Bernard Hopkins, This Is YOUR Fault

Look,

I love Bernard Hopkins. I think he's a great boxer and clearly one of the greatest of all time. He's one of my 3 favorite fighters, along with Money Mayweather (we have the same birthday), and...I can't think of anyone else, so that makes him one of my 2 favorite fighters.

But he's lost 3 fights in the last few years to younger fighters who he was still better than for 1 reason and one reason alone.

He's an asshole. (Don't hit me!)

How else do you explain that a man who hasn't tasted the canvas in 15 years allows himself to lose a fight because he won't throw his hands?

Do I think he won the Calzaghe fight? Yes. Can I argue with the judges who gave Calzaghe the split decision when he landed twice as many shots as Hopkins, even if they weren't doing a lick of damage? No.

You know why? Because that's how American boxing judges score fights.

If I hit you with three jabs and you counter with a hard hook, guess what, I won that exchange. Especially if we repeat that sequence 10 times in a round, I just hit you 30 times and you hit me 10. Well... I win that because you're countering and I'm being the aggressor. So what you caught me on the way out? American boxing judges reward activity and busy-ness, not strategy.

Hopkins knows this.

There are a few exceptions. Where there is a truly recognized champion who is also the favorite in the fight, the judges may give them the benefit of the doubt on strategy, IF they know that's his strategy going into the fight.

Example - Floyd Mayweather Jr vs Oscar De La Hoya

This fight was almost exactly the same as Hopkins Calzaghe in terms of strategy and execution (except there was a lot less punching.) Mayweather plays defense the entire fight, letting De La Hoya come at him, swing and miss, and then pops him with a quick jab or hook as a counter.
You'll also notice that fight was a split decision too. But Hopkins doesn't and never has, carried the same amount of weight with the boxing community (or said a different way, doesn't get the same respect from the judges) as the undefeated Floyd Mayweather Jr.

He's been the underdog in all of his BIG fights. When the judges expect you to lose, they view the fight that way. Its a natural filter.

You see, everyone knows Floyd is a counterpuncher and defensive genius. Its part of his schtick. B Hop calls himself "The Executioner". Now if you call yourself that, and then go into a fight playing D the whole time, the judges just might think its because you're being overwhelmed ...especially when you're the underdog to a younger fighter who is known for his volumunous punching output.

All this to say - yes, Bernard Hopkins executed his strategy very very well last night. And yes, he won the boxing match. But he didn't do what he had to do to win on the judges scorecards. Its just as bad as when he started slow against Jermain Taylor twice. Who the f*** starts a 12 round fight slow? Yea ok, 2 rounds of feeling your opponent out is fine. Find out how hard he hits, what he's trying to do. But 5, 6, 7? No. That would mean you gotta shut your opponent out the rest of the fight. And what is the likelyhood that the judges will score rounds 7 through 12 for you when you're fighting the undefeated "champion of the future"? Well...3 losses he shouldn't have will give Bernard that answer.

Perhaps I'm so upset because I
1) really like Bernard Hopkins and can't stand to see him lose a fight he had in the palm of his hands for NO GOOD REASON
2) was also born in Philly and
3) REALLY REALLY REALLY want to see him fight Roy Jones Jr again and now that fight may not occur. Hopkins is 43. He's also a smart man. He has options outside of in-ring fighting. Roy will fight Calzaghe next and who knows what will happen after that. My best hope is Calzaghe beats Roy this fall, meaning Roy and BHop need each other to get that money and we get that big fight about a year from now. That's one of the few fights I'd pay money to see. Mayweather-Cotto doesn't even get me that excited.