Comparing Floyd and Bhop's opposition

i was challenged to make a thread about this to state my case as to why floyd has had a greater career than bhop. i will mainly talk about opposition and how they fared in these fights.

bhop:
jones: bhop was green and jones had a broken hand. jones easily won this fight. no controversy. no shame in losing this fight though because most people arent going to beat jones.
johnson: this was before johnson was really the road warrior that we all got to know him as. he handed johnson his first loss and only stoppage loss (although by cuts) in his career until his most recent fight. good win.
trinidad: trinidad moved up in weight for this fight and was a heavy favorite for some reason. he had just recently gotten a gift decision against de la hoya. he was a good fighter but very one dimensional. bad style for bhop. good win but i wouldnt say great because of the weight factor.
de la hoya: i couldnt believe this fight was happening because de la hoya was nowhere near the size of bhop. i thought that it would be a complete blowout and assumed this fight happened just for money sake. de la hoya actually did a lot better than i expected but bhop was too big and eventually landed a good shot. not a great win because of the size difference. and remember that de la hoya had just gotten a gift against sturm right before this fight.
taylor: taylor came up through the rankings quickly. i never thought he was that great but i believe he had the style to beat bhop because of his reach and jab. i thought that taylor won the first fight and bhop won the second. pretty good win.
tarver: by this time, i think that most people thought that bhop was done (including me) because he just had back to back losses to taylor and was 40 years old. this win was impressive but i think its a bit blown out of proportion because no one was expecting him to come out like the bhop of old and win. solid win either way.
calzaghe: not much to say about this fight. could have gone either way but he did pretty well. bhop didnt necessarily impress but didnt really hurt his case either.
pavlik: pavlik became the MW champ and was thought to be too much for bhop. again, i think that this win is a little blown out of proportion because of bhops age and what everybody expected to happen in the fight. good win but again, a bit blown out of proportion.
dawson: we will refrain from talking about the first fight. the second fight was all dawson. wrong style for bhop. he was too quick and had too good of a jab.
kovalev: maybe age had to do with it although i dont think any version of bhop would have won this fight. kovalev was too big and too disciplined.

those are his 10 best/noticable opponents i would say. he came up short against a few of them which is fine. i dont expect everybody to go undefeated. but honestly, who is his best win? i would say that tarver and pavlik are probably his most impressive wins. both good fighters who he easily beat. you could argue tito but again, the weight issue makes me less impressed although its still a good win and impressive. so his best wins arent really anything great. like i said before, his longevity at the top makes his legacy more than his actual resume or his greatness in the ring.

floyd:
hernandez: not really a close fight. floyds first title win. he did it while he was still young and did it impressively against a good veteran. good win.
corrales: was a favorite to beat floyd and was thought to be very dangerous. floyd absolutely destroyed corrales. great win.
castillo: disputed first win but decisive second win. castillo was a good, tough fighter who was an experienced fighter. i know the excuse in the first fight was that his hands were bad but whatever. good win in the second fight.
judah: bad style match up for floyd but he adapted after the first 4 rounds and took over the fight pretty easily. pretty good win.
de la hoya: although he may have been past his best, the fight was at 154 which was a disadvantage to floyd. personally, i thought that de la hoya was still good at this time and thought that he would win convincingly. i was impressed at this win at least. good win.
hatton: undefeated and was a solid fighter. i was never super impressed by hatton but he was a good fighter either way. and people talk about hatton having to move up in weight but floyd started at a smaller weight and i guarantee that floyd walked around lighter than hatton did (obviously). very good win.
marquez: there is controversy to this win with the whole weight issue. i agree that floyd definitely had the weight advantage. tainted win but still alright.
mosley: mosley was old but still decent. just came off a destruction win against margo. this is also the same mosley that roach wouldnt allow pac near even though mosley constantly asked for the fight at this time. other than round 2, floyd completely embarrassed mosley and pretty much ended his career.
cotto: bad style match up for floyd i believe. one of his tougher fights but still convincingly won. cotto has shown that he still has it so i wouldnt say that cotto was way past his best or anything. very good win.
canelo: up and coming 154 pounder. floyd went up and weight and shut him out. the fight wasnt close. good win.

it was harder picking floyds top 10. he had some other fighters that could have been in there. his best wins are probably castillo, de la hoya, and cotto. he also beat all of those fighters (castillo can be debated though).

so if you look at both of their top 10 wins, you may be able to say that bhop has a better resume (although i would disagree) but he lost to many of his best opponents while floyd beat them all and beat most of them convincingly. floyd is hands down the greater fighter. he will go down as one of the greatest fighters ever known for his skills while bhop will go down as an anamoly who could hold up at an advanced age unlike anybody that the sports world has ever seen.

so the answer is that floyd is definitely better while bhop has a very impressive accomplishment with his longevity.

It's just silly that there are people who would even claim Bhop was the better fighter. It's just ridiculous ;D

I understand people having boxers they love and hate, and I certainly understand people hating Floyd, but it's a shame so many people let their hatred ruin their good judgement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

It's just silly that there are people who would even claim Bhop was the better fighter. It's just ridiculous ;D

I understand people having boxers they love and hate, and I certainly understand people hating Floyd, but it's a shame so many people let their hatred ruin their good judgement.

---

Agree but in my opinion he has fought the better fighters. I dont think i can have Hopkins as an all time great. Terrific fighter and wins over Trinidad and Pavlik were the peaks of his career but not sure if that earns you an ATG spot. Floyd almost certainly will go down as an ATG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

I dont think i can have Hopkins as an all time great.

---

We're going to have to part company on that one, he spent about 10 years as the #1 middleweight in the world, was one of the most intelligent boxers to ever step in the ring, world class skills and had longevity and consistency like nobody else in the history of the sport.

