Thread: 43 Year old Hopkins is Prime Hopkins ?

Before you shoot me down this statement has a question mark. The arguments you could make are:

a.) What are Nard's best wins? Arguably Tarver, (who was favourite) Winky and Pavlik (best performance I've seen from Nard) People may argue, but who else did he fight that people thought would beat him as much as people thought those 3 would? (maybe Tito?) So he has arguably been at his best since moving up from Middleweight.

b.) Kelly Pavlik would’ve beaten all of these Middleweight opponents that B-Hop faced. I think Jermain Taylor would’ve too.

Robert Allen
William Joppy
Morrade Hakkar
Carl Daniels
Keith Holmes
Antwon Echols
Syd Vanderpool
Simon Brown (arguable)
Andrrew Council
John David Jackson
William Bo James
Joe Lipsey
Glen Johnson (arguable)
Steve Frank
Segundo Mercado


b.) The Hopkins of today would not lose to Jermain Taylor

c.) I have never seen B-Hop look better than Pavlik and I seriously think Pavlik is one of the best ‘Middleweights’ Nard has fought (o.k it wasn't at MW)


Now I don't really think he is at his best right now, but this proves how you can also use facts to suit your argument. Fact is RJJ, Calzaghe and B-Hop all have a lot of dross on their record - Fact (cheers Fenster )

I think you could definitely make the case. His physical skills have obviously eroded somewhat due to his age, but his in the ring intelligence is more impressive now than ever before, and like you say, his recently performances are the best of his career.

Bernard Hopkins is just a FREAK! of a man no fighter can do what he does or compete like he does he does it at the highest level and wins he is 43 years old its just crazy and i think he is BRILLIANT!.

Originally Posted by tysonbruno

Bernard Hopkins is just a FREAK! of a man no fighter can do what he does or compete like he does he does it at the highest level and wins he is 43 years old its just crazy and i think he is BRILLIANT!.

got to agree with that!

Originally Posted by tysonbruno

Bernard Hopkins is just a FREAK! of a man no fighter can do what he does or compete like he does he does it at the highest level and wins he is 43 years old its just crazy and i think he is BRILLIANT!.

100% agreed. I had more body fat than that when I was born lol. It shows how important it is to stay at weight and in shape between fights. Like you say he is a freak and a legend

Well i think the younger version of Bernard Hopkins, would of been much more effective against Jermain Taylor, Joe Calzaghe. But i also think he would of been less effective against Kelly Pavlik.

Simply because in his younger days he had amazing stamina, and good power. Which he doesn't seem to have anymore, and his aggressive/rough style would of been effective against Jermain Taylor, who has stamina problems.

And it would of been more effective against Joe Calzaghe, because Joe Calzaghe has struggled in rough/tough fights before. But against Kelly Pavlik he would of been leaving himself more open, and it would of been more of a war and much more competitive.

Styles make fights i think something's Bernard Hopkins does now he does better than he used to. Like being better defensively and ETC.

But he also does alot of things better before than he does now. Like having much better stamina, aswell as better punching power ETC.

I think the younger Bernard Hopkins would beat the current version of Bernard Hopkins.

Originally Posted by ICB

Well i think the younger version of Bernard Hopkins, would of been much more effective against Jermain Taylor, Joe Calzaghe. But i also think he would of been less effective against Kelly Pavlik.

Simply because in his younger days he had amazing stamina, and good power. Which he doesn't seem to have anymore, and his aggressive/rough style would of been effective against Jermain Taylor, who has stamina problems.

And it would of been more effective against Joe Calzaghe, because Joe Calzaghe has struggled in rough/tough fights before. But against Kelly Pavlik he would of been leaving himself more open, and it would of been more of a war and much more competitive.

Styles make fights i think something's Bernard Hopkins does now he does better than he used to. Like being better defensively and ETC.

But he also does alot of things better before than he does now. Like having much better stamina, aswell as better punching power ETC.

I think the younger Bernard Hopkins would beat the current version of Bernard Hopkins.

To be honest mate so do I, but I am kinda saying that you can always find ways to change arguments if you look hard enough.

Didn't we just do this 2 weeks ago? Or right after Hopkins beat Pavlik. The consensus is that Bernard is NOT in his prime its ridiculous to say. Also look at who he has just beaten

Old, overweight Winky, barely
Old, weightdrained Tarver impressive, but still Tarver was a zombie in there

The only great fight he has had was against Joe Calzaghe and they came up about even either way.
And the Pavlik fight, but still I thought it was obvious his style would do that to Pavlik.

You can't compare him and his competition to his prime because the guys he is fighting aren't in their prime either, except Pavlik but that was obvious if HOpkins fought he would win like that, at least to me.

