Bernard Hopkins won't be happy just to get his WBC title back via a no-contest ruling for his fight with Chad Dawson -- he wants Dawson to be given a disqualification loss. From RingTV.com:

"First of all, I'm hoping that the commission in Los Angeles does the right thing and rewards my championship on paper back, and, second, disqualifies Chad Dawson for a flagrant foul.

"That was not an accident. I could have broken my neck or fractured a vertebrae. I've got a family. He's got a family. I've done things in the past. I've hit a guy on the hip. I've done things that a Jersey Joe Walcott or a Rocky Marciano would do. But I've never bitten anybody's ear. I've never picked nobody up and tried to throw them from the ring. I personally think that he should have been disqualified."

Hopkins has a lot more to say about the fight, about his critics, and about Chad Dawson in the article, so give it a click and read the whole thing.

But here's our question: What do you think should happen on December 13 when the California commission meets to discuss this? Golden Boy filed their appeal on Tuesday, so it's going to happen. Should the fight stand as it is (TKO-2 for Dawson, which I can't see), be ruled a no-contest, or be changed to a DQ win for Hopkins?