Didn't Winky prove he was better p4p than Hopkins?

[sweet_scientist]

Not all time, of course, but currently.

He did, after all, move up and face Hopkins at a weight that was more comfortable for Bernard, and fought with a reduced workrate and speed than he had at 154-160.

I'm interested in particular of the opinion of those that had Hopkins winning 115-113, which was I suppose, probably the most common score for the fight.

I actually had the fight scored a draw, so you know my answer to this question.

[Imperial1]

Not all time, of course, but currently.

He did, after all, move up and face Hopkins at a weight that was more comfortable for Bernard, and fought with a reduced workrate and speed than he had at 154-160.

I'm interested in particular of the opinion of those that had Hopkins winning 115-113, which was I suppose, probably the most common score for the fight.

I actually had the fight scored a draw, so you know my answer to this question.


I give Winky all the credit in the world..I mean if he had got the Nod Winky would have been # 1 in my book ..

[Amsterdam]

Not all time, of course, but currently.

He did, after all, move up and face Hopkins at a weight that was more comfortable for Bernard, and fought with a reduced workrate and speed than he had at 154-160.

I'm interested in particular of the opinion of those that had Hopkins winning 115-113, which was I suppose, probably the most common score for the fight.

I actually had the fight scored a draw, so you know my answer to this question.

I scored it 116-112, really wasn't hard to score, Hopkins normally was landing the harder blows and he sealed the last two rounds definitively.

Pretty clear for me. But Winky still deserves a mention in the P4P rankings.

[King Dan]

This is a very valid topic and I pretty much agree.

For me, this is similar to Shane fighting Winky.

Winky is a solid weight class above Shane and they had a close rematch.

[sweet_scientist]

I scored it 116-112, really wasn't hard to score, Hopkins normally was landing the harder blows and he sealed the last two rounds definitively.

Pretty clear for me. But Winky still deserves a mention in the P4P rankings.

Bernard was throwing the harder blows, but I felt Winky was the one landing more cleanly, hence my closer score.

Having the fight 116-112 as you do, I suppose there's no question in your mind Bernard is the better fighter p4p at the minute.

[Amsterdam]

Bernard was throwing the harder blows, but I felt Winky was the one landing more cleanly, hence my closer score.

Having the fight 116-112 as you do, I suppose there's no question in your mind Bernard is the better fighter p4p at the minute.

I mean no disrespect at all SS, but I feel you're giving Winky too much levarage in scoring some of his more ineffective, even if cleaner shots, thus giving him rounds. Both you and I are Wright fans, so that's understandable.

I put Bernard at #3 with this win, Winky drops out of the top 5. Wright's really suited for 160, at 168 he'd have no success even against an Anthony Mundine level, much less Kess or Calz.

Shame Wright wasn't fairly given his win over Jermain Taylor, it would have put Hopkins' win into better context in the books...

[sweet_scientist]

This is a very valid topic and I pretty much agree.

For me, this is similar to Shane fighting Winky.

Winky is a solid weight class above Shane and they had a close rematch.
True you could make that argument, though I'm not sure if it was so much the weight as it was a styles matchup thing which made Shane lose those matches (had Wink by three points in the rematch). Perhaps if Winky didn't have the reach and Winky was a bit shorter and not as strong Shane could have taken it.... Interesting.

[PH|LLA]

116 - 112 easy

no way 115-113

anyways Winky weighed in at 170 same as Hopkins and in my mind the weigh-in weight is the weight that matters

[sweet_scientist]

I mean no disrespect at all SS, but I feel you're giving Winky too much levarage in scoring some of his more ineffective, even if cleaner shots, thus giving him rounds. Both you and I are Wright fans, so that's understandable.

I put Bernard at #3 with this win, Winky drops out of the top 5. Wright's really suited for 160, at 168 he'd have no success even against an Anthony Mundine level, much less Kess or Calz.

Shame Wright wasn't fairly given his win over Jermain Taylor, it would have put Hopkins' win into better context in the books...

Perhaps, but were Bernard's punches really that effective? Neither guy was that effective imo. It's not as if Hop was laying a world of hurt on Winky. I felt both guys struggled greatly to land anything meaningful on each other. Hence, I think a draw was justified.

I know I'm in the minority there, but that's the way I see it.

[Amsterdam]

Perhaps, but were Bernard's punches really that effective? Neither guy was that effective imo. It's not as if Hop was laying a world of hurt on Winky. I felt both guys struggled greatly to land anything meaningful on each other. Hence, I think a draw was justified.

I know I'm in the minority there, but that's the way I see it.

Hopkins, even though competing at this level, is showing his age this time around...

That's why I see a crazy wide Calzaghe UD win if that fight happens.

[sweet_scientist]

Hopkins, even though competing at this level, is showing his age this time around...

That's why I see a crazy wide Calzaghe UD win if that fight happens.

Assuming Joe doesn't start showing age himself, I'd agree, he should win quite clearly.

[tays001]

bernard won the fight close but he still won .

[boxbox]

both may not have been effective in hurting each other but still Nard showed better performance and deserved the win.

[IntentionalButt]

I mean no disrespect at all SS, but I feel you're giving Winky too much levarage in scoring some of his more ineffective, even if cleaner shots, thus giving him rounds. Both you and I are Wright fans, so that's understandable.

I put Bernard at #3 with this win, Winky drops out of the top 5. Wright's really suited for 160, at 168 he'd have no success even against an Anthony Mundine level, much less Kess or Calz.

Shame Wright wasn't fairly given his win over Jermain Taylor, it would have put Hopkins' win into better context in the books...
Here's what I don't get about people's reactions to the fight though.

If it was such a predictable outcome, then why didn't the people now ranking Bernard ahead of Winky do so before this fight was even announced? If 10 out of 10 times it's a foregone conclusion that 'they're both extremely skilled but Bernard's just too big', why even bother having the charade play out? (that was actually my take on the fight before it happened, although part of me hoped that Winky could shock us).

It's like saying, 'Rafael Marquez is p4p better than Ricky Hatton, although if they fought he'd obviously lose', but then turning around and ranking Hatton above him if they actually fought at a catchweight and Marquez lost. Seems a little disingenous. Seems the effect of cold hard black-and-white results on a fighter's value or rank should be cushioned a bit in situations like this. Otherwise there is nothing separating the human element of analysis we are gifted with, from boxrec's point system. Someone in this thread earlier said 'IF winky had gotten the nod he'd be my #1 p4p' - meaning that his view on who is the legitimate best fighter in the world today literally hinged on the decision of three judges?

:conf Just seems really screwed up to me.

[psychopath]

Not all time, of course, but currently.

