BoxRec

In 2001, a 36 year old Hopkins was "too old" to beat the young, undefeated and dangerous Trinidad. He proved everyone wrong by taking him to school.

He went on to become the only boxer to fight for, win and defend all 4 Boxing titles and Ring Magazine title.

He beat the younger lions in De La Hoya, Tarver, Pavlik, and Pascal.

But alas, it had to come to an end one day.

The last of the throwback fighters...

End of an Era...

He didnt prove, "everyone wrong," at all. Those picking Hopkins were a sizeable minority, I remember it all quite distinctly.

Your description of Pascal as a young lion is more than a little lyrical (a young tabby, or tortoiseshell more like it). De La Hoya was far from a young lion --- he was a smaller veteran. Tarver, not young either. Pavlik? You could add that, yeah. I think Hopkins should be credited with taking Calzaghe so close, so many years removed from his peak.

All told, though, Hopkins is very old-school and he is, for now at least, the last such boxer.

He'll be back, he ran into a style that would have been an issue for him on his best day. That was some historic fouling tonight, if it was his last fight he went out with his head.

What happened?

He announce his retirement?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:What happened?

He announce his retirement?

I don't think so, Observer loves him so I think he is just sad that he got schooled tonight. As I said in the other thread, it's understandable, Hopkins can still beat a lot of fighters. Chad Dawson isn't one of them. I don't think he ever would have been.

Come on, while Dawson's style would always give basically anyone problems, last night showed a peak 32 year old Bernard would've soundly beaten him. People forget how much better Hopkins was over a decade ago.

I for one will be glad to see him go. His head work was disgusting last night. He set out to make the head a real threat to Chad. Only when the referee finally warned Hopkins did Chad open up. Crap fight. I dont think a great deal of Dawson either but he is thebest of a bad bunch. I hope Ward can compete as a Light Heavy, sort that division out.

dempseyfire wrote:Come on, while Dawson's style would always give basically anyone problems, last night showed a peak 32 year old Bernard would've soundly beaten him. People forget how much better Hopkins was over a decade ago.

Im going to have to agree, i also thought that any version of Hopkins would lose to Dawson, but after yesterdays fight, i could see Hopkins beating Dawson in his better years.

I have not seen Dawson fight. What is so vexing about his style. Is he really held in such regard as to perhaps beat or match a peak Hopkins stride-for-stride?

He is a 6'3 southpaw with very fast hands. What causes Hopkins the most trouble is that he is just as reluctant to lead as bernard is, but he has a better jab and is much stronger when Hopkins goes to grapple him. Chad is an excellent counter-puncher and I think that comes into play against a younger Hopkins. I'm sure it would be a much better fight, but I'd still slightly side with Chad. He dominated the older version in a terrible fight.

Dawson has the best Light Heavyweight resume since Spinks.

Chad is a great counter puncher no doubt about it, he was better at fighting back against Bernards leads than vice versa and that was part of the difference along with his throwing a bit more overall. Hopkins frustrated Dawson quite a few times though, especially in the first half of the fight.

IMHO, I'd say the Hopkins circa Tarver beats Chad, he just had that bit of extra push and strength that was lacking yesterday.

It's certainly possible, I thought he remained very composed as Hopkins fought one of the dirtier fights I've ever seen. That's another thing, Bernard can't get inside Dawson's head and that was a major thing for him.

dempseyfire wrote:Come on, while Dawson's style would always give basically anyone problems, last night showed a peak 32 year old Bernard would've soundly beaten him. People forget how much better Hopkins was over a decade ago.

Bernard never beat a bigger, faster Light heavyweight when he was 32 years old. I don't see how getting soundly beaten last night proved anything at all.

The important thing is that King George remains the oldest champ ever.

Making Hopkins the ugliest prince anyone ever saw D

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:Come on, while Dawson's style would always give basically anyone problems, last night showed a peak 32 year old Bernard would've soundly beaten him. People forget how much better Hopkins was over a decade ago.

Bernard never beat a bigger, faster Light heavyweight when he was 32 years old. I don't see how getting soundly beaten last night proved anything at all.

He wouldn't have to have beaten a faster Light Heavyweight when he was 32 retard, as Hopkins was pretty quick back than himself, especially his reflexes which are now a 47 year old man's ones. He beat a quick bigger southpaw like Keith Holmes who was also reluctant to lead with ease when he was 35-36 so I can see a peak 32ish Hopkins handling Dawson.

