pavlik had more means than Golovkin.
I don't mind withstanding some of hype's side-effects and related frustrations, if I need to speak my mind.
It's an open forum, Jac! Speak your mind always! Everyone here is exposed to some fun yuks. You are a great poster, whether or not I agree with you. You explain at depth your perspective and for that I have respect for you. Look at other posts...I'm the victim of ridicule plenty! Doesn't stop me and it won't stop you either! It's not like your posts are without merit.
oogiebe wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 15:20
While you are 100% correct, it won't stop more incessant posting.
I know I'm poking a little bit at fashion/hype-victims' wounded prides... I'm getting the usual insults and hysterical laughs you get from false hopes, wet dreams, ostented "grit" and "class", crumbling.
Pavlik is a bit like Tyson: not the most strong-minded, but definitely one of the most gifted boxers ever. Considering GGG's whole career span, it's clear that he's psychologically more balanced, but no more. Peaking Pavlik had more means than Golovkin.
I don't mind withstanding some of hype's side-effects and related frustrations, if I need to speak my mind.
It's an open forum, Jac! Speak your mind always! Everyone here is exposed to some fun yuks. You are a great poster, whether or not I agree with you. You explain at depth your perspective and for that I have respect for you. Look at other posts...I'm the victim of ridicule plenty! Doesn't stop me and it won't stop you either! It's not like your posts are without merit.
GGG was a long-term amateur: terrific amateur, but pro-boxing is different.
Pavlik was a phenom from the start, had a great amateur career, but shorter than GGG's.
It's no shame starting a pro career as late as GGG started it, but Pavlik summed up a more precocious professional experience (same goes for Canelo): this would give him a big advantage over Golovkin: GGG made his pro debut so late that, while peaking physically, he couldn't have summed up enough professional experience to be considered more dangerous than Pavlik. This is a common issue, among great amateurs going pro quite late.
I've never said I won't change my mind on this, but the arguments exposed here still don't prove me wrong.
Pavlik was never close to 2012-2015 version of Golovkin who was better than Pavlik in basically every aspect of boxing.
Both Pavlik and GGG have gathered impressive winning-streaks with fearsome KO-rate, but Pavlik's one includes an unquestionable work of a then-unbeaten Taylor: Golovkin has never ever KO'd an unbeaten, former-unified-world champion as dangerous as Taylor. The closest thing to that GGG ever did is, in my opinion, beating Brook: a welterweight who, with all due respect, has never unified anything.
If you're among the ones considering Lemieux as "great opposition", our conversation might end now, without making a dime of damage.
If you consider GGG's victories as having been obtained against more-dangerous opposition than Pavlik's, I might give you some time to get a grip about this, as it's not as grievous as the above-stated issue would be.
You are desperately trying to avoid the obvious: GGG is a much better boxer than Pavlik. He may have thinner bones, shorter penis, less body hair, etc., and not have an undefeated unified victim on his record, but he would handily beat Pavlik in the ring.
boxing_rocks wrote: ↑04 Jan 2019, 16:33
Pavlik was never close to 2012-2015 version of Golovkin who was better than Pavlik in basically every aspect of boxing.
Both Pavlik and GGG have gathered impressive winning-streaks with fearsome KO-rate, but Pavlik's one includes an unquestionable work of a then-unbeaten Taylor: Golovkin has never ever KO'd an unbeaten, former-unified-world champion as dangerous as Taylor. The closest thing to that GGG ever did is, in my opinion, beating Brook: a welterweight who, with all due respect, has never unified anything.
If you're among the ones considering Lemieux as "great opposition", our conversation might end now, without making a dime of damage.
If you consider GGG's victories as having been obtained against more-dangerous opposition than Pavlik's, I might give you some time to get a grip about this, as it's not as grievous as the above-stated issue would be.
You are desperately trying to avoid the obvious: GGG is a much better boxer than Pavlik. He may have thinner bones, shorter penis, less body hair, etc., and not have an undefeated unified victim on his record, but he would handily beat Pavlik in the ring.