If Bhop isn't an ATG on your list, I think your criteria is a little too selective.

Let me make this perfectly fucking clear. I dont hate Floyd. I dont hate Hopkins. My personal feelings for these two does not even enter the equation. If people want to say that Bernard is just as good a boxer so what. Criticizing them for saying so does not provide evidence to the contrary. Its simply a statement.

These child like responses that put all who disagree with Floyd robots as some kind of "hater" is both freakin hilarious, myopic and plain stupid. Its not dialogue its dogma.

Floyd took very little risks.
Hop took nothing but risks
Floyd fought guys that had no chance to beat him
Hop fought guys that could all beat him
Floyd never unified one division
Hop unified middle and double dipped 175 at close to 50
Floyd has never fought outside Vegas
Hop has fought all over the place
Floyd had a boyfriend ref in Cortez
Hop never had a ref in his pocket
Floyd has never jumped two weight classes to take on the man of a division
Hop has
Floyd has never dropped back down to fight a champion
Hop has
Floyds main reason for fighting at all is money
Hops main reason for fighting was/is legacy.
Floyd has coveted the 0
Hop has coveted his place in history.
Floyd has used the Arum excuse to avoid certain fights
Hop has never claimed a bridge burned as a reason not to fight.
Floyd thinks boxing is all about ppv
Hop thinks its all about the challenge

Steve Frank
Joe Lipsey
William Bo James
John David Jackson
Glenn Johnson
Andrew Council
Robert Allen
Robert Allen
Antwun Echols
Syd Vanderpool
Antwun Echols
Keith Holmes
Felix Trinidad
Carl Daniels
Morrade Hakkar
William Joppy
Robert Allen
Oscar De la Hoya
Howard Eastman

Those are the guys Hopkins defended his title against successfully and while there ARE some good names out there a lot of those names came from 154 and they were not "true middleweights" and that's where a lot of the criticism of Hopkins comes from. There were certainly threats to Hopkins at 168, but it isn't required that a fighter move up if he can run a division.

Floyd on the other hand has done the exact opposite he never stayed put in 1 division for long. He moved fight to fight and took on some interesting (and some not so interesting) fighters.


The crux of the argument is "What is ducking fighters" and "What is domination"? Is it moving division to division or is it staying put? Is it taking on the best of boxing in general or the best of your division? I personally think Floyd could have taken the Hopkins route but would have gotten bored with the monotony of the same stagnant division. I think BHop could have jumped division to division and had great success as well, but I believe he liked the consistency of middleweight and hell he had a formula that worked, give up about 4 rounds, warm up, and close the show with purpose (not typically a KO, but dominate at the end).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

The crux of the argument is "What is ducking fighters" and "What is domination"? Is it moving division to division or is it staying put? Is it taking on the best of boxing in general or the best of your division? I personally think Floyd could have taken the Hopkins route but would have gotten bored with the monotony of the same stagnant division. I think BHop could have jumped division to division and had great success as well, but I believe he liked the consistency of middleweight and hell he had a formula that worked, give up about 4 rounds, warm up, and close the show with purpose (not typically a KO, but dominate at the end).

---

It's a good question. I admire both. I admire Hopkins for his consistency and discipline to stay at the same weight, but I also admire guys like Floyd, Pac, SRR, Roy Jones, ect ect who transcended weight divisions and titles.

El the middleweight division stopped being the division it was when boxing went from 8 to 17 and no other middleweight after the expansion had any tougher era and all of them fought x welters.

It just kills me to no end that here we have a guy in Hopkins that is nothing short o a modern day Archie Moore and all people can do is belittle him. In fact its not just him. People spend their entire days on forums shitting on these guys. Every fighter Floyd has faced has been spat and shit on as guys with no chance and then when he's beaten them they become some incredible opponent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IamInuit

Let me make this perfectly fucking clear. I dont hate Floyd. I dont hate Hopkins. My personal feelings for these two does not even enter the equation. If people want to say that Bernard is just as good a boxer so what. Criticizing them for saying so does not provide evidence to the contrary. Its simply a statement.

These child like responses that put all who disagree with Floyd robots as some kind of "hater" is both freakin hilarious, myopic and plain stupid. Its not dialogue its dogma.

Floyd took very little risks.
Hop took nothing but risks
Floyd fought guys that had no chance to beat him
Hop fought guys that could all beat him
Floyd never unified one division
Hop unified middle and double dipped 175 at close to 50
Floyd has never fought outside Vegas
Hop has fought all over the place
Floyd had a boyfriend ref in Cortez
Hop never had a ref in his pocket
Floyd has never jumped two weight classes to take on the man of a division
Hop has
Floyd has never dropped back down to fight a champion
Hop has
Floyds main reason for fighting at all is money
Hops main reason for fighting was/is legacy.
Floyd has coveted the 0
Hop has coveted his place in history.
Floyd has used the Arum excuse to avoid certain fights
Hop has never claimed a bridge burned as a reason not to fight.
Floyd thinks boxing is all about ppv
Hop thinks its all about the challenge

---

Bro you can say you don't hate Floyd all you want, if you say it enough you might actually start believing it yourself, but you sound like a little kid. You're talking about Floyd taking very little risk, you're bringing up where they choose to fight (LOL), you're talking about corrupt refs, who fights for money and who fights for legacy (LOL)... it's some funny shit, dude. It's some hipster shit hahaha.

It reminds me of when you try to talk music with a hipster and he can't stop telling you how "pure" music was back in the day because you actually needed talent, maaaaaaaan, and nobody cared about the money maaaaaaaaan, it was just for the love of the music and they didn't use sex to sell records, MAAAAAAAAAAN. Hahahaha it's just brutal.

