Page 2 of 4

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 09:33
by Bard of Boxrec
all i remember about hop/dlh was that it was quite close and fairly boring. Hopkins didn't run as much in that fight as this.

Bernard did just enough to win against a limited Eastman who never surprised us with any semblance of workrate. eastman still managed to disapoint me, i guess against hopkins he just looks even more bumbling and inaccurate with his shots. A guy who struggled against Scott Dann was never going to be organised enough to give a p4p great fighter problems.

Predictable, if you ask me. I don't know why I bought it to be honest.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 09:47
by jomothepure
Should there be a rematch? Don't know that Hopkins would have anything to gain. Eastman would obviously get some more good money and publicity, but would an Eastman win conceivable?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/boxing/4281391.stm

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 09:51
by Neri
I was a bit disappointed, started off really slow. Eastman gave it a good go in the later rounds but was just countered time and time again. Hopkins is smart ill give him that. I thought Eastman should have brought the left hook in alot more. He hardly threw any.

Now its up to Ricky :TU:

Well done To Witter for his win, i didnt like the last showboating round though

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 09:56
by stujones
Should there be a rematch? No. Eastman was outclassed simple as.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 10:21
by Neri
I dont think a rematch is necessary either. Hopkins - Taylor next i hope

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 10:29
by stujones
That score card 114-114 is unusual one, by the sounds of it you had Eastman 3 up with 3 to play?

Hopkins didn't lose a round on my card, sure I think it was 3 rounds I scored 10-10 (1,5, 11) and the 12th could have also gone that way to - but I thought I was being a little kind to Eastman. I did expect to hear one 120-109 card

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 10:59
by Goz
Eastman is just too one-paced, doesn't have any gears to go up. When the commentator was saying that Eastman was probably just getting 'warmed up' I was saying 'no he's not, that's it'.

I don't know if Howard doesn't trust his stamina but he never seems to give it 100%.

Can he honestly put his hand on his heart and say that in his two world title challenges he gave absolutely everything? Howard is frustrating to watch, when he dis throw 2/3 shots he had some limited success but then just stands there and looks at Hopkins.

That said I'm sure Hopkins deserves much credit for that as well and I'm not for a minute suggesting that the fight was Eastman's to win, Hopkins also fought within himself although in the Philly legends case I suspect he had a gear or two to shift up.

The fight was exactly as I expected although the rounds were a little closer. I wonder if Howard will get another big fight soon or is it back to the Dagenham leisure centre for the next 4 years?

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 11:05
by nickd
Spot on Goz, Eastman didnt leave it all in the ring. I think he was stunned a couple of times and if he'd let it all hang out he'd probably have been stopped but that would have been better than the non performance he put in. Granted Hopkins was brilliant on the defence but all the more reason to pour it on and throw more leather. Eastman threw nothing in some of the rounds. All too predictable wasnt it?

Hopkins could have done more also, if he'd closed the show the last 3 rounds he'd have got the stoppage I think but he was content to protect what he had. He complained for years about not getting the recognition, but thats why - safety first is not what people pay money to see!!

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 12:21
by josh fg
Would the eastman we saw last night have beaten Willy Joppy

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 12:22
by Manos de Oro
It gives me an almost sexual thrill to watch Hopkins these days. All class. The first round was cagey then in the second round Hopkins started drawing him out. Eastman was not pressuring him, Eastman was not pressuring him. Even though he thought he was. Hopkins was doing this to take the fight away from Eastman in the later rounds. It got to the point I actually said out loud: "this is too easy, Howard needs to get back in the fight", and it was only round three or four... And I think it was one of those rounds Hopkins actually started to piss himself at how easy his plan was working out.

Hopkins may have showed his age by the amount of right leads he missed (he's usually a bit more accurate than that), but you've got to remember he fought very much, in fact he was probably copying, the style of Roy Jones: no jab, lead left hooks, dragging opponents further and further out to sea through the backfoot.

I'm disappointed in Eastman's corner. Robert McCracken was abysmal. I think he might have cost Howard any chance of winning. It was obvious he had no idea how to beat Hopkins. I was cringing when Howard would come to sit down and McCracken would list off reams of combinations Howard was to throw. This should all be programmed into Eastman in training; he had no sense of anything other than the corporeal of the fight (much like the people who think last night's fight was boring). Way out of his depth.

Eastman's comments after the fight are disappointing too. He is either delusional or simply so out of his depth he doesn't know what hit him. Poor rematch if it happens. There was a reason he didn't jump on and maul Hopkins last night, he'd do well to realise it.

