Hopkins by a mile and intrusive commentary

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 19 Sep 2004, 14:28

1 - Drawn round
2 - Hopkins
3 - Hopkins
4 - Hopkins
5 - Hopkins
6 - DeLaHoya
7 - Hopkins
8 - Hopkins
9 - KO

I had it 79-74 going into the ninth?

And was anyone else sick to death of the neverending commentary, Ihave the greatest of respect for both Darke and Watt, particularly the latter who's forgotten more then I know about boxing. But come on!

This was the UNDISPUTED Middleweight crown - it didn't need mindless guff being spouted for every second of the transmission. They spoke over the ring-walks which create their own tension.

They dont need to introduce the fighters and explain why this fight is important - only boxing fans WATCH PPV boxing, we know - this isn't 8pm on BBC1! This is 4am on SKY PPV. We know who these guys are!

Sometime silence is the best commentary you can get.

And another thing, I'm on a roll now, what the hell was the 'commentary' on Salido v Marquez all about! Did Darke, who is the commentator, not the expert/colour commentator, actually commentate on a single punch, it was just minute after minute of subjective diatribe - why not call what you see rather than pontificating about what might happen or what hasn't happened or the supposed thoughts of the boxers?

It reached the point when Iwas going for mute - but heck, why should I not listen to punches landed, or hear the crowd?

Its a hard job but I thought Darke and Watt were exceptionally intrusive last night and came close to spoiling the card.

But big up Bernard - Tito II and out.

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 19 Sep 2004, 14:30

i had it 78-75 going into the 9th for hopkins

glittermonkey · Post by **glittermonkey** » 19 Sep 2004, 15:20

I'm sensing a little anger there, Mr Payne. Didn't you have enough milk for your coco-pops this morning?

You're right though, there was way too much talking going on during the fights. But i disagree that there are only knowledgable boxing fans tuning in, there's bound to be a percentage of casuals, who have to be catered for. I mean, we all know about the history of both fighters, but there are certainly people who may not.

And, to be honest, there wasn't really a whole lot going on in the Marquez fight (that one almost finished me, i was definitely wilting during the last few rounds).

I had Hopkins up by 4 rounds, and even then i may have been giving a couple of the closer rounds to Oscar. God knows what big Larry was watching.

DK2112 · Post by **DK2112** » 19 Sep 2004, 15:32

Yeah you also need to remember that the people watching the repeats at a sensible hour may be casual fans just interested in this fight.

Freiheit · Post by **Freiheit** » 19 Sep 2004, 15:37

At the time of the stoppage, Hopkins led on two cards (79-73, 78-74), while the third judge had De La Hoya ahead (77-75).

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 19 Sep 2004, 15:43

DLH ahead? Jeez.

How many 'casual' fans pay £11.95 for a fight that you know?

Zero - thats how many, and I just felt the talking was over done.

I had Cheerios for reference.

DK2112 · Post by **DK2112** » 19 Sep 2004, 15:49

Rich people? Look I agree with you that a little less explanation was needed at times, but some people may be new to the sport and trying to get into it. E.g. someone started following boxing at the end of June - they won't have seen a DLH or Hopkins fight, so they need more detail.

glittermonkey · Post by **glittermonkey** » 19 Sep 2004, 16:12

DavidPayne wrote:I had Cheerios for reference.

Why? It's a crime against food, they're even worse than Lucky charms. My god, listen to me, i'm starting to sound like Guest.

The style of commentary that appears to be taking over now is the American way of doing things. Talking for the entire duration of the fight is how they like it, and it's probably how the lesser intellects over here like it too. I think that it's something we're just going to have to get used to, personally i also dislike being treated as if i have the attention span of a senile goldfish.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 19 Sep 2004, 16:26

I thought the fight totally one sided, DLH had moments, but only when Hopkins relaxed a little occasionally and allowed him to work. The much vaunted hand speed meant nothing because Hopkins' timing was too good, and he used his reach exceptionally well. The change of tactics to fighting off of the back foot totally flummoxed Oscar too.

I'm so gutted, I called the fight totally,went for KO9 sent off my prediction to maxboxing and the fornicating email bounced back! I didn't think it would be a body shot which would finish it, and I thought oscar would get more of a gradual mauling.

Hopkins showed that he was not only bigger, but better in almost every department, just as many of us figured him to be. He's got much sounder fundamentals than Oscar, and is so hard to tag with a succession of shots, and even when he does, he lands in return immediately. I thought he looked awesome, absolutely fantastic performance.

I would love to see him in against Jones, Toney or Tarver now. I give him a pretty good shot at Jones, if they could find an appropriate catchweight, whether or not Jones could come in under 175 is very doubtful though.