It's some scorned lover shit haha. Personally I don't like either guy. Bhop has a boring personality and a boring fight style, Floyd is a woman-beating prick who deserves to be in jail.

It just so happens that both are geniuses and prodigies in boxing. I'd love to come here and say they both stink and are overrated but I can't, I'd just be lying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IamInuit

El the middleweight division stopped being the division it was when boxing went from 8 to 17 and no other middleweight after the expansion had any tougher era and all of them fought x welters.

It just kills me to no end that here we have a guy in Hopkins that is nothing short o a modern day Archie Moore and all people can do is belittle him. In fact its not just him. People spend their entire days on forums shitting on these guys. Every fighter Floyd has faced has been spat and shit on as guys with no chance and then when he's beaten them they become some incredible opponent.

---

Absolutely agree man! Floyd has ALWAYS wanted things both ways Pre-fight:"This guy isn't in my league" Post fight: "That guy was a great boxer and I demolished him, praise me!" .....Floyd's lack of humility has indeed hurt how people view him. I think Floyd wanted to be the welterweight version of Ali, always bragging, adored, and despised, loved, and hated, cult of personality, etc.

Bernard Hopkins was very much a blue collar kind of champion. Sure he had his theater with his masks and all that mess, but at the end of the day he was a cagey fighter who defended his title time and time again like clockwork but got little praise and little media buzz for what he did. Maybe it's due to his style being more cagey than flashy, maybe it's because he's not a pretty guy, maybe it's because he's an ex-con, or maybe it's because other peers of Hopkins were stealing his spotlight ie RJJ & James Toney....Mayweather Jr. didn't have to deal with that all that much as he was never the PEER of Mosley or De la Hoya, but more the Next Generation Star. also Floyd comes from a boxing family, had amateur successes, and was groomed by HBO to be that "Next Big Thing" (no disrespect to Floyd because he has after all backed up everything he's said), Hopkins earned everything he ever achieved in the business.

Who faced the tougher opposition?

There's a good argument Hopkins did, but he also lost.

Who'd they miss? Who should Hopkins have faced and didn't? Same for Floyd.

I would argue Floyd's best wins are Corrales and De La Hoya. I think?

I'm less impressed by Floyd's recent opponents, considering his contemporaries faced tougher opposition. For example, Cotto faced Pacquiao, Margarito, Trout and Martinez, and at least Pacquiao was in his prime, and Mayweather didn't face any of them.

Hopkins' recent opponents, Calzaghe, Dawson, Pascal, and Kovalev are probably better than any of Floyd's in that time period, although, once again, Hopkins lost.

Why the fuck is preferring one over the other hating? Can anyone with a straight face and stable mind deny Mayweathers ability and skill? Personally I place Hopkins a notch above Mayweather when it comes to all time or 'great' based on opposition faced, career longevity and adaptability, style(s) and on a side note he did it all with no one setting the table for him and from the bottom up.

The gap is not as big as I thought it would be as I thought Floyd was better as he has dominated more weight divisions that B Hop. However Hopkins opponents at the weight are more challenging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

adaptability, style(s)

---

Please please please explain to me how Hopkins beats Floyd in adaptability?

;D

Hopkins pulled off a lot more big upsets than Floyd, but to be fair Floyd has hardly ever (if ever) been an underdog.

Someone explain to me also how going up in weight and dominating Tarver is any better than going up in weight and beating Canelo Alvarez?

Tarver was a solid fighter and the #1 at LHW at the time for sure, but he had 3 losses on his record and had been beaten by Glen Johnson just a few fights previous.

Canelo was the #1 at his division too. Young, undefeated and has gone on to regain the #1 spot in his division now that Floyd has dropped back to WW.

Someone explain to me how the Tarver win is a much higher quality win, because I don't get it.

It's the same story every time, people make these statements, and when you ask them to justify their opinion they get all defensive and start screaming about "oohhh I guess no one can disagree with anyone here" and "ooohh I guess I nobody can criticize Floyd."

What ever happened to actually having logic to back an opinion or idea? Sheesh ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Hopkins pulled off a lot more big upsets than Floyd, but to be fair Floyd has hardly ever (if ever) been an underdog.

Someone explain to me also how going up in weight and dominating Tarver is any better than going up in weight and beating Canelo Alvarez?

Tarver was a solid fighter and the #1 at LHW at the time for sure, but he had 3 losses on his record and had been beaten by Glen Johnson just a few fights previous.

Canelo was the #1 at his division too. Young, undefeated and has gone on to regain the #1 spot in his division now that Floyd has dropped back to WW.

Someone explain to me how the Tarver win is a much higher quality win, because I don't get it.

---

Beating Canelo is a great victory, very under rated.

I dont think the Alavrez win was underrated. Alvarez is a good fighter. Good defense, decent power, reasonably fast, decent movement but I have never rated him as great at any of this. Trout is a good fighter and gave him so much trouble that there was no doubt in my mind Floyd would school him. I also thought Lara would school him and while it wasnt a schooling I still think he should have won. Thats too many off days for me to consider Alvarez great.

As for Bhop I agree what he did for 10 years at MW was special but apart from Trinidad the competition really wasnt that good. De la Hoya really shouldnt have been at the weight and had just got a gift of a win over Sturm in the previous fight. For me he lost his 4 biggest fights. Jones Jr, Calzaghe, Taylor and Dawson and had he won one or 2 of these id have him as an all time great. Dont get me wrong he has had a great career just not of an ATG in my mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

adaptability, style(s)

---

Please please please explain to me how Hopkins beats Floyd in adaptability?

;D

---

His entire career was adaptability, literally from very early search and destroy to retooling his approach to the far too often broad brush and dismissal of the defensive sniper stuff he does. Yeh, sometimes it's ugly, but it's also gritty, cagey and full of guile you don't just learn overnight. Both fighters regardless of fandom can be very hunt and peck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Hopkins pulled off a lot more big upsets than Floyd, but to be fair Floyd has hardly ever (if ever) been an underdog.