He did, after all, move up and face Hopkins at a weight that was more comfortable for Bernard, and fought with a reduced workrate and speed than he had at 154-160.

I'm interested in particular of the opinion of those that had Hopkins winning 115-113, which was I suppose, probably the most common score for the fight.

I actually had the fight scored a draw, so you know my answer to this question.

I can understand your point but . . . nah nah nah . . . didn't Bhops also moved up in weight to fight Tarver in a weight more comfortable to Tarver and beat him there? Infact he didn't simply beat Tarver he humilated him and make him look like an amateur. Now on Winky, yes he went up in weight but loss, so Bhops should still be inching him in the p4p standing.

[CHATABOX]

116 - 112 to Hopkins.

BUT...


What a shit fight!

Winky shouldn't have gone up that much in weight. He looked absolute shit. Jab was slow, hell everything was slow. He did't need to do it i IMO.

[psychopath]

They should have met at 168 instead of 170.

Thats why I say they should do a rematch, I think Winky deserves it and Hopkins should respect him enough to do that.

A rematch on this will never happen because. . .

. . . first of all no promoter would gamble their money to make it happen . . . after the boring first fight? :yep

. . . second Winky should be rematching Taylor not Bhops.

[hopkinsfan07]

i had hopkins up 116-113 and Hopkins had been quite inactive leading up to the fight and was 42 so its quite level on advanteges right ?

[divac]

Maybe Scientist can lead me to a clear round that Winky won, because I just could'nt find it......

Hopkins took away Winky's jab with his lateral movement, and when Winky got close enough, Hopkins smuthered Winky's jab.

I think I can count in one hand the clean effective shots Winky landed.

Hopkins certainly did'nt put up a domintating performance, but imo outdid Winky in every round.
Hopkins imo hit winky with much harder and more effective shots round after round.
......you mentioned earlier Scientist that neither fighter was much effective.....I disagree, I thought Hopkins shots took their toll on Winky and Winky began to look the more for wear as the rounds went by.
Winky weakened and Hopkins got stronger.
The very last round Winky was even rocked and stunned.

I'm baffled by anybody having this fight anywhere close to a draw.....
.....on what basis????
.....Solely based on defense and crediting Winky for putting his hands at a high guard and tucking his shoulders??????


Winky's offense was plum ineffective, and Hopkins in comparison was quite more effective.
Hopkins wore down Winky Wright and got better with each passing round!

[Scar]

Not all time, of course, but currently.

He did, after all, move up and face Hopkins at a weight that was more comfortable for Bernard, and fought with a reduced workrate and speed than he had at 154-160.

I'm interested in particular of the opinion of those that had Hopkins winning 115-113, which was I suppose, probably the most common score for the fight.

I actually had the fight scored a draw, so you know my answer to this question.

Winky deserves credit for that but better than Hopkins?, no way. Hopkins did the very same when he fought Tarver and he was 41 years old when he did so, unlike Winky. I know that Hopkins fought at Light Heavyweight once before that, it was his first fight as a pro and he lost it.

[divac]

Yeah but Winky was coming forward throwing punches more, and in your mind that at least leads to a draw, right? Point me to a clear round in the second half that Chavez won against Whitaker.

Round 1!

Now get lost, or discuss the thread topic!

[sues2nd]

I scored it 116-112, really wasn't hard to score, Hopkins normally was landing the harder blows and he sealed the last two rounds definitively.

Pretty clear for me. But Winky still deserves a mention in the P4P rankings.

Took the words right out of my mouth Am...:good

[achillesthegreat]

No.

Firstly, he lost.

Secondly, his prime weight is only 6 pounds below Xs and when he was in his prime at 154 he was drying out a pretty number.

He is definitely naturally smaller than X but proved just how gifted he is. He is VERY strong. He looked like the same Winky. Of course he wouldn't be 100% the same version but that X is NOT the same version from 7 years ago.

I believe Winkys workrate was lower (if you believe this) because of Xs work. He made Wright hesitant to throw because he was missing so damn much.

X took away his jab and broke through his defence. He exposed the few flaws there are in Winky i.e. showing his jab by lifting his elbow up, balance issues, overextending and ultimately showed he isn't particularly dynamic.

A young X at 160 would put so much heat on him and for 12 rounds that it would be a very clear 8-4 type fight.

[brooklyn1550]

No he didn't

[o_money]

Winky's still the man. Some pussies in this game don't get it. If you got skills, make good fights and lose respectably you will still be marketable and respected.

[sweet_scientist]

No.

Firstly, he lost.

Secondly, his prime weight is only 6 pounds below Xs and when he was in his prime at 154 he was drying out a pretty number.

He is definitely naturally smaller than X but proved just how gifted he is. He is VERY strong. He looked like the same Winky. Of course he wouldn't be 100% the same version but that X is NOT the same version from 7 years ago.

I believe Winkys workrate was lower (if you believe this) because of Xs work. He made Wright hesitant to throw because he was missing so damn much.

X took away his jab and broke through his defence. He exposed the few flaws there are in Winky i.e. showing his jab by lifting his elbow up, balance issues, overextending and ultimately showed he isn't particularly dynamic.

A young X at 160 would put so much heat on him and for 12 rounds that it would be a very clear 8-4 type fight.

Hopkins took away the jab and made Winky look awkward at times, I agree, but he did a poor job breaking through Wright's defense. The punch stats back that up. It was not for nothing that Hopkins landed only about 150 punches (and Winky in fact landed 15 more punches than Hopkins, which isn't saying much becuase he didn't get through with much himself).

As an aside, Jermain Taylor did a better job of busting through Wright's guard than what Hopkins did (but also left himself open a lot more than Hopkins as well.

I just didn't see much from Hopkins to have him a clear winner in this one. The cleanest punches he landed imo came when he would shoe shine or flurry and that didn't do much damage to Winky. he was throwing a lot of hard punches, but Wright was pikcing most off with his gloves.

BTW, I agree a prime Hopkins beats Wirght, but I wasn't concerning myself with that here, I was concerning myself with their p4p status right now. Obviously Hopkins is further from his prime than Wright is, the question I was posing is whether right now, Hopkins really deserves a higher p4p ranking than Wright.

[sweet_scientist]

Maybe Scientist can lead me to a clear round that Winky won, because I just could'nt find it......

Hopkins took away Winky's jab with his lateral movement, and when Winky got close enough, Hopkins smuthered Winky's jab.

I think I can count in one hand the clean effective shots Winky landed.