Ulysses · Post by **Ulysses** » 19 Sep 2004, 17:13

Hopkins was just a step too far for De La Hoya. I thought it was very close up to the stoppage. However, it was becoming clear that Hopkins was going to win from the seventh onwards.
De La Hoya fought admirably especially early when he forced the champion onto the back foot.
Emmanuel Steward made a great point about how hard it is outbox a taller opponent. Not to mention a naturally stronger man.

DK2112 · Post by **DK2112** » 19 Sep 2004, 17:18

I expected Oscar to fade towards the end, and to me he was showing signs of lacking ideas on how to break Hopkins down a round or so before the stoppage.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 19 Sep 2004, 20:04

Disagree with your card David, think its a bit OTT. Hopkins did very little in the opening 5 rounds, some of these DLH didn't do that much. However, he was the one who was forcing the action, and I was giving him most of these rounds.

I had him 1 round up at the point of the stoppage, perhaps I am bias (cause I really wanted DLH to do it), but while you think my card is a mile out - I do share the same views on your card.

I have to say, Nigel Benn was very poor last night as an analysist. Crickey, did he care about any of the other fights, did he care that much about DLH vs Hopkins. His main concern was to say that he thought Hopkins would win and he kept remnding us of the fact, even when the questions were not relevant.

J · Post by J » 20 Sep 2004, 05:28

I must admit I only gave de la hoya two rounds, Im more in lin eiwt DP'sDP's card than yours stu, but then I was rooting for BHOP!
it was fairly comprehensive and I was a round out with my prediction, though I didnt htink the fight would go exactly the way it did. Was surprised that de la hoya was so static. The judge who had de la hoya 3 rounds up should never work again.

He got outjabbed out reached and out thought, to be honest i think it was a good thing it stopped when it did as you coudl see de la hoya was on a hiding to nothing by that stage and may well have taken a hell of a lot of punishment in the last three if it had gone that far.

BubiScholz · Post by **BubiScholz** » 20 Sep 2004, 06:02

J wrote:I must admit I only gave de la hoya two rounds, Im more in lin eiwt DP'sDP's card than yours stu, but then I was rooting for BHOP!
it was fairly comprehensive and I was a round out with my prediction, though I didnt htink the fight would go exactly the way it did. Was surprised that de la hoya was so static. The judge who had de la hoya 3 rounds up should never work again.

He got outjabbed out reached and out thought, to be honest i think it was a good thing it stopped when it did as you coudl see de la hoya was on a hiding to nothing by that stage and may well have taken a hell of a lot of punishment in the last three if it had gone that far.

it´s the fornicating american way. 2 of 3 judges from the Sturm-fight were put in this time again. what a skandal!!!!! and one had DLTK in front. this is no surprise. this is why i love this knockdown. i hope de la Tortilla-Kournikova has made his last fight so that this fornicating corruption has an end. this chico is worse than Don King.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 20 Sep 2004, 06:21

Ulysses wrote: Emmanuel Steward made a great point about how hard it is outbox a taller opponent. Not to mention a naturally stronger man.

Unless you're Sugar Ray Leonard that is...yeah decent start by Oscar, but only cause Hop was so damn cautious: he was boxing like he had Mike Tyson in front of him, early on.
I gave DLH a chance, but around about round three, I could see the error of my ways

I also went for Mexican "sensation" Rubio....hmmmm, think he might've been a little over-rated ( poor guy, what a LV debut that was )

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 20 Sep 2004, 07:21

Yeah talk about exposed. Jantuah is a respectable hitter but come on, he was made to look like Julian Jackson there.

J · Post by J » 20 Sep 2004, 08:25

haha yeah it was I taped it as had been at the cricket and was shattered watched it all in the morning and heard my old man shout "kinell", came back in rewound the tape, I thought it was a rerun of alexander / tak!!!!

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 20 Sep 2004, 16:27

Just to clarify I had it 4-3-1 to De La Hoya at the end of the fight, although I fully agree that the tide had turned.

1 - DLH
2 - DLH
3 - DLH
4 - Drawn
5 - Hopkins
6 - DLH
7 - Hopkins
8 - Hopkins.

It don't disagree if you would have said the first 3 were drawn rounds and given the fourth to Hopkins - I can see that argument. I just don't think Hopkins did enough to warrant the round, and I gave it DLH for commanding the centre of the ring and effort.

Incidently, I found it odd that many American respected posters that I converse with and usually argue alot with over such scoring, do tend to agree with me. Most have it 1 round either way. No, they are not DLH fans (far from it) infact some of the guys can see the argument for Mosley winning the return, which I can't.