Someone explain to me also how going up in weight and dominating Tarver is any better than going up in weight and beating Canelo Alvarez?

Tarver was a solid fighter and the #1 at LHW at the time for sure, but he had 3 losses on his record and had been beaten by Glen Johnson just a few fights previous.

Canelo was the #1 at his division too. Young, undefeated and has gone on to regain the #1 spot in his division now that Floyd has dropped back to WW.

Someone explain to me how the Tarver win is a much higher quality win, because I don't get it.

---

In fairness Tarver could say he had knocked out and beaten a great. As well the weight jump was a little bit more significant as opposed to some 1,2 lb catch weight carnival. Alvarez was a quality fight and match and scalp for Mayweather but he hadn't been in the deep end on a large scale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iaminuit

let me make this perfectly fucking clear. I dont hate floyd. I dont hate hopkins. My personal feelings for these two does not even enter the equation. If people want to say that bernard is just as good a boxer so what. Criticizing them for saying so does not provide evidence to the contrary. Its simply a statement.

These child like responses that put all who disagree with floyd robots as some kind of "hater" is both freakin hilarious, myopic and plain stupid. Its not dialogue its dogma.

Floyd took very little risks.
Hop took nothing but risks
floyd fought guys that had no chance to beat him
hop fought guys that could all beat him
floyd never unified one division
hop unified middle and double dipped 175 at close to 50
floyd has never fought outside vegas
hop has fought all over the place
floyd had a boyfriend ref in cortez
hop never had a ref in his pocket
floyd has never jumped two weight classes to take on the man of a division
hop has
floyd has never dropped back down to fight a champion
hop has
floyds main reason for fighting at all is money
hops main reason for fighting was/is legacy.
Floyd has coveted the 0
hop has coveted his place in history.
Floyd has used the arum excuse to avoid certain fights
hop has never claimed a bridge burned as a reason not to fight.
Floyd thinks boxing is all about ppv
hop thinks its all about the challenge

---

hahahahaha!!!!!!

[QUOTE=Spicoli;1280370]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

His entire career was adaptability, literally from very early search and destroy to retooling his approach to the far too often broad brush and dismissal of the defensive sniper stuff he does. Yeh, sometimes it's ugly, but it's also gritty, cagey and full of guile you don't just learn overnight. Both fighters regardless of fandom can be very hunt and peck.

---

Bhop adopted for sure, but can we say he was more adaptive than Floyd? Whenever Bhop ran into a tough style for him, he seemed to lose. He never made the adjustments to Jermain Taylor to find a way to win. He even had a second chance, and again could not adapt. He couldn't adapt to Cazlaghe, Dawson, or Kovalev. He kept doing the same thing.

Floyd has consistently made adjustments and gotten stronger as the fight progressed. We saw it with Mosley. With Castillo, who arguably should have won the first fight, he adjusted and dominated the rematch. With Oscar, he adjusted and controlled the mid and later parts of the fight. He took over the mid and later rounds vs Maidana and dominated the rematch.

Floyd has been adapting his style seamlessly into his advanced age, as his legs have started to go we've seen him start working smarter to compensate.

If Floyd was to fight GGG that would be on par with BHop fighting Kovalev....it was a very dangerous fight for anyone much less a 50 year old

Remember how Bernard was completely dominated--every second of every round for 12 rounds? That was awesome!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

If Floyd was to fight GGG that would be on par with BHop fighting Kovalev....it was a very dangerous fight for anyone much less a 50 year old

---

I don't know how that works because Bhop and Kovalev were in the same weight division and of similar size and weight. GGG is two divisions up from Floyd, and even at WW Floyd is routinely outweighed by more of a gap than Kovalev outweighed Bhop, which I believe was 7 lbs.

Hop IMO does't have a resume that questions who he didn't fight.

I think we all can find a fighter or two that PBF didn't fight: For me its Paul Williams who wanted him @ WW, Margarito as well... and a guy named: pacman.

That's why PBF has adjusted to all his challenges: because he chose which ones and when, Hop didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

That's why PBF has adjusted to all his challenges: because he chose which ones and when, Hop didn't.

---

Yeah, is that so?

I remember Hopkins turning down Kovalev as a replacement opponent for him a short time ago, saying Kovalev didn't deserve to fight him.

I remember Hopkins turning rejecting a 2.5 million dollar offer from Frank Warren to fight Joe Calzaghe in 2004.

I remember Hopkins being accused of ducking Chad Dawson when Dawson was the next big thing coming.

I remember Hopkins turning down a 60/40 split to fight then-p4p king Roy Jones.

But you're right... it's all about the legacy for Hopkins, he doesn't care one bit about money ;D

So some would like to split hairs eh, well ok.


Floyd challenged Hernendez for the 130 title in 98. Hernendez was battle worn, 33 years old and retired right after the fight.

He defended against Manfredy. Just what happened in that fight and why was it stopped?

Next was Rios. A 30 year old pseudo gate keeper.

Then Jukko, Genera, Vargas and Augustus. Opponents.

Then came Chico. Does anyone actually believe that Chico's head was even there? The guy was about a week away from going to the big house. I'm surprised they went through with the fight.

Next came Carlos Hernandez who was shell shocked and dominated 4 years earlier by the same Genaro Hernandez that Floyd beat and he was able to drop Floyd.

Chavez was next up to the plate and he did pretty well until he gassed.

Then came Castillo at 135 and we all saw that first fight. Big points for Floyd going after that rematch and winning it. That was a great win over a very good fighter but Cortez made his presence known and would go on to do so anytime Floyd was faced with a swarmer/crowding type fighter.