Hopkins certainly did'nt put up a domintating performance, but imo outdid Winky in every round.
Hopkins imo hit winky with much harder and more effective shots round after round.
......you mentioned earlier Scientist that neither fighter was much effective.....I disagree, I thought Hopkins shots took their toll on Winky and Winky began to look the more for wear as the rounds went by.
Winky weakened and Hopkins got stronger.
The very last round Winky was even rocked and stunned.

I'm baffled by anybody having this fight anywhere close to a draw.....
.....on what basis????
.....Solely based on defense and crediting Winky for putting his hands at a high guard and tucking his shoulders??????


Winky's offense was plum ineffective, and Hopkins in comparison was quite more effective.
Hopkins wore down Winky Wright and got better with each passing round!
Winky looked gassed from about the 8th or 9th rounds on, and fought off fumes till the end. You can choose to think that was Hopkins' work that reduced him to that, personally I think it was more to do with not belonging at 170.

I don't think Winky was hurt at any point during the fight, even the last round, but he was tired as fuck. Had hopkins put together a few punches he probably could have knocked him down at the end there. Wright had no legs under him.

As to there being no clear rounds Winky won, well I think there were a few. I'll rewatch it later tonight and tell you which rounds Winky clearly won. Just going off memory I think rounds 2 and 7 were pretty definitively Wright's rounds.

LMFAOOO@Hops shutting him out.

Pure Vlade!

[divac]

Hopkins took away the jab and made Winky look awkward at times, I agree, but he did a poor job breaking through Wright's defense. The punch stats back that up. It was not for nothing that Hopkins landed only about 150 punches (and Winky in fact landed 15 more punches than Hopkins, which isn't saying much becuase he didn't get through with much himself).

As an aside, Jermain Taylor did a better job of busting through Wright's guard than what Hopkins did (but also left himself open a lot more than Hopkins as well.

I just didn't see much from Hopkins to have him a clear winner in this one. The cleanest punches he landed imo came when he would shoe shine or flurry and that didn't do much damage to Winky. he was throwing a lot of hard punches, but Wright was pikcing most off with his gloves.

BTW, I agree a prime Hopkins beats Wirght, but I wasn't concerning myself with that here, I was concerning myself with their p4p status right now. Obviously Hopkins is further from his prime than Wright is, the question I was posing is whether right now, Hopkins really deserves a higher p4p ranking than Wright.

You're enamored with the defensive part of the game.....in this instance, Hopkins being unable to land as clearly or as effective as he's done in the past with other opponents.

.....but you still have to look at each fighters offense and who is being more effective with it.

Without question Hopkins was offensively being more effective than Winky in landing with landing harder more telling shots.....

As far as I can see, you're looking at it from the point of view that Hopkins is'nt breaking through Winky's defense as he's done in the past vs others, totally forgetting to look at Hopkins sound defense as well, and looking at how effective Winky's offense was.....which imo was attrocious.

Talk about ring generalship in this fight, Wright was blindly following Hopkins and having a hard time keeping his balance in the process.
He never pumped the jab in multiples because it was'nt there for him to do so.
Hopkins took that away from him and in essense took away the only effective weapon Wright is customarily effective with.

Hopkins in the process threw his 3 or four good shots a round (mainly right hands) on the inside and did some work to Winky's body.

Again, not many if any fighters are going to look great offensively vs Winky in that he has a great high guard defense, but Hopkins cracked Winky enough times per round to merit more credit than Winky, who imo was completely ineffective in everything he tried offensively.

When you point to punchstats, which I hate to do, they're pretty equal in the punches landed dept......knowing that, who landed the harder shots clean and otherwise??????

To me that was Hopkins by a landslide in both depts.....and its why Hopkins won by the lopsided scores rendered!

[divac]

Winky looked gassed from about the 8th or 9th rounds on, and fought off fumes till the end. You can choose to think that was Hopkins' work that reduced him to that, personally I think it was more to do with not belonging at 170.

I don't think Winky was hurt at any point during the fight, even the last round, but he was tired as fuck. Had hopkins put together a few punches he probably could have knocked him down at the end there. Wright had no legs under him.

As to there being no clear rounds Winky won, well I think there were a few. I'll rewatch it later tonight and tell you which rounds Winky clearly won. Just going off memory I think rounds 2 and 7 were pretty definitively Wright's rounds.

LMFAOOO@Hops shutting him out.

Pure Vlade!

I've got this tape right in front of me, whenever you have the time let me know and give me 2 or 3 of what you think are Winky's best rounds.

From what I saw, only the first 3 or 4 rounds could be mistaken for Winky rounds......it all went slowly down hill for Wright from there.


The weight may have had something to do with how terribly sloppy Wright looked......but do you honestly think that it was the added weight and not Hopkins that completely took away Wrights jab???


Hopkins is a great fighter, no doubt.....but he has'nt terribly impressed me to the depths that others in this forum have been impressed by him.

.....but I have to give the man his credit. Hopkins is a true student of the game.
He does his homework and goes about and sticks to a gameplan that will benefit him regardless of if it makes him look spectacular or not.

42 years old and coming out stronger than Wright who is 7 years his Jr.
I've got to respect what Hopkins brought to the table vs Wright.
The type of fight Hopkins and Wright fought with Hopkins using his legs to lateral Wright and then spinning Wright when he got close takes its toll on an old fighters legs, then you have the grappling that went on that is always taxing on a fighter.
You would think that a 42 year old could'nt stand up to that type of wear.....but Hopkins came out the better more fresher fighter.
That has got to be respected!

[sweet_scientist]

You're enamored with the defensive part of the game.....in this instance, Hopkins being unable to land as clearly or as effective as he's done in the past with other opponents.

.....but you still have to look at each fighters offense and who is being more effective with it.

Without question Hopkins was offensively being more effective than Winky in landing with landing harder more telling shots.....

As far as I can see, you're looking at it from the point of view that Hopkins is'nt breaking through Winky's defense as he's done in the past vs others, totally forgetting to look at Hopkins sound defense as well, and looking at how effective Winky's offense was.....which imo was attrocious.

Talk about ring generalship in this fight, Wright was blindly following Hopkins and having a hard time keeping his balance in the process.
He never pumped the jab in multiples because it was'nt there for him to do so.
Hopkins took that away from him and in essense took away the only effective weapon Wright is customarily effective with.

Hopkins in the process threw his 3 or four good shots a round (mainly right hands) on the inside and did some work to Winky's body.

Again, not many if any fighters are going to look great offensively vs Winky in that he has a great high guard defense, but Hopkins cracked Winky enough times per round to merit more credit than Winky, who imo was completely ineffective in everything he tried offensively.

When you point to punchstats, which I hate to do, they're pretty equal in the punches landed dept......knowing that, who landed the harder shots clean and otherwise??????

