We criticize elite fighters for decisions, but don't appreciate the flip side..

[Shake]

..of the coin. Hopkins opposition is sometimes questioned. Floyd is accused of ducking people.

But what about the ones who shot and lost?

On the other hand there's a guy like Vargas, who took all comers when he was way too green and never matured into a real champion despite his potential.


And Taylor. He's been fighting really good competition, and hasn't looked good. And here he is taking Pavlik right after the public demanded it. What will people say about him if he loses? He gave us the fight. He knows it's possible he won't win.

Are we, despite all our claims to the contrary, too result-oriented?

If you don't shoot and keep your zero/streak/belt, in the end, you'll get more respect than the ones who shot and lost.

[RAMPAGE0017]

I don't see why people would question Hopkins opposition. He fought the fighters who were available during his reign. That's all he really could do. Only problem is.. Hopkins fought during an era where the middleweight division was in a dead period.... the competition was always there, but they just didn't have any marquee at 160. Jones beat Hopkins for the IBF title, then promptly moved up to the super-middleweight division and there was no longer any appeal. As a matter of fact.. the one who brought some marquee back to the middleweights was Hopkins himself after beating Trinidad.

[mikeyc]

..of the coin. Hopkins opposition is sometimes questioned. Floyd is accused of ducking people.

But what about the ones who shot and lost?

On the other hand there's a guy like Vargas, who took all comers when he was way too green and never matured into a real champion despite his potential.


And Taylor. He's been fighting really good competition, and hasn't looked good. And here he is taking Pavlik right after the public demanded it. What will people say about him if he loses? He gave us the fight. He knows it's possible he won't win.

Are we, despite all our claims to the contrary, too result-oriented?

If you don't shoot and keep your zero/streak/belt, in the end, you'll get more respect than the ones who shot and lost.


All valid points that's why a good management team is so important. They can guide you to a good record and to money fights, but there comes a time whether the fighter can fight or not. Once you reach the elite level in boxing you shouldn't have easy fights! That's one part of what's wrong w/ boxing- guys are allowed to fight weak opposition for their belts. I'm sure 50 years ago these guys fought top tier fighters every 3 months.

[Decebal]

All valid points that's why a good management team is so important. They can guide you to a good record and to money fights, but there comes a time whether the fighter can fight or not. Once you reach the elite level in boxing you shouldn't have easy fights! That's one part of what's wrong w/ boxing- guys are allowed to fight weak opposition for their belts. I'm sure 50 years ago these guys fought top tier fighters every 3 months.

Exactly! Once you are elite, legacy matters more than the '0' or money. You should only fight elite fighters/dangerous elite-to-be for glory. Nothing else matters.

[Mook]

I agree to an extent, it's just a shame that some fighters seem to have been held back. i'm thinking Hatton here - he really could have been on the world scene a year to two years earlier. Haye rushed himself by taking on thompson too early, but you know what? i think that's led to people underestimating him now, which helps him in fights. It was like with Lewis - people thought that they just had to stick one on him post-McCall (watch Tua), but they were wrong... apart from that Rahman thing...

[Lupe]

I don't see why people would question Hopkins opposition. He fought the fighters who were available during his reign. That's all he really could do. Only problem is.. Hopkins fought during an era where the middleweight division was in a dead period.... the competition was always there, but they just didn't have any marquee at 160. Jones beat Hopkins for the IBF title, then promptly moved up to the super-middleweight division and there was no longer any appeal. As a matter of fact.. the one who brought some marquee back to the middleweights was Hopkins himself after beating Trinidad.

The reason why Hopkins opposition is questioned often comes when he's compared to the past great at MW - and ofcourse you have to factor the comp level. As you said, he fought in a dead division but I think many fans feel he could just said "fuck it" and sought better comp in the upper divisions. And challenges were there.

[Mook]

yep, Toney, Eubank, Benn and Calzaghe. ok, I've cheated a bit by naming four of my fave boxers...

[Lupe]

..of the coin. Hopkins opposition is sometimes questioned. Floyd is accused of ducking people.

But what about the ones who shot and lost?

On the other hand there's a guy like Vargas, who took all comers when he was way too green and never matured into a real champion despite his potential.


And Taylor. He's been fighting really good competition, and hasn't looked good. And here he is taking Pavlik right after the public demanded it. What will people say about him if he loses? He gave us the fight. He knows it's possible he won't win.

Are we, despite all our claims to the contrary, too result-oriented?