Sosa and Ndou were next at 135. Sosa was an unknown Dominican who fought one person with a pulse prior to Floyd in Spadafora and was soundly beaten. Ndou may have been 30 and 1 when he fought Floyd but go take a look at his opposition.

Then came a 140 eliminator with Corley who did give him some issues with his speed and southpaw approach. He rocked Floyd pretty good at one point. Demarcus was no world beater albeit managing to out point Bailey and barely lose his title to Judah.

Floyd then fought another 140 eliminator against Brussels. I guess he was a contender. So this brings us to 2005.

Arturro Gatti for the 140 WBC title followed keeping that close to 10 year relationship alive. Gatti had went to the well far to many times. To come clean though I actually thought he had a shot based on Floyds shady competition up to that point. Needless to say it was another mismatch.

Mitchell was the next victim and then he jumped up to fight Judah for a Welter paper title that for some reason Judah did not lose when he lost to Carlos Baldomir. Judah was the beginning of name plate recognition.
Nobody in boxing thought he'd make it to 12 but he did and actually did better then expected until he started watching himself.

Floyd doesn’t bother with the Ibf tin but then fights Baldo for the Wbc strap he took off Judah. You'd almost think all of this shit was preplanned.

Oscar was next and to Floyds credit he jumped right up to 154 and the shot at super stardom but was Oscar in his prime in 2007? Name plate number 2. And to Oscars credit he stuck with him until he stopped using his jab.

Hatton was next and I'll just say that Cortez absolutely ruined that fight and did what he was indirectly hired to do. It was pathetic and anyone who stands by the “it wouldn’t have made a difference” is daft with little or no understanding of the sport they pretend to be keen on. Not even Name plate rec on this horror show.

Then it was Marquez for some reason. Pretty much a career featherweight who was having difficulty so wandered up to 130/135. This is the fight after close to a 2 year retirement. And he could not even make the weight he agreed to while Marquez was sporting a suit of new flab. Lets just call this for what it was, A joke.

Its now 2009 and his next mark is Shane but it was a dollar short and a decade late. Name plate number 3.

A year later in 2011 its Victor Ortiz and just look at who the ref was and the job he did. Yup that's right Mr. Cortez with yet another academy performance.

FF close to another year and we see Floyd against Cotto in 2012 prior to going to jail. Ugly fight that Floyd did not look all the great in understandably but the boxing world had already thrown Cotto under the bus and again his prime was killed in cement gate. Name plate number 4

Another year passes an its 2013 and he fights Guerrero. Now Robert earned it I guess by jumping up 2 divisions and beating Aydin and Berto but was the result anything but expected

To his credit just a few months later he agrees to Alvarez but of course there is a catch which then turns into another pass for Floyd in the minds of many. Floyd does a nice job but Alvarez held his own.

And lastly Maidana. A fighter all but dismissed by everyone as a no hoper and we witnessed what we did. Sadly he had no Cortez.

Hardly a ledger that justifies the trumpets.

So endeth my hair splitting.

Again, we can nitpick all we want but I say that the only fighter that bhop faced that was clearly better than any of Floyd's opponents was Jones. I thnk that the rest aren't that different. For example, I don't think the calzaghe fight is any better or worse than Floyd's fight with Oscar. Or I don't think Floyd's fight with canelo is any better than bhops win over pavlik.

Like I said before, I believe that Bhop gets a lot of credit for certain wins because he was old rather than his opponent being great. For example, if he were younger and got a draw against Pascal, it would have been seen as Bhop failing. So he has been in a win win situation for the past 10 years because when he wins its incredible because he's so old but when he loses its alright because he's old.

Basically, longevity helps your case but I feel that Floyd is enough above Bhop in boxing ability that longevity alone doesn't push him past him. I think that Bhop utililzed his talents more efficiently than Floyd but Floyd's talent level was just too high to catch him on greatness. I think that Bhop is a top 5 fighter from the last 2 decades but Floyd is #1 and there's no shame in saying that Floyd is better than you.

Bernard was such a dirty cheater.
How can people seriously think that a guy who broke as many rules as possible in almost every fight he was in could be considered better than a guy who is a boxing genius who fought within the rules?
It's ridiculous that this is even a discussion!
It's all about age. You old people need Bernard in order to feel relevant in a world that's passing you by.

When was the last time Floyd was in a fight where he wasn't the overwhelming favorite :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IamInuit

So some would like to split hairs eh, well ok.


Floyd challenged Hernendez for the 130 title in 98. Hernendez was battle worn, 33 years old and retired right after the fight.

He defended against Manfredy. Just what happened in that fight and why was it stopped?

Next was Rios. A 30 year old pseudo gate keeper.

Then Jukko, Genera, Vargas and Augustus. Opponents.

Then came Chico. Does anyone actually believe that Chico's head was even there? The guy was about a week away from going to the big house. I'm surprised they went through with the fight.

Next came Carlos Hernandez who was shell shocked and dominated 4 years earlier by the same Genaro Hernandez that Floyd beat and he was able to drop Floyd.

Chavez was next up to the plate and he did pretty well until he gassed.

Then came Castillo at 135 and we all saw that first fight. Big points for Floyd going after that rematch and winning it. That was a great win over a very good fighter but Cortez made his presence known and would go on to do so anytime Floyd was faced with a swarmer/crowding type fighter.

Sosa and Ndou were next at 135. Sosa was an unknown Dominican who fought one person with a pulse prior to Floyd in Spadafora and was soundly beaten. Ndou may have been 30 and 1 when he fought Floyd but go take a look at his opposition.

Then came a 140 eliminator with Corley who did give him some issues with his speed and southpaw approach. He rocked Floyd pretty good at one point. Demarcus was no world beater albeit managing to out point Bailey and barely lose his title to Judah.

