BoxRec

ikorolev wrote:Hopkins said that he will not fight some Joe Schmoe which Murray is.

lefty wrote:Did he? By better im guessing you mean he managed to survive the full 12 rounds. Other than that he was completely dominated.

fergusg wrote:Darnell Boone (first fight)

fergusg wrote:You asked a question and I answered it.

fergusg wrote:By the way, the CompuBox punch stats seem to support my stance that Hopkins is a shot fighter:
• Bernard Hopkins landed five or less punches in seven of the twelve rounds against Sergey Kovalev. He could only manage to land thee shots during rounds 1, 2 & 9.
• The total amount of punches he connected with for the entire first three rounds is the same as he managed in the 12th round (i.e. ten shots).
• Excluding the final round (where his work-rate was roughly four times higher than normal), Hopkins threw an average of 14 punches per round (in comparison to Kovalev’s 49 shot average).
• Kovalev managed to land 186% more punches against Hopkins than Shumenov.
• Kovalev managed to land 81% more power punches against Hopkins than Shumenov.
• Marco Antonio Rubio managed to land the same amount of punches in the first round against Gennady Golovkin than what Hopkins could manage throughout the entire first four rounds against Kovalev.
• Bernard Hopkins only managed to connect with one solitary jab for five of the twelve rounds.
• Hopkins could only manage to land an average of FIVE punches per round.

fergusg wrote:Agreed, but these statistics are an accurate reflection of my perception of Hopkins’ performance against Kovalev that I personally witnessed, as he simply didn’t fight back – he was purely in survival mode.

Put it this way, CompuBox states that the average work-rate for a light heavyweight fighter is throwing 54.1 punches per round, but Hopkins could only manage 14.

When a fighter cannot throw punches and he’s on the receiving end of many more than what he’s accustomed to, then it’s time to hang up the gloves.

Sometimes fighters really do grow old overnight… and unfortunately, that’s what happened to Hopkins.

That being said, I’m not criticising Sergey Kovalev or trying to undermine his victory. He was the consummate professional because he demonstrated patience and was disciplined enough to stick to his game-plan. Sergey can only beat the man that he shares the ring with, so I can’t fault his performance in any way.

Hopkins’ performance against Kovalev was much akin to witnessing James ‘Bonecrusher’ Smith’s appalling efforts against Mike Tyson… they were both very negative and purely focussed on going the distance.

Evander wrote:^
Contemplating a GGG v Hopkins fight can only be seen as a huge mark of respect for a 49 year old Bernard.

fergusg wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:Everything points towards Froch being the ideal opponent for this, given everything Hopkins has said, and I'm shocked noone's mentioned it. It also works for Froch's plans as well.

I doubt that Froch would be willing to consider facing Hopkins (as there are better options out there for him), but if he did, he would dominate the cagey veteran with ease… a stance I’ve maintained for several years.

If you watch the tactics Froch employed against Arthur Abraham, coupled with his work-rate during the Kessler rematch, then I really have no idea whatsoever how Hopkins would be able to cope with dodging an average of 87 heavy-handed punches per round, using tactics that are fairly similar to how Kovalev fought last Saturday.

Hopkins has always wanted to fight Carl Froch, probably because it would allow him to earn a career-high payday, but I’m confident that the man from Nottingham could earn much more money competing against the likes of Kessler or DeGale (assuming the Chavez Jr. bout falls through due to contractual issues). So I doubt that we’ll get to see a Froch-Hopkins fight.

Ian1973 wrote:

fergusg wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:Everything points towards Froch being the ideal opponent for this, given everything Hopkins has said, and I'm shocked noone's mentioned it. It also works for Froch's plans as well.

I doubt that Froch would be willing to consider facing Hopkins (as there are better options out there for him), but if he did, he would dominate the cagey veteran with ease… a stance I’ve maintained for several years.

If you watch the tactics Froch employed against Arthur Abraham, coupled with his work-rate during the Kessler rematch, then I really have no idea whatsoever how Hopkins would be able to cope with dodging an average of 87 heavy-handed punches per round, using tactics that are fairly similar to how Kovalev fought last Saturday.

Hopkins has always wanted to fight Carl Froch, probably because it would allow him to earn a career-high payday, but I’m confident that the man from Nottingham could earn much more money competing against the likes of Kessler or DeGale (assuming the Chavez Jr. bout falls through due to contractual issues). So I doubt that we’ll get to see a Froch-Hopkins fight.

Don't agree at all I'd fancy Hopkins to beat Froch. Froch is hard but he's slow, one dimensional and tailor-made for those with a boxing brain to outbox him. Hopkins on points.

fergusg wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:Everything points towards Froch being the ideal opponent for this, given everything Hopkins has said, and I'm shocked noone's mentioned it. It also works for Froch's plans as well.

I doubt that Froch would be willing to consider facing Hopkins (as there are better options out there for him), but if he did, he would dominate the cagey veteran with ease… a stance I’ve maintained for several years.

If you watch the tactics Froch employed against Arthur Abraham, coupled with his work-rate during the Kessler rematch, then I really have no idea whatsoever how Hopkins would be able to cope with dodging an average of 87 heavy-handed punches per round, using tactics that are fairly similar to how Kovalev fought last Saturday.

Hopkins has always wanted to fight Carl Froch, probably because it would allow him to earn a career-high payday, but I’m confident that the man from Nottingham could earn much more money competing against the likes of Kessler or DeGale (assuming the Chavez Jr. bout falls through due to contractual issues). So I doubt that we’ll get to see a Froch-Hopkins fight.

Riddick Blowe wrote:Everything points towards Froch being the ideal opponent for this, given everything Hopkins has said, and I'm shocked noone's mentioned it. It also works for Froch's plans as well.

JCS wrote:To 168... try to goad Froch into a fight and cash out in England, guns blazing. I think he could guile and counterpunch his way through Froch's sloppy, slow punches, unless he is completely spent which I wouldn't doubt based on last night's fight.

baron_otto wrote:I don't see Froch wanting this. I strongly suspect its a tougher fight than many assume and Froch won't look good even if he wins. He can get a big payday, look good and not have to deal with the rough treatment Hopkins will bring if he fights someone else.

palooka wrote:I don't think beating this version of Hopkins will persuade anyone that Froch is a better champion than Calzaghe - he may as well box Jones Jnr.

(To gain the utmost recognition Froch ought to rematch Ward and beat him, as that's not likely he should forget about 'legacy' etc and box Chavez Jnr in a big Vegas bout that would most likely be fight of the year - he'd likely win, he'd get the Yanks on side and he could swan off into the sunset loaded, with his marbles intact and with the fans calling for more.

palooka wrote:Beating an ATG means different things depending on when the fight is held; Hopkins is an ATG and he is almost 50 years old having just been beaten out of sight. If Froch were to beat Hopkins now many would say, with some validity, that he beat an old and way past his prime ATG.

palooka wrote:Though Chavez Jnr lacks eminence what he does have is a pretty basic, fan pleasing style, strength, guts and a fantastic chin and he has a big fan base - quite similar to Froch.

Just my opinion obviously.