Hopkins called him a B- fighter, which is about right for last night, but I'd actually say Eastman could be as high as A- if he got a proper trainer and fought guys below Hopkins' level. Fights like Felix Sturm and Jermain Taylor would be good fights for him.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 12:32
by jamesmcdonnell
stujones wrote:Hopkins was class, a brilliant performance. Howard showed good focus throughout - but just wasn't up to it.

I know people are all ready saying, Hopkins only threw 30 odd punches a round he must be shot. No, unless the fight becomes a grudge he always just does enough. Tito and Joppy both got his goat up and destroyed them. Yet between those fights he laboured and "looked worn" vs Daniels.

I think Hopkins was in 3rd gear, and Eastman was a good as he could have been. The 40 year old made the 34 year old look so slow in there.

I don't want to end on a negative note for British boxing (something I have been accused off) - I still take my hat of to Eastman, he looked as good as some of Hopkins' opponents, the likes of Daniels and Allen - and I cannot fault him for not having his mind on the job, because he fought with a good focus - so well done, but outclassed.

I think it was James Mac who was debating with me whether Hopkins vs Eastman would be as competitive as Hopkins vs DLH, did you think it was?

Incidently, how about a Super Fight at Light heavy between Jones Jnr and DLH? He's eat a fair few pies hasn't he?
You're kidding right? Jones Jr would fornicating murder him, I guess you are joking.

I thought this fight was a little more competitive. The differnece was Hopkins had to respect Eastman's power a lot more, whereas he was just wary of getting outpointed with flurries by DLH.

Hopkins looked totally focussed and in command of himself, a seamless fighting machine. Eastman did look to have him hurt at one point, and when he did have good spells spent far too long admiring his work rather than pouring it on.

The truth is, Eastman is too mechanical, he just cannot let his shots flow and that will always hold him back. He's also too easy to counter ebecause his defence is virtually non-existent, I don't know why he keeps the left so low, because he doesn't even have a jab.

However, and this is going to sound controversial. If a limited fighter using one hand like Eastman can make Hopkins box that conservatively, I believe that Jermain Taylor is going to push Hopkins all the way.

Taylor is big, strong, fast, young, is sound technically, and capable of fighting at a high pace. He is also a good thinking fighter, and is in the mold of Hopkins, he is patient, but when he finds the opening, is far more aggressive and hard hitting than Hopkins.

In two-three fights, Taylor will beat Hopkins, but they should fight right away, and I think it will be a great fight and we may see the title change hands.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 12:47
by KOJOE90
Riddick Blowe wrote:all i remember about hop/dlh was that it was quite close and fairly boring..
As it happens I enjoyed that fight. Didn't think it was boring at all.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 13:19
by Max Molyneux
Neri1983 wrote:I was a bit disappointed, started off really slow. Eastman gave it a good go in the later rounds but was just countered time and time again. Hopkins is smart ill give him that. I thought Eastman should have brought the left hook in alot more. He hardly threw any.

Now its up to Ricky :TU:

Well done To Witter for his win, i didnt like the last showboating round though
Wouldn't it be cool if Ricky won Tszyu's belt and Witter won the Wbc version of the winner of the next Gatti fight? Then they could fight each other. :TU:

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 13:29
by josh fg
Max Molyneux wrote:
Neri1983 wrote:I was a bit disappointed, started off really slow. Eastman gave it a good go in the later rounds but was just countered time and time again. Hopkins is smart ill give him that. I thought Eastman should have brought the left hook in alot more. He hardly threw any.

Now its up to Ricky :TU:

Well done To Witter for his win, i didnt like the last showboating round though
Wouldn't it be cool if Ricky won Tszyu's belt and Witter won the Wbc version of the winner of the next Gatti fight? Then they could fight each other. :TU:
The only problem with that is for that to happen Hatton has to beat Kosta Tszyu and that is a big ask I have a feeling tszyu will make him look very ordinary

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 13:43
by Matchfixer
Not sure what fight some of you were watching last nigth to suggest Hopkins won over 9 rounds :-?

He won 1 of the first 5 at tops and about 6 in total. Eastman won about 2 and the rest were shared.

So 114-118 would be my score in favour of Hopkins.

I wouldn't mind seeing Johnson or Jones or Taylor beat that boring style... in fact it would make me very happy.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 14:05
by jamesmcdonnell
I think I gave Eastman 3 rounds with 2 even, have to check my scorecards.