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 20 Sep 2004, 16:38

http://www.fightnews.com/canobbio20.htm

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 20 Sep 2004, 17:05

REAL_DEAL wrote:http://www.fightnews.com/canobbio20.htm

Yeah, apparently the US commentary team noted that DLH was working harder in the later rounds than he did in the earlier rounds, wheras the UK team were saying that he was running out of steam.

Stats there show he was landed more in his bad rounds than he did in his good ones.

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 21 Sep 2004, 03:34

DavidPayne wrote:1 - Drawn round
2 - Hopkins
3 - Hopkins
4 - Hopkins
5 - Hopkins
6 - DeLaHoya
7 - Hopkins
8 - Hopkins
9 - KO

I had it 79-74 going into the ninth?

And was anyone else sick to death of the neverending commentary, Ihave the greatest of respect for both Darke and Watt, particularly the latter who's forgotten more then I know about boxing. But come on!

This was the UNDISPUTED Middleweight crown - it didn't need mindless guff being spouted for every second of the transmission. They spoke over the ring-walks which create their own tension.

They dont need to introduce the fighters and explain why this fight is important - only boxing fans WATCH PPV boxing, we know - this isn't 8pm on BBC1! This is 4am on SKY PPV. We know who these guys are!

Sometime silence is the best commentary you can get.

And another thing, I'm on a roll now, what the hell was the 'commentary' on Salido v Marquez all about! Did Darke, who is the commentator, not the expert/colour commentator, actually commentate on a single punch, it was just minute after minute of subjective diatribe - why not call what you see rather than pontificating about what might happen or what hasn't happened or the supposed thoughts of the boxers?

It reached the point when Iwas going for mute - but heck, why should I not listen to punches landed, or hear the crowd?

Its a hard job but I thought Darke and Watt were exceptionally intrusive last night and came close to spoiling the card.

But big up Bernard - Tito II and out.

Spot on David. I had the scorecard EXACTLY the same as you. Trouble is I woke about five minutes before the fight and picked up the nearest bit of paper to write the scores on. It was my wifes birthday card for the following day.

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 21 Sep 2004, 03:38

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I thought the fight totally one sided, DLH had moments, but only when Hopkins relaxed a little occasionally and allowed him to work. The much vaunted hand speed meant nothing because Hopkins' timing was too good, and he used his reach exceptionally well. The change of tactics to fighting off of the back foot totally flummoxed Oscar too.

I'm so gutted, I called the fight totally,went for KO9 sent off my prediction to maxboxing and the fornicating email bounced back! I didn't think it would be a body shot which would finish it, and I thought oscar would get more of a gradual mauling.

Hopkins showed that he was not only bigger, but better in almost every department, just as many of us figured him to be. He's got much sounder fundamentals than Oscar, and is so hard to tag with a succession of shots, and even when he does, he lands in return immediately. I thought he looked awesome, absolutely fantastic performance.

I would love to see him in against Jones, Toney or Tarver now. I give him a pretty good shot at Jones, if they could find an appropriate catchweight, whether or not Jones could come in under 175 is very doubtful though.

The thing is, Hopkins is more a Jnr middle than he is a Super Middle. He's got a 28" waist.

Whether or not the jones fight comes off, Hpokins is IMO the best P4P, by a mile. I think he should get more credit for staying in the same division his whole career. Not may fighters these days can do that.

Watching Hopkins fight is similar to sleeping with a beautiful Woman. You never forget it.

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 21 Sep 2004, 13:11

Is it true Ian Darke said in the commentary that he spoke to someone from Scotland who had been waiting 4 years for a big fight to go to? Haven't watched the fight yet, but got told he said something like that. If he did then it was probably me as I spoke to him in the upper foyer not long before the undercard commenced and told him I'd been waiting a big fight to go to since Vargas - Trinidad in late 2000.

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 21 Sep 2004, 13:52

Manos de Oro wrote:Is it true Ian Darke said in the commentary that he spoke to someone from Scotland who had been waiting 4 years for a big fight to go to? Haven't watched the fight yet, but got told he said something like that. If he did then it was probably me as I spoke to him in the upper foyer not long before the undercard commenced and told him I'd been waiting a big fight to go to since Vargas - Trinidad in late 2000.

Yes, he said you were saving up.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 22 Sep 2004, 03:02

I'm having coco pops right now.

Hopkins by a mile and intrusive commentary

Do modern commentators talk too much?

Hopkins by a mile and intrusive commentary

Re: Hopkins by a mile and intrusive commentary