I absently sent an annoying fan email to William Dettloff of The Ring magazine, sometime before the fight, noting that I felt entirely confident that I knew the reason Hopkins wanted to fight Jones again despite Jones' terrible and shocking KO loss to Danny Green.
I said Bernard Hopkins wanted to beat Roy Jones up. Bad. Regardless of how much anyone cared. The money the match would pull in from the name recognition value was just an extra. Beating him up on tv, of course, was why it was a pro-fight and not a parking lot face-off. When Mr. Dettloff mentioned my speculation on the audio webcast by himself and Eric Raskin, it really made me smile. I confess to being more than just a little bit egomaniacal.
So now Bernard has beaten Roy up and been paid for the pleasure. Now it's decision time: either he resumes a serious boxing career or he retires. A serious career basically means one of two choices. Either he moves to cruiserweight full time and goes shopping for more gilded plastic or he fulfill his post-fight musing and moves to heavyweight looking for a legacy fight with David Haye before he calls it a career.
In RingTV's weekend review, Michael Rosenthal makes his feelings quite clear:
Yes, he can still beat the majority of good fighters in and around his weight class. However, he’s talking about challenging heavyweight David Haye. Hopkins, a smart guy, is deluding himself if he thinks he can beat a fighter as big and good as the brash Briton. He’d get pummeled –- badly. The hope here is that Hopkins retires, leaving behind a wonderful legacy. If he must continue fighting, he should stick to relatively small and slow opponents. No one wants to see him get hurt.
I would be happy to see Mr. Hopkins retire now if that's what he wants, but I'd also be rather disappointed if his last fight was a personal vendetta that benefitted no one. It might be poetic, considering the Bon Jovi-esque qualities of his 'It's My Life' career, but it would still be disappointing.
An idle musing of The Ring's cruiserweight ratings tells me this: with one definite exception (Steve Cunningham: nearly as polished as Bernard, more athletic, and still in his prime or at its tail end) and one possible exception (Zsolt Erdei: maybe too fast for Hopkins at 45), Hopkins is even-money against the 200 lb Top Ten. Better against some of them. He could win a belt at 200 lbs, even make a serious championship run and go out on a great blaze in a classic fight. Yet I don't know what he would really add to his legacy by doing so and I am not sure the investment in physical punishment is worth the reward. If this were the only choice he was considering I'd advise retirement and the beginning of a career training Golden Boy prospects. Who wouldn't like to see the old man teach a new generation of American fighters to fight a lot better than most of them do?
I have to admit, though, that the Haye fight intrigues me.
Yeah. I said it.
For those who are thinking about the damage he took from Roy Jones' rabbit punch, it might not be the most important factor. Rabbit punches can really hurt people. That's why they are illegal. The fact that many referees fail to properly warn fighters as long as no one gets hurt, or that some fighters base their style on borderline rabbit punches, doesn't change that. Rabbit punches are really dangerous. It's why they are fouls. The after-effects Bernard experienced are precisely why they are illegal and do not necessarily reflect how he would take a legal blow. If the rabbit punch did the type of permanent damage that would make retirement necessary, it would show up on exams and licensing would be very difficult. If it hasn't, it shouldn't be a factor in the decision.
Forget Hopkins' age for a moment and then ignore the size difference as well. We'll get back to both.
Focus on the basics: Haye is a fast, powerful, athletic KO artist who is still a product in development regardless of his potential star power or his (meaningless) WBA strap. He has great talent, raw skills, and a questionable chin. His wins over Nikolai Valuev and John Ruiz have shown that his patience and self-discipline are improving. Bernard Hopkins is the perfect opponent to test/develop his technique. A close, ugly, controversial decision win (or loss) for Haye would be great for his development. If he blows Hopkins out, we know he's ready to try the Brothers K... let's face it, the only guys at heavy who would show even a semblance of Hopkins' polish have names ending in '-itschko.' If Hopkins exposes him, then he'll have a better map of what he needs to fix than anything anyone at heavyweight can show him.
That's why it's good for Haye, win lose or draw. It's good for Hopkins because he'll probably either provide a close, technical, tactical fight without a clear winner or win a huge upset.
