Printable View
He's had incredible success and longevity other boxers could only dream about. Some think he's one of the greatest ever, others think he's cherry-picked opponents and feasted on naturally smaller guys and doesn't deserve the praise he gets. Where do you think his place is in boxing history?
Hopkins still is a great great fighter... Proper Warrior in my book.
He did piss me off with his antics when Calzaghe started to get the upper hand and then go on to win but he is a genuine great.
Respect
Solid, crafty vet, good MW champ.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Unusually he lost his power early, but has managed to point out some decent wins against decent guys.
He's an all-time great. Not top, top level, but a great nonetheless.
There are two questions with regard to Hopkins' ranking: where should he be ranked all-time as a middleweight and where should he be ranked all-time in general?
I understand the man is 48, but it is probably best to wait until he 100% retired before we make an assessment. What if he beat the reigning super middleweight champion in Andre Ward?
As a middleweight, his reign was long, but his challengers weren't of the elite variety for the most part. He didn't face Toney and he lost to a prime Roy Jones. Who were his best wins at middleweight? Glen Johnson, Oscar De La Hoya, Felix Trinidad. Am I missing anyone?
In my opinion, he actually faced better competition above middleweight, coming up short in some fights (Calzaghe, Dawson), but beating others, Pascal, Wright, Tarver, Cloud and Pavlik.
He's still a TWAT.;D
He's not done yet, he could fight another four or five fights, who knows. Most of us didn't think he'd still be here now, so I'm not putting any limits on him.
Ask that question when he retires.
imo he's a living legend. Possibly near the bottom of top 25 p4p of all time. For sure in the top 50. That is a living legend
All time great for me, what he has done is brilliant and should be recognised as such.
I don't believe Bernard has lost his power.(is it not the last thing you lose). I think he just doesn't put as great an effort into his shots. Power punches take lots of energy an given his age he prefers to use guile ,cunning an the boat loads of experience he's got. No one can deny his achievements, at the top at 48 is incredible
I think he beat Calazaghe, Taylor and Pascal in the 1st fight. His only true loss since well Roy Jones IMO is Dawson.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rantcatrat
Legend and all time great. Where? We'll wait until he officially retires to judge but he is without a doubt one of the craftiest, self determined and technically sound professional boxers I've ever seen climb into a ring, live or on tape. He can say he literally did it his way and frankly I can admire his mindset as much as his skill.
"Decent" ? What is your definition of "good" ?Quote:
Originally Posted by VendettosSolid, crafty vet, good MW champ.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
Unusually he lost his power early, but has managed to point out some decent wins against decent guys.
Antonio Tarver, Jean Pascal, Kelly Pavlik, Winky Wright and Tavoris Cloud were only "decent" ?
There is no pleasing some people. If you hate or dislike a fighter then no matter what he does he can't win you over.
I believe Hopkins to be a bonafide all time great. Lesser fighters have been given the title that is for certain.
Hopkins is a credit to boxing. He took the time to learn his trade, and to master it, and he was a consumate professional. Always in shape, always ready to give whatever it took. He had his lapses- the two fights with Jermain Taylor, for example. And I bet he kicks his own ass daily, seeing now how weak Taylor really was.
That said, I believe his longevity is a real result of the dumbing down of boxing. He fights a lot of guys that are boxing dumb. Of course, the same thing was said about Archie Moore in the 1950s, and, given the sudden dearth of club shows and so on, it was probably valid. But the guys Moore fought were leagues above the guys Hopkins has fought, just as Moore was smarter than Hopkins could ever be. Because Moore fought Charley Burley and ezzard Charles and Eddie Booker and Jack chase and the list goes ever on. Hopkins never fought smart guys like that.
He had a bunch of defenses at MW, and that has to be worth something, but it doesn't make him a better fighter than guys that had less. I don't think he beats Hagler or Monzon, or Toney (though neither were as smart as they got later)....Honestly, in head to head matches, I don't know if he'd break my top 30 at that weight. There were some great fighters that never won a title.
Fair assessment. He literally let Taylor off the cliff and to this day I think his arrogance cost him the 1st one as much as Taylors bow & arrow stiff jab and right. It was fairly obvious that the Cloud fight would be similiar the Pavlik fight in that both were guys who while strong, young and with authority on punches, they were also unimaginative and had tunnel vision in the ring. Hopkins was winning rounds on them psychcologically before the bell even sounded and that is a legitimate huge part of his game. Shit I think Ornelus gave him a tougher fight and actually buzzed him more than both. Cloud was taylor made but facing Pascal x 2, Dawson x2 he was in with two guys with sound boxing minds and top competition available. Toney vs Hopkins is one we'll always wish we had when it comes to those "If only" misses but I'm convinced Hopkins, at middle and at best, would take Toney over 12. Hustle and not playing into his rolling counter game killed Toney and he'd get no time outs with Hopkins I believe. Hagler tops him there taken into account mind set at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
Just another Disney actor.
/thread