The first four rounds were all pretty quiet, there was little to seperate either man. It was clear though that Hopkins was always going to get those close ones on tyhe judges cards. 117-111 sounded fair to me.

Howard just wasn't landing enough clean shots.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 14:15
by stujones
James, of course I was joking it was a mearly an observation that Oscar looked at least 12 1/2 stones. Why isn't he having enough exercise with that wife of his?

As for the Hopkins' to last defences, I think the DLH one was more competitive, wasn't DLH up on one of the cards at the time of the stoppage - they were about to embark on the home stretch and who knows perhaps DLH had focused on a big finish.

After the 3rd round of this fight there only looked like one winner.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 14:42
by nickd
James I agree, I think Taylor will give Hopkins one hell of a fight. I think he could well be the man to dethrone him, Eastman made it easy for Hopkins by hardly throwing and when he did they were single shots. Taylor puts his shots together beautifully and has great variety. To me Hopkins looks to be slipping a little, he was pretty sloppy himself last night maybe it was just the bad clash of styles? Hopkins v Taylor is one I would love to see and I think they should make it now Taylor could be ready.

I can't believe Eastman only threw a handful of uppercuts last night, he normally throws plenty and when Hopkins was coming in to clinch he could have nailed him with that one. He did a couple of times but he could and should have been doing that throughout the fight.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 14:58
by Lefthookhappy19
You guys impressed with Taylor? Yeah he looked good but he is highly protected. That guy last night offered no punching threat to him whatsoever and Taylor towered over him. Their must be a reason he's so protected.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 15:02
by stujones
Don't see him as protected just the devision is poor. William Joppy, Raul Marquez and now Eduard all good quite concievably have been in the top ten at the time of their meeting with Taylor.

No disrespect, but when Sam Soliman is the number 1 contendor it just shows the lack of depth in the devision.

Can you think of any other fights (apart from say Eastman) who Taylor could have faced? Tito has only just come back and thats about it. Robert Allen? Morrade Haakar? - He's fought and beaten better.

Eduard is a tough cookie and its was a good win.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 15:07
by nickd
I think Taylor would beat Eastman handily, and he'll put up a better show against Hopkins than Howard did last night win or lose.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 15:07
by jamesmcdonnell
There really aren't too many other people for him to beat, Eastman or Ikeke would be good preparation for him, I think Taylor beats either, though Ikeke would make him work hard. Eastman would be too one-paced for Taylor.

Hopkins looks to be slipping just a tad to me now, the punch power isn't really there any more, and Taylor has power in abundance and looks to be a very big strong middleweight, I reckon he weighs 170 come fightnight.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 15:09
by nickd
Taylor is huge at the weight, I'd say he may be closer to 175 fight time. I think the timing could be perfect for him to take the torch.

Very nice fella aswell it seems which is refreshing. Doesnt seem to have the bad attitude a lot of the up and coming fighters have.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 15:14
by Manos de Oro
Lefthookhappy19 wrote:You guys impressed with Taylor? Yeah he looked good but he is highly protected. That guy last night offered no punching threat to him whatsoever and Taylor towered over him. Their must be a reason he's so protected.
Agree with this completely, been saying since I first started seeing Taylor a couple years ago. He's a pretty boy filling a particular market niche. It's plain to see he has skills, but I think he'd fall apart in a real fight. Hopkins would jab and drown him.

A couple of years from now - or if he gets some proper contender experience - he's got a better chance of giving Hopkins grief.

Posted: 20 Feb 2005, 15:20
by nickd
Manos de Oro wrote:
Lefthookhappy19 wrote:You guys impressed with Taylor? Yeah he looked good but he is highly protected. That guy last night offered no punching threat to him whatsoever and Taylor towered over him. Their must be a reason he's so protected.
Agree with this completely, been saying since I first started seeing Taylor a couple years ago. He's a pretty boy filling a particular market niche. It's plain to see he has skills, but I think he'd fall apart in a real fight. Hopkins would jab and drown him.

A couple of years from now - or if he gets some proper contender experience - he's got a better chance of giving Hopkins grief.
Put him in with Hopkins now, if he loses its not the end of the world he can come again but if he wins then he's taken the title off the champ rather than waiting for Hopkins to retire. Who in all honesty is out there that can stretch him and make him any more prepared for Hopkins? Maybe a few fights with some super middles would be nice to get him some rounds otherwise he blows everyone else away.

Have you seen his fight with Joppy? He completely dominated him and that was a real fight.