Yes, Michael Rosenthal says he has no chance and he'll get his ass kicked. It's possible Hopkins could get old all at once and it could really happen. At 45, that's always a threat. It's happened to guys before.
Barring such a sudden event, however, when is the last time anyone kicked Bernard Hopkins' ass? Two men have beat him since he won the middleweight championship: Jermain Taylor and Joe Calzaghe. They both won the kind of close, technical, difficult fight that used to go to Hopkins over guys like Keith Holmes. There was some degree of controversy in all three of those defeats. Neither man came close to kicking Bernard's ass.
Hopkins has had his 'ass kicked' precisely twice: his first pro-fight and his first fight with Roy Jones Jr.
Of course there have been two occasions on which his ass-kicking was widely and loudly predicted: his fights with Felix Trinidad and Kelly Pavlik. In both cases much ass was kicked. Just not Bernard's.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not predicting that Hopkins can do that to Haye at heavyweight. I'm just saying that his two career defining wins came in fights in which he was a massive underdog. Before the Pavlik fight, when everyone was predicting a brutal KO that would end Hopkins' career, I admit I was wrong too: I said Pavlik would win a very close and potentially controversial decision. Hopkins surprised me.
I don't think that Bernard Hopkins will surprise me again. If he and David Haye fight, I think David Haye will win (or possibly lose, but I lean toward win) a very ugly decision of the kind Joe Calzaghe won. Don't be surprised if Hopkins manages a flash knockdown in round one in much the same way, Haye's chin and balance aren't all that.
Now, for those who cannot get over the issue of size: David Haye's claim to fame is as a big puncher at cruiserweight. At heavy, he's shown the ability to break guys down but he has not blown anyone out of the water. Like Michael Moorer before him, he's still a KO threat at 2001+... he's just no longer a sure, safe KO bet. Bernard Hopkins was talking about fighting Tomasz Adamek or Danny Green at cruiserweight before the Roy Jones fight. I think most people favored Bernard in those fights, and those who did were right to do so.
So riddle me this:
If Arreola-Adamek is a real fight which can get everyone excited, then how can Haye be safely predicted to blow Hopkins out of the water?
Tomas Adamek and Chris Arreola bring the same things to the table: good chins, solid punching power, fan-friendly styles. I've seen Adamek fight... he's entirely one dimensional. He's the stereotype of the old 'European fighter.' Jab, right hand, repeat until final bell. He doesn't throw a lot of combinations. Against Steve Cunningham (at cruiser) he won a very close fight on the basis of three knockdowns and came very close to being stopped early. At 175 he lost to Chad Dawson. Arreola isn't as fast as Dawson or as polished as Cunningham, but he hits a lot harder and has a heck of a chin. Even if Adamek brings all his power to heavyweight, Arreola is a very big slice of pie for him. If he doesn't, he's in for a very long... but very short... night. He faces much more risk of really being hurt... he's there to hit and he doesn't have a plan B if he can't hurt a guy. I expect Chris Arreola to win by KO3. It could happen faster. I can see Adamek making the first two or three rounds competitive with a bit of movement, but he's not Vitali Klitschko. He's not going to outslick Arreola and break him down. He's going to get caught and eventually ground down. His 'best case' scenario is to lose by KO6.
David Haye is a former cruiser, Bernard Hopkins has probably been a de facto cruiser for awhile. Sure, age is a factor. It's impossible to ignore '45'... but David Haye is neither tremendously bigger than Hopkins nor tremendously more skilled than guys at cruiser we would all admit, if pressed, we just can't see badly beating Bernard.
There's the crux of it. If Haye were still a cruiserweight, there would be some die-hard American boxing writers predicting a big Hopkins win in the same vein some predicted Hopkins schooling Calzaghe. Anyone actually reading this should take a moment to think about that and tell themselves honestly what they think about such a fight.
For those of you who still believe, despite all of my arguments, that a highly-skilled middleweight champ lacking one punch power can't be successful at heavyweight well-past his prime I have only two words.
James Toney.
No comments:
Post a Comment