21.08.04 – By Izyaslav “Slava” Koza – Novirasputin@hotmail.com – I just don’t get it! What exactly has the “Executioner” done to merit, a discussion between the HBO crew on who should be the Pound-For-Pound #1 fighter, him or Mayweather? Now, before everybody starts to jump the gun and assume I dislike Hopkins, nothing can be further from the truth. Bernard Hopkins is a shining example of many things including,
1. A superior work ethic. Nobody in the sport, except for maybe Evander Holyfield (who is as shot as a cannonball), has such a tremendous physique and build for his age (39). The fact that he can still throw enough, and have enough stamina to win a 12 round championship decision, unlike poor Evander, further makes his case all the more unique, special and of admirable.
2. Character. A lot of critics disproved of Hopkin’s vehement refusal to fight if Joe Cortez was the referee. I, on the other hand, applaud it. Bernard does not put his life, which is centered on boxing, in the hands of somebody else if he can help it. He is a self made man. If he felt Cortez would jeopardize that, especially after Robert Allen out right admitted it would be a dirty fight, (something Cortez has had trouble in dealing with in the past ), then it would have been cowardly to NOT say anything about it.
3. Skill. Make no mistake about it, Hopkins is a very skilled fighter. He sort of reminds me of a cross breed between Tyson and Ali, in that he is cocky and intimidating at the same time. He scares opponents, but he also annoys them in a combination of Ali like nuisance (i.e. forcing Tito’s camp to rewrap Trinidad’s gloves in there fight), and Tyson like intimidation (e.g., when he went after Robert Allen, who offered to touch gloves after a foul in the latest Hopkins-Allen fight).
So after all that praise, what exactly is my problem with Bernard Hopkins? Well, it’s a problem I have with most of the fighters who are dared to be called “p4p greats,” and that is his opposition.
Most recently Hopkins fought Robert Allen, who looked like he was searching for any reason to quit in their last bout on Saturday night. Honestly, are these the types of fighters that make Hopkins a “p4p” force?
Come on, even if Allen had an inkling of that little extra something we call “skill,” why in the hell would he need it if he approached this fight from a “Show up, and collect my paycheck” kind of mentality? So now with this win, we can add him to Morrade Hakkar, as Hopkins list of career defining victories right?
Seriously, Hopkin’s only real big win was against Felix Trinidad, who by no fault of his own, had two seriously overlooked problems. First, he was naturally smaller than Hopkins, which was obvious to all. Second of all, any fool with a heavy hand can knock him down. So, basically Hopkins has made his name and legacy by winning a fight against a small, china chinned opponent, who had so much heart and desire that he quit soon after his loss to Hopkins. Now sure, he is coming back taking on Ricardo Mayorga, but honestly, if Trinidad had any sort of character at all, he wouldn’t need to play these “I’m retired for good,” games and ask to challenge Bernard in a rematch right away.
So that is exactly what I think of Bernard Hopkins record, seeing as his best victim was not exactly what I consider a “great challenge.”
Now we come to the upcoming showdown between Hopkins and the Golden Boy in September. Look, I will say it right now: who exactly is this a challenge for? For Oscar De La Hoya, who is fighting about 30 pounds above his initial boxing weight against obviously the best middleweight out there (at least in terms of skill)? Or, is it a challenge for Bernard Hopkins fighting against another smaller fighter, who has a tendency to fade blatantly in the later rounds, and needed the help of three senior citizens to steal a belt from young kid in his last outing? (I had it 115-113 for Sturm)
Point taken, I don’t care if Hopkins does beat De La Hoya, he still wouldn’t have accomplished anything worth mentioning in terms of a boxing legacy. Furthermore, its not like there is a shortage of challenges out there. Joe Calzaghe is a very worthy opponent who would make for one hell of a fight, and again, Joe is looking for a big payday as well. Then there was Toney, and then Jirov, and then Jones, and maybe Tarver, and in my eyes, Hopkins takes the road more traveled and fights De La Hoya.
From a money standpoint, I understand his decision, because nobody else can offer that many zeros, but again, in terms of a boxing legacy that will make him a household name, this was the wrong choice.
The Bottomline is, Hopkins has fought good fighters. He has survived a hard life, and he has made a good living with his bare hands, but he has not reached his full potential. He has not had that one fight were the other guy wanted it just as much as he did, and was willing to die, like I am sure Hopkins would be willing to if someone puts him up to it.
It is this lack of quality opposition, and this lack of a true war, and not the lack of his tremendous skills that makes me shake my head in disgust after seeing him at the top of somebody’s p4p list.
Bonus thought: Mayweather has not earned his spot at #1 either, and I think by way of past, current, and future opposition, only Erik Morales can claim that spot. Although De La Hoya and Tsyzu are not far behind in terms of opposition. However, De La Hoya suffers from an unfavorable win percentage against his high caliber competitors (which is why he doesn’t present a challenge to Hopkins), while Kostya is out selling sports drinks, and autographs, and claiming he is injured.
Think I am just a bitter boxing fan?
Novirasputin@hotmail.com for comments