To me that was Hopkins by a landslide in both depts.....and its why Hopkins won by the lopsided scores rendered!

We'll just have to disagree I'm afraid. To me it came down to this: Hopkins was throwing harder shots, but most were being fended off. Winky was landing cleaner shots, but with not much on them. In the end they neutralised each other. Hence the draw.

You and many here seem to think Bernard was landing cleaner shots as well as harder shots. I didn't see him land all that cleanly at all.

Looking at a fighter's face isn't the best way of judging a fight, but in all seriousness, bar the cut from the headbut, Wright recieved more damage in training for the fight than he did in the ring with Hopkins! And given that Winky has a proclivity to swell and become disconfigured of late in fights, that should tell you something about how effective Bernard was in this one.

[sweet_scientist]

I've got this tape right in front of me, whenever you have the time let me know and give me 2 or 3 of what you think are Winky's best rounds.

From what I saw, only the first 3 or 4 rounds could be mistaken for Winky rounds......it all went slowly down hill for Wright from there.


The weight may have had something to do with how terribly sloppy Wright looked......but do you honestly think that it was the added weight and not Hopkins that completely took away Wrights jab???


Hopkins is a great fighter, no doubt.....but he has'nt terribly impressed me to the depths that others in this forum have been impressed by him.

.....but I have to give the man his credit. Hopkins is a true student of the game.
He does his homework and goes about and sticks to a gameplan that will benefit him regardless of if it makes him look spectacular or not.

42 years old and coming out stronger than Wright who is 7 years his Jr.
I've got to respect what Hopkins brought to the table vs Wright.
The type of fight Hopkins and Wright fought with Hopkins using his legs to lateral Wright and then spinning Wright when he got close takes its toll on an old fighters legs, then you have the grappling that went on that is always taxing on a fighter.
You would think that a 42 year old could'nt stand up to that type of wear.....but Hopkins came out the better more fresher fighter.
That has got to be respected!

Full credit to him for coming physically and mentally prepared at his age. I'm not taking that away from him. It is truly amazing, and I don't begrudge him winning this fight, as I feel there is an argument that can be made that he won a good 7 rounds.

[sweet_scientist]

Winky deserves credit for that but better than Hopkins?, no way. Hopkins did the very same when he fought Tarver and he was 41 years old when he did so, unlike Winky. I know that Hopkins fought at Light Heavyweight once before that, it was his first fight as a pro and he lost it.

You, like many others here are getting caught up in the fact that Hopkins is still competent despite being a fossil. I'm not denying that, but age has NOTHING to do with your p4p status, which is what the topic of this thread is all about.

And sure, Hopkins did well and humiliated Tarver despite making the jump up in weight, but I think it's fair to say that the jump in weight has not debilitated him as much as it has Wright. Hopkins is much more natural at lightheavy (I mean, he even started his career there) than Wright, and the question is really whether Wright proved he was better than Hopkins p4p right now given that he fought above his best weight, a weight more natural to Hopkins than it was for Wright.

[sweet_scientist]

Talk about ring generalship in this fight, Wright was blindly following Hopkins and having a hard time keeping his balance in the process.


Kinda reminds me of another fight ;)
<=====

[Koa]

Hopkins took away the jab and made Winky look awkward at times, I agree, but he did a poor job breaking through Wright's defense. The punch stats back that up. It was not for nothing that Hopkins landed only about 150 punches (and Winky in fact landed 15 more punches than Hopkins, which isn't saying much becuase he didn't get through with much himself).

As an aside, Jermain Taylor did a better job of busting through Wright's guard than what Hopkins did (but also left himself open a lot more than Hopkins as well.

I just didn't see much from Hopkins to have him a clear winner in this one. The cleanest punches he landed imo came when he would shoe shine or flurry and that didn't do much damage to Winky. he was throwing a lot of hard punches, but Wright was pikcing most off with his gloves.

BTW, I agree a prime Hopkins beats Wirght, but I wasn't concerning myself with that here, I was concerning myself with their p4p status right now. Obviously Hopkins is further from his prime than Wright is, the question I was posing is whether right now, Hopkins really deserves a higher p4p ranking than Wright.

Damn you come up with some great threads, topics very worthy of consideration. When judging a fighter like Wright, we have to consider how under-rated he was for so long due to his stingey defense. A lot of razzle dazzle tends to get peoples attention whether the shots land or not. In the end judging tends to be subjective.. If we were just to measure power shots landed and jabs landed, the fight likely would have been a draw, or Winky would have won it.. Thing is the power and quality of the clean shots landed are what many people tend to judge, rather than the punches actually landed.. In many cases you don't even need to land cleanly to have it considered a clean punch via compubox.

This is one thing I was trying to point out in the Wright vs Taylor fight. So many punches Taylor threw had effect even though they were clearly at least partially blocked by Wright, who I still thought had a considerable landed punch output in that fight which I suspected before I even watched it a second time.

Unfortunately fighters don't get points for blocking punches :D.

But yeah, I would have to agree that lb for lb today, Wright has to get the nod considering he was the one that went up in weight and seemed to not be comfortable in his own skin, or at least as comfortable as we usually see him. Game fight with one of those fighters who is a master at winning, and for a very long time being a guy nobody liked unless you are a true boxing fan.. I'm talking about HBO for a long time didn't like Hop, I believe because they didn't feel he was an easy guy to market.

[achillesthegreat]

Hopkins took away the jab and made Winky look awkward at times, I agree, but he did a poor job breaking through Wright's defense. The punch stats back that up. It was not for nothing that Hopkins landed only about 150 punches (and Winky in fact landed 15 more punches than Hopkins, which isn't saying much becuase he didn't get through with much himself).

As an aside, Jermain Taylor did a better job of busting through Wright's guard than what Hopkins did (but also left himself open a lot more than Hopkins as well.

I just didn't see much from Hopkins to have him a clear winner in this one. The cleanest punches he landed imo came when he would shoe shine or flurry and that didn't do much damage to Winky. he was throwing a lot of hard punches, but Wright was pikcing most off with his gloves.

BTW, I agree a prime Hopkins beats Wirght, but I wasn't concerning myself with that here, I was concerning myself with their p4p status right now. Obviously Hopkins is further from his prime than Wright is, the question I was posing is whether right now, Hopkins really deserves a higher p4p ranking than Wright.
I disagree. He didn't shatter it. I don't think he had the speed or power to, some like RJJ could do it. X went around it and through it. Not only that but he was catching Wright with shots that were cleaner then Wrights ever been hit with. I think this started in the first round.