Floyd then fought another 140 eliminator against Brussels. I guess he was a contender. So this brings us to 2005.

Arturro Gatti for the 140 WBC title followed keeping that close to 10 year relationship alive. Gatti had went to the well far to many times. To come clean though I actually thought he had a shot based on Floyds shady competition up to that point. Needless to say it was another mismatch.

Mitchell was the next victim and then he jumped up to fight Judah for a Welter paper title that for some reason Judah did not lose when he lost to Carlos Baldomir. Judah was the beginning of name plate recognition.
Nobody in boxing thought he'd make it to 12 but he did and actually did better then expected until he started watching himself.

Floyd doesn’t bother with the Ibf tin but then fights Baldo for the Wbc strap he took off Judah. You'd almost think all of this shit was preplanned.

Oscar was next and to Floyds credit he jumped right up to 154 and the shot at super stardom but was Oscar in his prime in 2007? Name plate number 2. And to Oscars credit he stuck with him until he stopped using his jab.

Hatton was next and I'll just say that Cortez absolutely ruined that fight and did what he was indirectly hired to do. It was pathetic and anyone who stands by the “it wouldn’t have made a difference” is daft with little or no understanding of the sport they pretend to be keen on. Not even Name plate rec on this horror show.

Then it was Marquez for some reason. Pretty much a career featherweight who was having difficulty so wandered up to 130/135. This is the fight after close to a 2 year retirement. And he could not even make the weight he agreed to while Marquez was sporting a suit of new flab. Lets just call this for what it was, A joke.

Its now 2009 and his next mark is Shane but it was a dollar short and a decade late. Name plate number 3.

A year later in 2011 its Victor Ortiz and just look at who the ref was and the job he did. Yup that's right Mr. Cortez with yet another academy performance.

FF close to another year and we see Floyd against Cotto in 2012 prior to going to jail. Ugly fight that Floyd did not look all the great in understandably but the boxing world had already thrown Cotto under the bus and again his prime was killed in cement gate. Name plate number 4

Another year passes an its 2013 and he fights Guerrero. Now Robert earned it I guess by jumping up 2 divisions and beating Aydin and Berto but was the result anything but expected

To his credit just a few months later he agrees to Alvarez but of course there is a catch which then turns into another pass for Floyd in the minds of many. Floyd does a nice job but Alvarez held his own.

And lastly Maidana. A fighter all but dismissed by everyone as a no hoper and we witnessed what we did. Sadly he had no Cortez.

Hardly a ledger that justifies the trumpets.

So endeth my hair splitting.

---

Exactly. The guy who's fought nothing but championship and top ranked opposition for the last 16 years never had a real fight in his life, it was all rigged to give Floyd an easy career, he's a sissy who never fought anyone and only cares about money, every other champion who's ever lived didn't care about money whatsoever and it was just the love of boxing... yeeesh.

It's a good thing this is an internet forum, because there's no way you'd be able to tell me you're not a Floyd hater and keep a straight face. Come on dude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by La Cucaracha

When was the last time Floyd was in a fight where he wasn't the overwhelming favorite :confused:

---

When you've been the #1 p4p in the sport for nearly 10 years, and you've gone 18 years in boxing without taking a loss, bookies will generally put you as the favourite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by La Cucaracha

When was the last time Floyd was in a fight where he wasn't the overwhelming favorite :confused:

---

When you've been the #1 p4p in the sport for nearly 10 years, and you've gone 18 years in boxing without taking a loss, bookies will generally put you as the favourite.

---

True but there are fights where he wouldnt be as strong a fav as usual but he wont take them. He would have been 4/7 - 4/6 a few years ago against Pac. Hed be a similar price against GGG. I doubt hed be much shorter than 1/3 v Thurman. He'll be about 1/4 v Khan which will be his biggest price for a long time. He did go off around 2/5 v Canelo but that was due to flood of Money on Canelo. THe bookies had him open around 1/5. Instead of Khan he took Maidana twice where he was 1/16 in the 1st and 1/10 in the 2nd.

Again Beans he is a great fighter and an ATG but I dont see how you can suggest he has fought the best possible opponents in their primes which is my only criticism of him. I know this is the case with lots of other fighters in history but most of the other ATGs have that big win that keeps them ahead of Floyd in my rankings.

I am a floyd hater. Id love to see him lose. But Ive never criticised his boxing ability and hes definitely the best fighter of my generation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthless rocco

Bernard was such a dirty cheater.
How can people seriously think that a guy who broke as many rules as possible in almost every fight he was in could be considered better than a guy who is a boxing genius who fought within the rules?
It's ridiculous that this is even a discussion!
It's all about age. You old people need Bernard in order to feel relevant in a world that's passing you by.

---

I hope Floyd's little finger is OK after being bitten by Maidana. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

True but there are fights where he wouldnt be as strong a fav as usual but he wont take them. He would have been 4/7 - 4/6 a few years ago against Pac. Hed be a similar price against GGG. I doubt hed be much shorter than 1/3 v Thurman. He'll be about 1/4 v Khan which will be his biggest price for a long time. He did go off around 2/5 v Canelo but that was due to flood of Money on Canelo. THe bookies had him open around 1/5. Instead of Khan he took Maidana twice where he was 1/16 in the 1st and 1/10 in the 2nd.

Again Beans he is a great fighter and an ATG but I dont see how you can suggest he has fought the best possible opponents in their primes which is my only criticism of him. I know this is the case with lots of other fighters in history but most of the other ATGs have that big win that keeps them ahead of Floyd in my rankings.

I am a floyd hater. Id love to see him lose. But Ive never criticised his boxing ability and hes definitely the best fighter of my generation.

