Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

07-23-2007, 05:44 PM
ICB

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Gamo

CC Ice,I agree to an extent. I rate B Hop,he is a legend but some are going to far. Greatest of all time or even contender for GOAT?!??! I think not. Don't just look at the stats but look at the substance of the stats. People criticise Joe Calzaghe because they don't buy the record,even though he has beaten most of his opponents impressively,crushed his main rival and is unbeaten and unified champ. Obviously Hopkins has fought the better fighters but my point is don't just look at the numbers,look at the guys he has fought too. I don't think they qualify him for GOAT nor top 10-15.

:coolclick: back Gamo i totally agree if you actually look at Hopkins best wins there all from boxers like Tito ect moving way above there natural weight im sorry but Hopkins is nowhere even close to Henry Armstrong Willie Pep or Muhammad Ali hell even Salvador Sanchez who died so young has beaten more atg in there weight class than Hopkins has ever done.
07-23-2007, 05:52 PM
Gandalf

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Gamo

Yeah but Miles,I want to see JC get the credit he deserves. And I want to see B Hop fight a really live big strong guy like JC. Although I'd like a Jones Junior fight because I love RJJ,I don't think it improves his legacy in any way,shape,or form.

CC bro. I know exactly where you are coming from. Its a fight that makes a lot of sense, and is good for whoever the winner is. I suppose being a big fan of both fighters leaves me a bit twisted on it all. I dont think BHop can beat Calzaghe at this stage. Hopkins would be crafty and tricky but he couldnt do to Calzaghe what he did to the beefed up Winky.

I would rather he fought another lightheavyweight, and at least then I could go into it supporting BHop all the way and have no issues in my head.

Its an odd predicament, I know! :-\
07-23-2007, 05:59 PM
El Gamo

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

CC back brother. I see your predicament but I think it would be a good fight,it would get alot of publicity on both sides of the pond and would be great for us fans.
07-23-2007, 06:10 PM
Gandalf

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Gamo

CC back brother. I see your predicament but I think it would be a good fight,it would get alot of publicity on both sides of the pond and would be great for us fans.

It would be a good fight and it would generate a mad amount of interest. If the fight were to come off which is a long shot knowing the negotiation tactics of both sides then I could have no complaints. It would have been the choice of both parties.

A weird fight for me though.
07-23-2007, 06:58 PM
gyrokai

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

If Calzaghe gets past "his next opponent" ;)

... I think Calzaghe Hopkins might actually be entertaining, I think Joe could beat Hopkins.

Hopkins isn't GOAT, but he's certainly knocking on the door to be among THE GOATimes.
07-23-2007, 08:42 PM
El Kabong

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

......notice Winky Wright had not lost since 1999 HOWEVER this was his first fight at 175 and he is 35 years old.

IMO Winky should never have moved up

Hopkins-Calzaghe would be a GREAT match at 168 or 170....I think Bernard has become a better boxer as the years have gone on. Hopkins-RJJ II would still be a good fight to see
07-23-2007, 08:51 PM
donnydarkoIRL

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

B-Hop cant go on forever unfortunately, I'm hoping he'll actually retire soon as i don't want to witness a fight in which a true boxing legend is in that one fight too many...
07-23-2007, 09:02 PM
JonesJrMayweather

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

i thought he looked old..and should retire...i credited winky's lethargy to the weight and would like to see him back down...

hop on ther other hand is great simply because of his interim reign at MW and beating tarver...not because of his opponents...his main opponents were smaller guys adn oscar looked like he threw the fight off that silly body shot....
07-23-2007, 09:07 PM
El Kabong

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

B-Hop has the oppertunity for 1 or 2 more paydays and I honestly think he should take them....at least the RJJ and James Toney ones....depending on when James can fight again
07-23-2007, 09:16 PM
donnydarkoIRL

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

The RJJ fight could be interesting and entertaining because of the fact they dislike each other so much.
But i dont think id have the endurance to handle a months build up listening to james toney...i jus couldnt take it
07-23-2007, 11:14 PM
SweetPea

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

Hopkins is the best 42 year old fighter in history.

He's not even remotely in the discussion of greatest fighter of all-time, and he's not going to enter the discussion just by beating Joe Calzaghe.
07-24-2007, 12:27 AM
eagle

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SweetPea

Hopkins is the best 42 year old fighter in history.

He's not even remotely in the discussion of greatest fighter of all-time, and he's not going to enter the discussion just by beating Joe Calzaghe.

Say he has 3 fights left. Who would he have to beat to be an atg in your eyes? If he beat Calzaghe, Taylor at 168, and won a alphabet heavy belt would that give him atg status?
07-24-2007, 01:01 AM
BoomBoom

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

Him and Archie Moore. Foreman too. All those guys really beat the clock.
07-24-2007, 04:19 AM
Hulk

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

Bernard is great for his age no doubt. But you gotta go with Archie Moore for best fighter after 40. He didn't beat Durelle for the title, he was defending it for like the 8th time or so and was 45 years old. And in that fight he was taking on a 27 year old guy, not a 35 year old guy like Wright AND he fought HARD and won by KO, he didn't win a boring UD like B-hop just did. Moore took on Marciano and knocked him down after this too. And he went rounds with prime Ali when he was 50. Moore is the greatest fighter over 40 ever IMO.
07-24-2007, 05:17 AM
the phenom

Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?

Quote:

Originally Posted by El Gamo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gyrokai

He has the most accomplished resume of this era.

BUT lets not get ahead of ourselves...

Tarver and Winky haven't looked too good coming into the fight. I'm not a believer in Tarver. But I will say this, he never gets any REAL credit for what he did to Jones Jr. in the second round. But Tarver at this point in his life, has been aging just as much, ringwise, and lost his drive. He, just as Jones Jr, had to deal with the massive weight drain after pretending to be a heavyweight for awhile. And lets get this clear, Tarver lost the fight a long time ago, he was so afraid of Hopkins, you wonder how the hell did this guy ever get into the upper elite listings. Thats why I say, I've never been a believer in Tarver.

And Winky HAS looked shaky in the legs as Steward has been saying all along. And the size disadvantage Winky had to deal with coming into the fight. The added weight did slow his game and lessen his clean punches.

Lets see how +42 year old Hopkins deals with an elite fighter in his PRIME.
He's very close... but if he does that, then he's DEFINITELY up their among the true legendary heros of the sport.

Thats why I want to see B Hop v JC.

to be honest clazaghe isnt in his prime anymore, he should fight someone whos really in his prime, rooy jones, lol jk, but really calzaghe isnt in his prime

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page