I see what you are saying about the little flurries. X would take away Wrights offence and pick his shots. Those flurries were to even the table when he was caught.

The punch stats offensively are a moot point, it was close. The fight was close in the ring and on paper. However the ring general was X, plus he had the suprior defence, offence was about equal.

I thought you meant all time is Wright higher. Now Wright isn't higher either, ultimately he lost. He could clearly fight at the weight, it was skill and smarts that gave him an L!

Taylor didn't do a better job. He had the youth to bomb away. If X was younger he'd be ripping Wright apart. X was still pacing himself. Being at 175 and facing a smaller guy meant he could risk a bit more than usual but he is still old.

[Vantage_West]

116 - 112 easy

no way 115-113

anyways Winky weighed in at 170 same as Hopkins and in my mind the weigh-in weight is the weight that mattershopkins is a natural light heavy winky is a natural junior middle he has goen up 3 divisions to fight him...did you see how lathargic he was this wasa fight which didnt prove anything winky's whole style revolves around being quick snappy and agile while being able to block the punches.hopkins did exactly what he should of done but it wasnt a fair fight at middlewieght i would of agreed more.

[psychopath]

Winky's still the man. Some pussies in this game don't get it. If you got skills, make good fights and lose respectably you will still be marketable and respected.

Being "the man" is different from being respected and being marketable.

Winky is still the man man? Nah . . . definitely not. If he only fought a rematch with taylor and defeated him . . . you can call him the man.

Respected? Yes! Definitely. Winky has some serious skills and nobody can deny that.

Marketable? :D Nah . . . he's not. He needs a named opponent for his fight to sell. Has he ever headlined a main event of a PPV affair?

[Street Lethal]

Not all time, of course, but currently.

He did, after all, move up and face Hopkins at a weight that was more comfortable for Bernard, and fought with a reduced workrate and speed than he had at 154-160.

I'm interested in particular of the opinion of those that had Hopkins winning 115-113, which was I suppose, probably the most common score for the fight.

I actually had the fight scored a draw, so you know my answer to this question.

I agree, sweet scientist.

[tpuz]

if they fought at 160 winky would probably get emI don't think so, Hopkins was the 160 pound champion for 10 years.

[sweet_scientist]

Damn you come up with some great threads, topics very worthy of consideration. When judging a fighter like Wright, we have to consider how under-rated he was for so long due to his stingey defense. A lot of razzle dazzle tends to get peoples attention whether the shots land or not. In the end judging tends to be subjective.. If we were just to measure power shots landed and jabs landed, the fight likely would have been a draw, or Winky would have won it.. Thing is the power and quality of the clean shots landed are what many people tend to judge, rather than the punches actually landed.. In many cases you don't even need to land cleanly to have it considered a clean punch via compubox.

This is one thing I was trying to point out in the Wright vs Taylor fight. So many punches Taylor threw had effect even though they were clearly at least partially blocked by Wright, who I still thought had a considerable landed punch output in that fight which I suspected before I even watched it a second time.

Unfortunately fighters don't get points for blocking punches :D.

But yeah, I would have to agree that lb for lb today, Wright has to get the nod considering he was the one that went up in weight and seemed to not be comfortable in his own skin, or at least as comfortable as we usually see him. Game fight with one of those fighters who is a master at winning, and for a very long time being a guy nobody liked unless you are a true boxing fan.. I'm talking about HBO for a long time didn't like Hop, I believe because they didn't feel he was an easy guy to market.

Thanks for the nice words mate :good

I've got to say, measuring the effect of a blow is not exactly a science, and people can disagree with the quality of clean punches, to say nothing of ones that are partially deflected and even totally blocked but manage to have the defender's glove hit up against the head. Ultimately I didn't feel Bernard's blows were having that much of an effect on Winky (i.e. anymore than what Winky's were to him), and though Bernard closed the show well, as he usually does, in terms of rounds counted, I thought both men had gathered the same.

[sweet_scientist]

I agree, sweet scientist.

It's good that we can agree on something :good

[sweet_scientist]

I disagree. He didn't shatter it. I don't think he had the speed or power to, some like RJJ could do it. X went around it and through it. Not only that but he was catching Wright with shots that were cleaner then Wrights ever been hit with. I think this started in the first round.
We'll just have to disagree there. I think Vasquez, Vargas and Taylor were landing cleaner blows and putting more hurt than what Hopkins was on Winky.

I see what you are saying about the little flurries. X would take away Wrights offence and pick his shots. Those flurries were to even the table when he was caught.
It was a good ploy on Bernard's behalf, unsettling Wright's guard with quick little shots which enabled subsequent ones to land.

The punch stats offensively are a moot point, it was close. The fight was close in the ring and on paper. However the ring general was X, plus he had the suprior defence, offence was about equal.
I thought Hopkins was the better ring general, Winky had the slightly better defense and landed a few more clean punches. As to effective agression, I didn't think either man was that effective in their agression, though Winky was the one pressing the fight.

I thought you meant all time is Wright higher. Now Wright isn't higher either, ultimately he lost. He could clearly fight at the weight, it was skill and smarts that gave him an L!
I thin there was a clear drop off in stamina and speed for Wright with the rise in weight. You can't say the same with Hopkins. He looked utterly shyte against Taylor both times and has done better with the rise in weight. Wright still fought well at 170, but there's no question in my mind he does a better job at 160. Right now, I don't think Hopkins does a better job at 160. Prime for Prime, Hopkins beats Winky, no doubt, but Hopkins hasn't been prime for a good 5 years at least.

Taylor didn't do a better job. He had the youth to bomb away. If X was younger he'd be ripping Wright apart. X was still pacing himself. Being at 175 and facing a smaller guy meant he could risk a bit more than usual but he is still old.
Taylor did a better offensive job than Hopkins (never said he did better defensively or tactically). He did have the youth to bomb away, and some of his bombs landed.

Again, you're talking all time and I agree, Hopkins wins. Right now, Winky is the better fighter p4p in my books.

[divac]

I thought Hopkins was the better ring general, Winky had the slightly better defense and landed a few more clean punches. As to effective agression, I didn't think either man was that effective in their agression, though Winky was the one pressing the fight.


Good God Scientist, although you agree Hopkins was the better ring general, you're going to give Winky rounds based on your opinion on a slightly better defense and a few more clean punches???????

You are not going to take the effectiveness of those punches into account??????:patsch

You are totally going to disregard that Hopkins landed the much harder blows???:patsch

Since this fight is just a few days past, I'd really love to see the rounds you gave Winky with an explanation on why that round went to Winky!

I'm baffled as to how someone can come up with more than 2 rounds to give to Wright!