---

You tell me a guy he didn't fight in their prime and I'll give you evidence of Floyd calling them out or trying to make the fight happen. Not my opinion or a guess, but real evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IamInuit

So some would like to split hairs eh, well ok.


Floyd challenged Hernendez for the 130 title in 98. Hernendez was battle worn, 33 years old and retired right after the fight.

He defended against Manfredy. Just what happened in that fight and why was it stopped?

Next was Rios. A 30 year old pseudo gate keeper.

Then Jukko, Genera, Vargas and Augustus. Opponents.

Then came Chico. Does anyone actually believe that Chico's head was even there? The guy was about a week away from going to the big house. I'm surprised they went through with the fight.

Next came Carlos Hernandez who was shell shocked and dominated 4 years earlier by the same Genaro Hernandez that Floyd beat and he was able to drop Floyd.

Chavez was next up to the plate and he did pretty well until he gassed.

Then came Castillo at 135 and we all saw that first fight. Big points for Floyd going after that rematch and winning it. That was a great win over a very good fighter but Cortez made his presence known and would go on to do so anytime Floyd was faced with a swarmer/crowding type fighter.

Sosa and Ndou were next at 135. Sosa was an unknown Dominican who fought one person with a pulse prior to Floyd in Spadafora and was soundly beaten. Ndou may have been 30 and 1 when he fought Floyd but go take a look at his opposition.

Then came a 140 eliminator with Corley who did give him some issues with his speed and southpaw approach. He rocked Floyd pretty good at one point. Demarcus was no world beater albeit managing to out point Bailey and barely lose his title to Judah.

Floyd then fought another 140 eliminator against Brussels. I guess he was a contender. So this brings us to 2005.

Arturro Gatti for the 140 WBC title followed keeping that close to 10 year relationship alive. Gatti had went to the well far to many times. To come clean though I actually thought he had a shot based on Floyds shady competition up to that point. Needless to say it was another mismatch.

Mitchell was the next victim and then he jumped up to fight Judah for a Welter paper title that for some reason Judah did not lose when he lost to Carlos Baldomir. Judah was the beginning of name plate recognition.
Nobody in boxing thought he'd make it to 12 but he did and actually did better then expected until he started watching himself.

Floyd doesn’t bother with the Ibf tin but then fights Baldo for the Wbc strap he took off Judah. You'd almost think all of this shit was preplanned.

Oscar was next and to Floyds credit he jumped right up to 154 and the shot at super stardom but was Oscar in his prime in 2007? Name plate number 2. And to Oscars credit he stuck with him until he stopped using his jab.

Hatton was next and I'll just say that Cortez absolutely ruined that fight and did what he was indirectly hired to do. It was pathetic and anyone who stands by the “it wouldn’t have made a difference” is daft with little or no understanding of the sport they pretend to be keen on. Not even Name plate rec on this horror show.

Then it was Marquez for some reason. Pretty much a career featherweight who was having difficulty so wandered up to 130/135. This is the fight after close to a 2 year retirement. And he could not even make the weight he agreed to while Marquez was sporting a suit of new flab. Lets just call this for what it was, A joke.

Its now 2009 and his next mark is Shane but it was a dollar short and a decade late. Name plate number 3.

A year later in 2011 its Victor Ortiz and just look at who the ref was and the job he did. Yup that's right Mr. Cortez with yet another academy performance.

FF close to another year and we see Floyd against Cotto in 2012 prior to going to jail. Ugly fight that Floyd did not look all the great in understandably but the boxing world had already thrown Cotto under the bus and again his prime was killed in cement gate. Name plate number 4

Another year passes an its 2013 and he fights Guerrero. Now Robert earned it I guess by jumping up 2 divisions and beating Aydin and Berto but was the result anything but expected

To his credit just a few months later he agrees to Alvarez but of course there is a catch which then turns into another pass for Floyd in the minds of many. Floyd does a nice job but Alvarez held his own.

And lastly Maidana. A fighter all but dismissed by everyone as a no hoper and we witnessed what we did. Sadly he had no Cortez.

Hardly a ledger that justifies the trumpets.

So endeth my hair splitting.

---

Exactly. The guy who's fought nothing but championship and top ranked opposition for the last 16 years never had a real fight in his life, it was all rigged to give Floyd an easy career, he's a sissy who never fought anyone and only cares about money, every other champion who's ever lived didn't care about money whatsoever and it was just the love of boxing... yeeesh.

It's a good thing this is an internet forum, because there's no way you'd be able to tell me you're not a Floyd hater and keep a straight face. Come on dude.

---

Agree, being an internet forum- we nitpick all fighters we don't agree with. Kinda hard to do with fighters from 1920's-1970's.
Most of us aren't old enough to question Benny Leonards comp or Gene Tunney's comp. Who their comp beat, what weight they walked around at, what they ate for breakfast...

Iam-- broke it down-scientfically- didn't miss jack! LOL! but that is hard to do for fighters of yesteryear.

Now about that post to me...:mad: lol!

I remember Hopkins turning down Kovalev as a replacement opponent for him a short time ago, saying Kovalev didn't deserve to fight him. You said that like it was way back in 2002'...: :lickish:

I remember Hopkins turning rejecting a 2.5 million dollar offer from Frank Warren to fight Joe Calzaghe in 2004. My Opinion only- when a fighter like Hop or Froch has been in the trenches for years- are they really ducking? If Froch says Chavez or retire..same with Hop. Hop fought an in shape Calzaghe 4 years later who had his BEST wins 04-07 in a young Lacy- whooped his ass agree? Young Kessler undefeated, outgritted him- DAMN good fight was it not? & In between a once loss- Bika and Hop took that Calzaghe on. I have no qualms with his (timing) to fight an undefeated JC.