You do actually know a non entity like Jean Pascal beat Dawson......just to remind you before you and Urinie get carried away with the lazy soundbites like "any version of Dawson beats Hopkins"...oh and how much odds on one of you two pissants mentioning Oxford in your reply!!!

Goodnight, Irene wrote:He didnt prove, "everyone wrong," at all. Those picking Hopkins were a sizeable minority, I remember it all quite distinctly.

Your description of Pascal as a young lion is more than a little lyrical (a young tabby, or tortoiseshell more like it). De La Hoya was far from a young lion --- he was a smaller veteran. Tarver, not young either. Pavlik? You could add that, yeah. I think Hopkins should be credited with taking Calzaghe so close, so many years removed from his peak.

All told, though, Hopkins is very old-school and he is, for now at least, the last such boxer.

He isn't the last "old-school boxer"...do you actually watch present day boxing instead of having your head up the ring almanac 1986's backside all day long?....go and watch Adrian Broner his skills are a throwback to the smart boxers of the 1950's. He reminds me of Marlon Starling.

mugabi wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:Come on, while Dawson's style would always give basically anyone problems, last night showed a peak 32 year old Bernard would've soundly beaten him. People forget how much better Hopkins was over a decade ago.

Bernard never beat a bigger, faster Light heavyweight when he was 32 years old. I don't see how getting soundly beaten last night proved anything at all.

He wouldn't have to have beaten a faster Light Heavyweight when he was 32 retard, as Hopkins was pretty quick back than himself, especially his reflexes which are now a 47 year old man's ones. He beat a quick bigger southpaw like Keith Holmes who was also reluctant to lead with ease when he was 35-36 so I can see a peak 32ish Hopkins handling Dawson.

You do actually know a non entity like Jean Pascal beat Dawson......just to remind you before you and Urinie get carried away with the lazy soundbites like "any version of Dawson beats Hopkins"...oh and how much odds on one of you two pissants mentioning Oxford in your reply!!!

Oxford doesnt spit out graduates with a High School-level of understanding grammar & vocabulary like it used to. Such a shame. You quite remind me of a Simpsons episode, where Monty Burns buys his idiot son's way into higher education, after being told junior spelled, 'Yale,' with a 6.

Except, you know...that happened, whereas Id be stunned if you slipped through the cracks of High School graduation. "How much odds," on that?

Funny how some here think Saturday gives us some insight in to how Dawson would fare against a prime Hopkins.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:Come on, while Dawson's style would always give basically anyone problems, last night showed a peak 32 year old Bernard would've soundly beaten him. People forget how much better Hopkins was over a decade ago.

Bernard never beat a bigger, faster Light heavyweight when he was 32 years old. I don't see how getting soundly beaten last night proved anything at all.

You are also the only person on this whole forum who scored the fight a shutout for Dawson. I saw Dawson a clear winner but "soundly beating" the 47 year old fighter he did not do. Knowing both their styles and Chad's natural reluctance to let his punches go like he can, it was no surprise the fight was a stinker with many close rounds and Chad simply winning by landing a couple more punches each round and throwing around 5-6 more. Hopkins 13 years ago was far faster, would've been more active/accurate, and given how much he landed on Dawson and got him out of his game, I'd have little doubt he beats him in his prime. Chad is a good all-around fighter but has always lacked the 'X' factor (no pun intended) . . .a great fighter wouldn't repeatedly gotten caught by the crazy sh%6 Pascal kept landing on him in their fight, or needed some courteous judging to get past Glen Johnson the first time (not that a close Dawson victory was a robbery, but I and many others had Johnson winning the fight).

9-3 or 12-0 doesn't change that it was an easy win with the exception of dealing with the cuts from the fouls and the repeated fouls around them. Hopkins didn't cause him any trouble with anything legal. Bernard landed virtually nothing of significance. When Hopkins was at his best he was a Middleweight, Dawson's size wouldn't play a factor?

Bernard is clearly the greater fighter, but he hasn't beaten anyone with a more difficult style for him than Dawson. Anyone who thought that fight wasn't going to suck doesn't know anything about either of them. It was as good as Hopkins could allow it to be without catching an ass whipping. If he was younger it would be a more entertaining and closer fight, but a Hopkins win is far from a guarantee.

I had the first Johnson fight a draw, no shame in that, and he won the rematch very wide.

Dawson will likely be gunning for a rematch against Pascal now. As Pascal is the only person to have beaten him, it makes sense, and it will certainly be a more entertaining fight than the fight with Hopkins was. If Hopkins wants to keep going he could take on Shumenov and probably win another title if he wants, or Cleverly as has been suggested in another section of the forum, but I don't think he should bother personally.