If you have the time Scientist, take me into your way of scoring a round, by pointing out the rounds you gave Winky and why he edged those particular rounds!

I just cant see anything that Winky did in a round that Hopkins did'nt do better!

[divac]

Btw Scientist, how did you score the Hopkins and Winky's fights with Jermaine Taylor?

[sweet_scientist]

Good God Scientist, although you agree Hopkins was the better ring general, you're going to give Winky rounds based on your opinion on a slightly better defense and a few more clean punches???????

You are not going to take the effectiveness of those punches into account??????:patsch

You are totally going to disregard that Hopkins landed the much harder blows???:patsch

I don't think either man was more effective with their shots. I thought Bernard threw harder as a whole, but didn't land as cleanly as Winky. And although Winky landed a little cleaner, there wasn't much to his shots. In the end I felt they neutralised each other. (Haven't I said that in this thread already?)

Since this fight is just a few days past, I'd really love to see the rounds you gave Winky with an explanation on why that round went to Winky!

I'm baffled as to how someone can come up with more than 2 rounds to give to Wright!

If you have the time Scientist, take me into your way of scoring a round, by pointing out the rounds you gave Winky and why he edged those particular rounds!

I just cant see anything that Winky did in a round that Hopkins did'nt do better!

I haven't got the time to do an in depth round by round analysis right now, but all I will say is that many rounds were close, with not much separating each fighter. Having said that there were subtle shifts in the action, with some rounds Winky doing a little better, landing the better shots, other rounds Bernard doing better and landing the better shots. All the rounds weren't carbon copies of each other to warrant a shutout as you had. There were shifts in the action. I'm sure most people that had Hopkins winning by 2 points, or even so much as 4, would specify rounds I gave to Wright as the same rounds they gave Wright.

Having the fight scored a shutout to me says that you came to the fight (or developed very early in the fight) a preconceived idea, and you stopped following the action and just went with what you surmised without looking at what happened.

But hey, you had Taylor shutting out Spinks, you had Marquez shutting out John and you had Marquez all but shutting out Barrera as well, so why should I be surprised? :lol:

In any case I will give you my scorecard:

115-115 A draw.
Hopkins gets rounds 1,3,5,11 and 12.
Winky rounds 2,4,6,7 and 9.
Rounds 8 and 10 even.

As I've said before, I'm totally fine with anyone having it 2 points either way, as some of the rounds there were very close.


Btw Scientist, how did you score the Hopkins and Winky's fights with Jermaine Taylor?


I had Taylor taking the first Taylor-Hopkins fight 115-114
Taylor winning rounds 1,2,4,6,7 and 8.
Hopkins winning rounds 5,9,10,11 and 12.
Round 3 being even.

I had the second Taylor-Hopkins fight scored a draw: 115-115
Taylor winning rounds 1,2,4,6 and 11.
Hopkins winning rounds 5,7,8,9 and 10.
Rounds 3 and 12 even.

I had the Wright-Taylor fight scored 115-113 for Wright.
Taylor winning rounds 3,4,6,7 and 10.
Wright winning rounds 1,2,5,8,9,11 and 12.

[divac]

Thats not true Scientist, dont misquote me!:twisted: :D

I believe I actually gave Barrera three rounds vs Marquez!

There was a few early shifts in momentum in the Hopkins-Wright fight, early on Winky got very aggressive vs Hopkins, really pushing the action, to the point that Hopkins was really forced to backpedal and use his legs to fend Winky.
I had Hopkins edging those early rounds because he was imo nailing Wright with some clean single shot right hands on the inside and shooting some good shots to Winky's body......
Hopkins was being more effective with his shots, although he was being clearly made to work hard for them.

During those early rounds, my feeling was that although Hopkins was just edging those rounds, I did'nt think Hopkins legs would hold up at the pace that Winky was forcing Hopkins to fight.

Had the fight gone at the pace of the early rounds, Hopkins may have wilted some down the stretch....but Hopkins made sure the pace slowed to his liking and got physical with Winky by mugging Winky on the inside, getting into clinches, pushing, pulling.
The physical part of what Hopkins was doing is what imo frustrated and lead to Winky weakening down the stretch of the fight.
Hopkins is used to that type of fight, as he's done it alot throughout his career.
Hopkins mugs fighters!:lol:

I've said it before Scientist, you hate giving a consecutive string of competitive rounds to one fighter. You like to divy up rounds that are close enough although it may deter from your usual scoring criteria.

.....as you know, I've never had a problem giving a fighter a consecutive string of rounds that may be close.
I follow the scoring criteria as I interpret it, and if a fighter edges 12 consecutive rounds in a row, then thats exactly what he will get on my scorecard.

You've critiqued me on several of my scorecards, but how is it that in most cases, my scorecards happen to coincide almost exactly to how the actual judges scored in the fight.
.....both Hopkins-Taylor fights, I believe I had Taylor over Winky by 3 points. I dont think I was off there, alot of people had Taylor winning.

My JMM-MAB scorecard was right on par with the scores read by the actual judges.

The Taylor-Spinks fight, now thats a fight right there where most rounds were carbon copies of one another, having said that, it's uncomprehensible to me why someone would split those rounds down the middle.
It you gave one fighter a round in that fight, why the hell would you turn around and give a similar type round to the other fighter????

I could go on and on......Chavez-Whitaker????:deal :yep Once again my scorecard coinciding with the official judges!:hey :yep :D


Btw Scientist, I think you insinuated that I did'nt pay close enough attention to Hopkins-Winky......:nono
That was one of those fights where I paid extra close attention.
As a boxing fan that likes to score a fight as he watches, who would'nt pay close attention to a fight such as that between two defensive fighters that bring alot of subtleties to the table.

I found myself paying extra attention as the rounds mounted, and the HBO guys were going against my scorecard and mounting rounds on Winky's column.
I was shaking my head in disbelief that the HBO guys would nonchalantly give a round to Winky Wright......
.....as the official scores were read and up came two 117-111 scores, I just nodded my head up and down absolutely certain that those wide scores could only go to Bernard Hopkins!

I feel very confident and unashamed at the scorecards I post.....I score what I see, and I'm all too happy to explain my card, which is alot more than I can say to alot of guys around here who all they can do is critique others scores, but not explain there own.

[psychopath]

1st of all the fight wasn't boring fuck face.

2nd of all, I think there would be interest in a rematch seeing how good this fight was.

3rd of all there is no fucking reason for Hops to fight Taylor again, he got robbed 2x; why would he want to put himself thru that again?