I remember Hopkins being accused of ducking Chad Dawson when Dawson was the next big thing coming. IMO neither Hop nor Dawson could sell seats. Hop needs an opponent with popularity to sell a fight. remember how empty the arena was for Hop-RJJ II? Yet, Hop fought the young undefeated Cloud-& Cloud called out Dawson & said all he fought were old geezers in Johnson & Tarver. So Hop simply knew there was no money in that fight. So Hop fought his conquerer Pascal- and that wasn't impressive? To beat the man who beat Dawson? When Dawson can't sell in conneticut, but Pascal packs a punch and the house in Canada?


I remember Hopkins turning down a 60/40 split to fight then-p4p king Roy Jones.
Most of these fights all occurred in the last 5-10 years of a man who has fought 20+ years. Hopkins I think you & I agree is an egomaniac. Once he got that fat ass Tito $$ payday- he wanted 50%. Then with DLH payday too? If you remember RJJ called out Tito & DLH as well- plus we KNOW how many fights RJJ is questioned on missing. We don't need to name them.


But you're right... it's all about the legacy for Hopkins, he doesn't care one bit about money.
He couldn't have cared for the money when he took on RJJ II, remember how empty the arena was?

Hop's 1st 10 years was all about holding down one division-this is why noone can call him a ducker for nearly a decade 1/2.
And if we hold him accountable for fighting Tito as a fighter moving UP..then shouldn't we do that for all?
Haglar then would have to be the weakest MW of all time if we hold HIM to that standard.
Duran started at what weight? Hearns? Leonard? See then he fought guys who weren't natural MW's.

To me though that is bullshit. A fighter's natural weight is what he walks around at. NOT STARTED.
Then Holyfield too, remember he was called a blown up CW. So then Tyson lost to a blown up CW? No bro... Holyfied, like Duran, Hearns, Leonard and YES TITO T..all gained weight. Plus Tito beat the hell outta MW top contender in Joppy to prove he was a legit MW.

Only Ray Robinson can make that claim- he was never a LHW...he fought at it lost and went back down...If Tito did that then okay, but in reality. Tito is a big victory for Hopkins at MW.
Pavlik was a Knockout artist who was considered the man- he walked around at 170 so that's where they fought. Not Hop's fault Pav fell apart afterwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

True but there are fights where he wouldnt be as strong a fav as usual but he wont take them. He would have been 4/7 - 4/6 a few years ago against Pac. Hed be a similar price against GGG. I doubt hed be much shorter than 1/3 v Thurman. He'll be about 1/4 v Khan which will be his biggest price for a long time. He did go off around 2/5 v Canelo but that was due to flood of Money on Canelo. THe bookies had him open around 1/5. Instead of Khan he took Maidana twice where he was 1/16 in the 1st and 1/10 in the 2nd.

Again Beans he is a great fighter and an ATG but I dont see how you can suggest he has fought the best possible opponents in their primes which is my only criticism of him. I know this is the case with lots of other fighters in history but most of the other ATGs have that big win that keeps them ahead of Floyd in my rankings.

I am a floyd hater. Id love to see him lose. But Ive never criticised his boxing ability and hes definitely the best fighter of my generation.

---

You tell me a guy he didn't fight in their prime and I'll give you evidence of Floyd calling them out or trying to make the fight happen. Not my opinion or a guess, but real evidence.

---

im not saying he ducked anyone Im just saying he hasnt fought an elite fighter in their prime. Some will argue Canelo but I dont think hes elite, id argue his best is still yet to come, and it was at a catchweight where he was weakened.

Also if he really wanted the Manny fight I know he could have made it happen. Im not saying he ducked him as there are fair demands he made that Manny wouldnt do but I believe if he really wanted it would have happened

[QUOTE=Beanflicker;1280388]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

His entire career was adaptability, literally from very early search and destroy to retooling his approach to the far too often broad brush and dismissal of the defensive sniper stuff he does. Yeh, sometimes it's ugly, but it's also gritty, cagey and full of guile you don't just learn overnight. Both fighters regardless of fandom can be very hunt and peck.

---

Bhop adopted for sure, but can we say he was more adaptive than Floyd? Whenever Bhop ran into a tough style for him, he seemed to lose. He never made the adjustments to Jermain Taylor to find a way to win. He even had a second chance, and again could not adapt. He couldn't adapt to Cazlaghe, Dawson, or Kovalev. He kept doing the same thing.

Floyd has consistently made adjustments and gotten stronger as the fight progressed. We saw it with Mosley. With Castillo, who arguably should have won the first fight, he adjusted and dominated the rematch. With Oscar, he adjusted and controlled the mid and later parts of the fight. He took over the mid and later rounds vs Maidana and dominated the rematch.

Floyd has been adapting his style seamlessly into his advanced age, as his legs have started to go we've seen him start working smarter to compensate.

---

Ya know. I put Taylor 1 squarely on Hopkins. He assumed, he let his fat ego get in the way and did indeed grow stronger down the stretch, Hopkins has gotten stronger in the late rounds for the longest time, but he refused to insist on a ko there. He pooched it. That was a 1 point fight...and Taylor was rocking and rolling late.

Hopkins adapted to Oscar as well. He left him in a heap. And before we start railing on Oscar not being a middle (I do agree and hated that fight)...its not as if Mayweather has never beat on a guy who jumps a division just to make an "event"? At least Oscar had previously made the weight..and fought there albeit getting his ears boxed. Hopkins had been in "tough" and adapted well enough. Ask Allen, Mercado and Echols how he adapted and came back. With a jacked up shoulder and basically bashing the latter with one arm no less. No one expected less off Mayweather when he adapted to Marcos-Maidana. At the same point in his career Hopkins was adapting to an entirely different division and second career..legitimately..and dominating THE recognized Lt heavyweight champion not to mention a top ranked p4p fighter in Tarver.