IPB  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
8 Pages V  « < 6 7 8  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Who is true boxer of decade (2001-2010)
Hops
post Aug 18 2011, 08:04 PM
Post #71


Super Featherweight


Group: Members
Posts: 653
Joined: 11-April 10
Member No.: 10,849



Hahaha! When those witnesses come knockin' at my door, I tell them I'm a Muslim. They hurriedly skimp away.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrchitown
post Aug 18 2011, 08:47 PM
Post #72


Cruiserweight


Group: Members
Posts: 5,675
Joined: 21-July 11
Member No.: 12,858



QUOTE (The Ollie Reed Fan Club @ Aug 17 2011, 07:20 PM) *
Fair enough. For me I just can't count Zab or Gatti as great wins. Nor Fatton to be honest. Pac gets no credit there either. Floyd's win over JMM at the weight they fought discounts it for me, as will Pac's win if he does it in the 3rd encounter.

I said from the start though I actually give the title to Hopkins. He was fighting dudes at their peak at the start of the decade and is still fighting dudes at their peak at the end of the decade and now 2 weight classes up. In many ways his resume is the least attractive of all 3 but crucially when he fought them makes up for it (in my opinion.)


I could definitely see how Hopkins is/could be the boxer of the decade. Dude has Never been dominated and even when he loses, controversy surrounds the decision. I thought that he beat Calzaghe, I thought it was 115-113 for B-Hop, and that's due to the knockdown. He did slow down though from 7 on but I just can't see how Calzaghe got any credit for those earlier rounds. And your right, he has fought people in their prime and took the fight directly to them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Ollie Reed F...
post Aug 18 2011, 08:58 PM
Post #73


Super Middleweight


Group: Team BU
Posts: 3,702
Joined: 27-April 08
From: NZ
Member No.: 7,287



QUOTE (mrchitown @ Aug 18 2011, 09:47 PM) *
I could definitely see how Hopkins is/could be the boxer of the decade. Dude has Never been dominated and even when he loses, controversy surrounds the decision. I thought that he beat Calzaghe, I thought it was 115-113 for B-Hop, and that's due to the knockdown. He did slow down though from 7 on but I just can't see how Calzaghe got any credit for those earlier rounds. And your right, he has fought people in their prime and took the fight directly to them.


Plus Hopkins' wins were all 'clean' wins. I can't remember him winning any disputed decisions. If he had been given the first Taylor fight, I think he won that close but cleanly and the Clazaghe fight, another close but clean win then I don''t think this would even be up for debate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
riddick
post Aug 19 2011, 08:05 AM
Post #74


Amateur


Group: Members
Posts: 45
Joined: 14-June 11
Member No.: 12,555



QUOTE (lloyd mayflower @ Aug 18 2011, 10:22 AM) *
Fixed your post for you mate. Dont need to thank me.

lil bitch (IMG:style_emoticons/default/fuck.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackbelt2003
post Aug 19 2011, 12:59 PM
Post #75


Light Heavyweight


Group: Team BU
Posts: 4,425
Joined: 29-October 03
Member No.: 84



Hmmmm...I guess it depends on what the criteria is. Is it just who is the best? Who has achieved the most? Or who has defined boxing for the decade?


If it's who's the best, then it has to be Floyd Mayweather.

If it's based on who's had the best career in that decade, then undoubtedly Hopkins.

If it's taking into consideration who had the biggest effect on boxing in that decade, then I agree with Smarty that Oscar de la Hoya basically carried the fight game on his shoulders for that 10 year period, even if he lost most of his big fights.




Black
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

8 Pages V  « < 6 7 8
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st August 2014 - 01:38 AM