The fight wasn't boring Dickhead? Is that the kind of fight that keeps you in the edge of your seat? :think

Yeah there would be interest to a rematch for stupid fans like you but not Winky and Bhops, dumbfuck! :yep

There's no reason for Bhops to fight Taylor again shithead, but Winky does. The first fight was a draw . . . do you even know that? :D :lol:

[sweet_scientist]

Thats not true Scientist, dont misquote me!:twisted: :D

I believe I actually gave Barrera three rounds vs Marquez!
I said you "all but" had JMM shutting out Barrera, not that you had him shutting him out :D.

There was a few early shifts in momentum in the Hopkins-Wright fight, early on Winky got very aggressive vs Hopkins, really pushing the action, to the point that Hopkins was really forced to backpedal and use his legs to fend Winky.
I had Hopkins edging those early rounds because he was imo nailing Wright with some clean single shot right hands on the inside and shooting some good shots to Winky's body......
Hopkins was being more effective with his shots, although he was being clearly made to work hard for them.

During those early rounds, my feeling was that although Hopkins was just edging those rounds, I did'nt think Hopkins legs would hold up at the pace that Winky was forcing Hopkins to fight.

Had the fight gone at the pace of the early rounds, Hopkins may have wilted some down the stretch....but Hopkins made sure the pace slowed to his liking and got physical with Winky by mugging Winky on the inside, getting into clinches, pushing, pulling.
The physical part of what Hopkins was doing is what imo frustrated and lead to Winky weakening down the stretch of the fight.
Hopkins is used to that type of fight, as he's done it alot throughout his career.
Hopkins mugs fighters!:lol:
I don't score points for holding, pushing and rabbit punching, so I didn't give Bernard all that much credit for his work in "mugging" Winky. Where he was landing legitimate body shots, I credited him. His mugging did tire Winky out and allowed him to take the last couple of rounds of the fight. At 160, I don't think Winky would have tired as much as the strength disparity wouldn't be so great.


I've said it before Scientist, you hate giving a consecutive string of competitive rounds to one fighter. You like to divy up rounds that are close enough although it may deter from your usual scoring criteria.

.....as you know, I've never had a problem giving a fighter a consecutive string of rounds that may be close.
I follow the scoring criteria as I interpret it, and if a fighter edges 12 consecutive rounds in a row, then thats exactly what he will get on my scorecard.
You're right to do it as you do, and I myself would give every round to a fighter if I thought he edged every round, but I never give sympathy rounds. If a round is too close to call, I call it even (my cards usually involve one or two and sometimes even three even rounds if the fight calls for it) and if I feel a guy edged the round, he gets it, even if it was close.

You've critiqued me on several of my scorecards, but how is it that in most cases, my scorecards happen to coincide almost exactly to how the actual judges scored in the fight.
.....both Hopkins-Taylor fights, I believe I had Taylor over Winky by 3 points. I dont think I was off there, alot of people had Taylor winning.
My JMM-MAB scorecard was right on par with the scores read by the actual judges.

The Taylor-Spinks fight, now thats a fight right there where most rounds were carbon copies of one another, having said that, it's uncomprehensible to me why someone would split those rounds down the middle.
It you gave one fighter a round in that fight, why the hell would you turn around and give a similar type round to the other fighter????

I could go on and on......Chavez-Whitaker????:deal :yep Once again my scorecard coinciding with the official judges!:hey :yep :D
I think you should measure your scorecards against how intelligent boxing fans and scribes score fights rather than how judges score fights. I mean, judges sometimes score fights wrong, its rare that the majority of intelligent boxing fans or scribes do. I find the means (the average) reached amongst intelligent boxing fans and scribes' scorecards a much more accurate gauge of how a fight went down than how judges score fights generally. I mean, fancy boasting that you scored Chavez-Whitaker the same as the judges. That's almost as bad as saying you scored Lewis-Holyfield I just like the judges and trying to garner credibility from it!


Btw Scientist, I think you insinuated that I did'nt pay close enough attention to Hopkins-Winky......:nono
That was one of those fights where I paid extra close attention.
As a boxing fan that likes to score a fight as he watches, who would'nt pay close attention to a fight such as that between two defensive fighters that bring alot of subtleties to the table.

I found myself paying extra attention as the rounds mounted, and the HBO guys were going against my scorecard and mounting rounds on Winky's column.
I was shaking my head in disbelief that the HBO guys would nonchalantly give a round to Winky Wright......
.....as the official scores were read and up came two 117-111 scores, I just nodded my head up and down absolutely certain that those wide scores could only go to Bernard Hopkins!
Here's an interesting thing. I didn't watch the HBO telecast, but by all accounts Harold Lederman was giving all the early rounds to Wright and the later rounds to Hopkins. I watched the Sky Sports telecast with an English crew including Jim Watt. Jim Watt had all the early rounds (bar the 2nd) for Hopkins and then scored rounds 7-10 for Winky. I take it that would have been almost a total reversal of what Harold Lederman had. Between the two of them, Winky was probably pegged down for winning 9 of the 12 rounds. Isn't that bizarre? I don't think so. It was a close fight. Rounds that were close could be seen to be going the other way.


I feel very confident and unashamed at the scorecards I post.....I score what I see, and I'm all too happy to explain my card, which is alot more than I can say to alot of guys around here who all they can do is critique others scores, but not explain there own.
That's great, you do always explain your cards, and though I don't always (hardly ever) agree with them, I do read them and await what you have to say. :good

[divac]

Thats interesting what you say Scientist that the Sky telecast had rounds 7-10 for Winky......
:huh Imo however Winky did better in the first half of the fight than he did in the 2nd half.
.....and I thought HBO was terrible!

Whats even more interesting to me is that you followed right along and scored right along the lines that Sky did!:think :?

You had those rounds either even or gave them to Winky!:nut :lol:

You're terrible Scientist, just terrible!:lol: :D ;)

[steelem]

Not all time, of course, but currently.

He did, after all, move up and face Hopkins at a weight that was more comfortable for Bernard, and fought with a reduced workrate and speed than he had at 154-160.

I'm interested in particular of the opinion of those that had Hopkins winning 115-113, which was I suppose, probably the most common score for the fight.

I actually had the fight scored a draw, so you know my answer to this question.

Winky was in terrible shape & looked as though he just had the free buffet at pizza hut - hopkins won & winky might as well just quit as he was Sxxx..

[sweet_scientist]

Thats interesting what you say Scientist that the Sky telecast had rounds 7-10 for Winky......
:huh Imo however Winky did better in the first half of the fight than he did in the 2nd half.
.....and I thought HBO was terrible!

Whats even more interesting to me is that you followed right along and scored right along the lines that Sky did!:think :?