If you don't shoot and keep your zero/streak/belt, in the end, you'll get more respect than the ones who shot and lost.

Yes..and its all in the name of fans wanting to see who the best man is in a particular division.
We criticese Floyd because he avoided Hatton, Margarito and Cotto.
We criticise Cotto because he avoided Margarito.
We criticise Jones because he fought less than ordinary comp.
We admire Tito and Vargas because they sought to fight the best.
Oscar is often criticised (and rightly so) because while he fought everybody, he fought them at a time when he knew he had an advantage.

The list goes on.

[lefthook31]

You cant always make every fight happen. Most of the time the elite fighters are controlled by different promoters, who dont want the fight or make it really difficult or one sided. For the elite fighter who wants to leave an all time great legacy, he must make the big fights happen.

Some fighters, like Jermaine Taylor, are forced into fights before they are ready by their greedy promoters or managers, and it shortens their careers. Shelly Finkel, Gary Shaw, and Dibella, are perfect examples of managers who rush their fighters into fights they are not ready for. Arum on the otherhand takes his time, and invest the time and money in making them a star. Don King on the otherhand would match his fighters against no namers, their entire career, if he could make enough money from them.

[lefthook31]

Yes..and its all in the name of fans wanting to see who the best man is in a particular division.
We criticese Floyd because he avoided Hatton, Margarito and Cotto.
We criticise Cotto because he avoided Margarito.
We criticise Jones because he fought less than ordinary comp.
We admire Tito and Vargas because they sought to fight the best.
Oscar is often criticised (and rightly so) because while he fought everybody, he fought them at a time when he knew he had an advantage.

The list goes on.

BS. What advantage did Oscar have over Tito and Hopkins or Mosley? As far as Cotto, how is he avoiding Margarito, he is set to face him next if he beats Williams.

[Lupe]

BS. What advantage did Oscar have over Tito and Hopkins or Mosley? As far as Cotto, how is he avoiding Margarito, he is set to face him next if he beats Williams.

Oops, it's a typo - I meant Floyd but I realise I already mentioned it.

Re Oscar - the list of fighters Oscar had clear advantage of is much longer than those where odd were even.

[Thread Stealer]

BS. What advantage did Oscar have over Tito and Hopkins or Mosley? As far as Cotto, how is he avoiding Margarito, he is set to face him next if he beats Williams.

Some criticized Oscar for fighting Tito when Tito had known problems making 147, Mosley for having less experience at the weight class and the timing of the rematch (SSM's previous fights and performances), and Hopkins for fighting at a catch weight.

It's nit-picking though. Tito had problems for awhile making 147 anyway, even before Oscar fought there, Hopkins had said many times he'd fight Oscar at a catchweight so Oscar accepted it, and Mosley was pretty big for lightweight anyway. Maybe it was b/c of Oscar's own words after the Tito fight "Why should I fight Mosley, you'll just say I beat another little guy". But it was basically the best matchup @ 147 at the time.

You can pretty much find reasons to downgrade anyone's resume and make them look overrated.

[igotJUIC3]

BS. What advantage did Oscar have over Tito and Hopkins or Mosley? As far as Cotto, how is he avoiding Margarito, he is set to face him next if he beats Williams.

how has this man avoided Hatton and Cotto???

Now i aint saying he avoided Margo but at least you have a valid argument...but the other two......nah man he has went after Hatton more than once and i dont think Cotto has ever pitched an offer to PBF. Arum hasnt even said that one.

[sandwichsurgeon]

I don't see why people would question Hopkins opposition. He fought the fighters who were available during his reign. That's all he really could do. Only problem is.. Hopkins fought during an era where the middleweight division was in a dead period.... the competition was always there, but they just didn't have any marquee at 160. Jones beat Hopkins for the IBF title, then promptly moved up to the super-middleweight division and there was no longer any appeal. As a matter of fact.. the one who brought some marquee back to the middleweights was Hopkins himself after beating Trinidad.

Sounds like the American version of Calzaghe's career to me.

[Amsterdam]

Sounds like the American version of Calzaghe's career to me.

Yes. Hopkins was ducked in the same way for a good while too by guys moving through the division.

[RAMPAGE0017]

The reason why Hopkins opposition is questioned often comes when he's compared to the past great at MW - and ofcourse you have to factor the comp level. As you said, he fought in a dead division but I think many fans feel he could just said "fuck it" and sought better comp in the upper divisions. And challenges were there.



Why move up to a new division when you're already established as the king of the one you're currently in? As far as business goes, that's a dumb move.