Originally Posted by Taeth

Didn't we just do this 2 weeks ago? Or right after Hopkins beat Pavlik. The consensus is that Bernard is NOT in his prime its ridiculous to say. Also look at who he has just beaten

Old, overweight Winky, barely
Old, weightdrained Tarver impressive, but still Tarver was a zombie in there

The only great fight he has had was against Joe Calzaghe and they came up about even either way.
And the Pavlik fight, but still I thought it was obvious his style would do that to Pavlik.

You can't compare him and his competition to his prime because the guys he is fighting aren't in their prime either, except Pavlik but that was obvious if HOpkins fought he would win like that, at least to me.

I refer the Right Honourable Gnetleman to the answer I gave some moments ago

Originally Posted by Taeth

Didn't we just do this 2 weeks ago? Or right after Hopkins beat Pavlik. The consensus is that Bernard is NOT in his prime its ridiculous to say. Also look at who he has just beaten

Old, overweight Winky, barely
Old, weightdrained Tarver impressive, but still Tarver was a zombie in there

The only great fight he has had was against Joe Calzaghe and they came up about even either way.
And the Pavlik fight, but still I thought it was obvious his style would do that to Pavlik.

You can't compare him and his competition to his prime because the guys he is fighting aren't in their prime either, except Pavlik but that was obvious if HOpkins fought he would win like that, at least to me.

It's not ridiculous to say btw. Some people get better with age.
Look at Randy Cotoure.

Originally Posted by Taeth

Didn't we just do this 2 weeks ago? Or right after Hopkins beat Pavlik. The consensus is that Bernard is NOT in his prime its ridiculous to say. Also look at who he has just beaten

Old, overweight Winky, barely
Old, weightdrained Tarver impressive, but still Tarver was a zombie in there

The only great fight he has had was against Joe Calzaghe and they came up about even either way.
And the Pavlik fight, but still I thought it was obvious his style would do that to Pavlik.

You can't compare him and his competition to his prime because the guys he is fighting aren't in their prime either, except Pavlik but that was obvious if HOpkins fought he would win like that, at least to me.

In that case which fights do you think warrant B-Hop being a great? Robert Allen, Joe Lipsey? John David Jackson?

I don't know about that,Maybe Hopkins has had one of the longest primes ever seen in a fighter....albeit with a bump or two . Would we be asking this questione if it were not for his dominate preformance against heavy favorite Pavlik?

I think it's a collective and a blending of styles.No doubt that he is much more ring savy and more intelligent fighter than he was years ago,as opposed to his past offensive mind set and output.He was always stubborn and refused to division jump until very late.Whatever the shape of the middleweight division then,he cleaned it out.He is a great fighter...bottom line.

Also if we are going to include Hakkar and Frank on the list,I'd have to include Eastman and......cough.......Baptist and even Aquino.I'm not convinced Pavlik would beat Joppy or even Holmes at their very best after seeing his inability to adjust to movement.Call me nuts.Its all maybe's and might haves though.

It might not be so bad if one was to hit a prime that late in career....shite,now I have something to look forward too

Its not even debatable IMO, I just don't see it, Bernard Hopkins was a truly great fighter in his prime, its just a shame he didn't get a chance to fight the Tito's (maybe he was still in his prime there, its close), Pavlik's Calzaghe's and Taylor's then.

I think the move up in weight helped him later on but he's not in his prime.

Doesn't mean I think he'd blow out a prime Calzaghe. I'd pick him but it would be an interesting fight.

Pavlik and Tito would have always been easy fights for him. Straight line guys who have to set their feet to punch, not so much.

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by Taeth

Didn't we just do this 2 weeks ago? Or right after Hopkins beat Pavlik. The consensus is that Bernard is NOT in his prime its ridiculous to say. Also look at who he has just beaten

Old, overweight Winky, barely
Old, weightdrained Tarver impressive, but still Tarver was a zombie in there

The only great fight he has had was against Joe Calzaghe and they came up about even either way.
And the Pavlik fight, but still I thought it was obvious his style would do that to Pavlik.

You can't compare him and his competition to his prime because the guys he is fighting aren't in their prime either, except Pavlik but that was obvious if HOpkins fought he would win like that, at least to me.

In that case which fights do you think warrant B-Hop being a great? Robert Allen, Joe Lipsey? John David Jackson?

Because he was old as well, He fought at Tarver's weight, he dominated the middleweight division for as long as he did without any trouble. Back to why do I think he is great? JUST WATCH him in his prime, he was amazing. How many times do I ahve to say you don't need a certain opposition to be great, its how you fight. Whether its Bernard winning for so long the way he did or Calzaghe doing it or Jones doing it or Mayweather doing it, they all are great fighter, to bring it every fight is something VERY few people can do.