You had those rounds either even or gave them to Winky!:nut :lol:

You're terrible Scientist, just terrible!:lol: :D ;)

Hey I thought Jim was making some good points :lol:

But I disagreed quite a bit with his card. He had the 4th and 6th for Bernard, I had them for Wink. I had the 8th and 10th even, he had them for Winky. Those rounds could have gone the other way imo, could have been Bernard's just as well as Winky's.

I'd like to see the HBO coverage, but I don't think I'm really missing anything. Jim Lampley's usually horrible at calling technical fights. He has no idea on calling a missed or landed punch. A thrown punch is as good as a landed punch for him... infuriating...

[achillesthegreat]

We'll just have to disagree there. I think Vasquez, Vargas and Taylor were landing cleaner blows and putting more hurt than what Hopkins was on Winky.

It was a good ploy on Bernard's behalf, unsettling Wright's guard with quick little shots which enabled subsequent ones to land.

I thought Hopkins was the better ring general, Winky had the slightly better defense and landed a few more clean punches. As to effective agression, I didn't think either man was that effective in their agression, though Winky was the one pressing the fight.

I thin there was a clear drop off in stamina and speed for Wright with the rise in weight. You can't say the same with Hopkins. He looked utterly shyte against Taylor both times and has done better with the rise in weight. Wright still fought well at 170, but there's no question in my mind he does a better job at 160. Right now, I don't think Hopkins does a better job at 160. Prime for Prime, Hopkins beats Winky, no doubt, but Hopkins hasn't been prime for a good 5 years at least.

Taylor did a better offensive job than Hopkins (never said he did better defensively or tactically). He did have the youth to bomb away, and some of his bombs landed.

Again, you're talking all time and I agree, Hopkins wins. Right now, Winky is the better fighter p4p in my books.
I think Vasquez, Simon and Vargas were definitely putting more hurt on Wright. But it was a 12 battles that made up the war and X won more. So whereas the three mentioned may put more hurt on Wright they were losing the round or making it unnecessarily close by giving Wright openings. Xs work was paced better and easier to read. He was the ring general, took away Wrights jab and cracked his defence. His shots weren't hurtful but they were scoring. I think he got into Wrights mind too.

I basically agree with everything you say. You scored it 6-6 and I had it for X, something like 7-5. I think it was close and competative but overall it was Xs night.

[divac]

Hey I thought Jim was making some good points :lol:

But I disagreed quite a bit with his card. He had the 4th and 6th for Bernard, I had them for Wink. I had the 8th and 10th even, he had them for Winky. Those rounds could have gone the other way imo, could have been Bernard's just as well as Winky's.

I'd like to see the HBO coverage, but I don't think I'm really missing anything. Jim Lampley's usually horrible at calling technical fights. He has no idea on calling a missed or landed punch. A thrown punch is as good as a landed punch for him... infuriating...

Had it not been for Harold Lederman's round by round bringing out of his score, HBO's coverage was'nt a total waist.
Lampley even mentioned while Lederman had Wright well ahead, that the fight could just as easily be scored differently by someone else, alos pointing out that Hopkins best shots were coming on the inside and from angles that would be harder to spot and recognize. (Lampley may have actually been taking a shot at Lederman's atrocious early scoring):yep

I agree with you on Lampley's ability to spot certain technical aspects, but I get the feeling that most of the time its more his bias that gets in the way than his knowleadge.
For this particular fight, Lampley was'nt that bad.

The thing I did'nt like about the HBO telecast was that they harped so much on negativity on both fighters.
Instead of trying to set a tone so that the viewers could enjoy the fight, Emmanuel Steward in particular was calling on both fighters to retire.
....thats fine and dandy if thats his opinion, but I'd wish he'd put more emphasis and describe the goings on in the fight instead of bumming us out that they've both declined considerably from what they once were.

A few days back during the Holyfield Savarese fight, Bob Sheridan called the fight and was enthusiastic on the effort put forth by both fighters.
I could not help but think that if it were HBO calling the fight, they would be bumming us out about the sad decline of Holyfield and pointing out negatives instead of positives.
The Colonel made it an enjoyable watch by being optimistic and calling the fight between Holyfield and Savarese, not Holyfield and a supposed showdown with one of the Heavyweight champs.

For my taste, of the current broadcasters, Al Bernstein I find is enjoyable to listen. He gives his opinion but does'nt come across as his word should be the gospel.

[China_hand_Joe]

Hopkins has to slip out the top 10 P4P fighters now -fullstop-

[Jinx]

i never saw the point of a Winky/Hopkins fight at this stage of their careers at 170...it should've happened at 160, and Winky probably would've edged out a close decision over Hopkins...but we have to take Hopkins' age into account, and a pre-Tito Hopkins beats Winky decisively imo...

[sweet_scientist]

Had it not been for Harold Lederman's round by round bringing out of his score, HBO's coverage was'nt a total waist.
Lampley even mentioned while Lederman had Wright well ahead, that the fight could just as easily be scored differently by someone else, alos pointing out that Hopkins best shots were coming on the inside and from angles that would be harder to spot and recognize. (Lampley may have actually been taking a shot at Lederman's atrocious early scoring):yep

I agree with you on Lampley's ability to spot certain technical aspects, but I get the feeling that most of the time its more his bias that gets in the way than his knowleadge.
For this particular fight, Lampley was'nt that bad.

The thing I did'nt like about the HBO telecast was that they harped so much on negativity on both fighters.
Instead of trying to set a tone so that the viewers could enjoy the fight, Emmanuel Steward in particular was calling on both fighters to retire.
....thats fine and dandy if thats his opinion, but I'd wish he'd put more emphasis and describe the goings on in the fight instead of bumming us out that they've both declined considerably from what they once were.

A few days back during the Holyfield Savarese fight, Bob Sheridan called the fight and was enthusiastic on the effort put forth by both fighters.
I could not help but think that if it were HBO calling the fight, they would be bumming us out about the sad decline of Holyfield and pointing out negatives instead of positives.
The Colonel made it an enjoyable watch by being optimistic and calling the fight between Holyfield and Savarese, not Holyfield and a supposed showdown with one of the Heavyweight champs.

For my taste, of the current broadcasters, Al Bernstein I find is enjoyable to listen. He gives his opinion but does'nt come across as his word should be the gospel.

Good call on Sheridan, guy does a great job calling fights, especially with the energy and passion that he brings.

Bernstein is another good caller who I enjoy listening too. Much more insightful than the HBO crew imo, and less airs of smugness and omniscience.

[El Bombasto]

Winky proved himself better than Hopkins by losing to him? Maybe in The Bizaro World, but not here.