How Do You Rank Jones, Calzaghe, and Hopkins ATGreatness As Of Now?

Here is some fuel to the fire LOL enjoying this argument LOL;D
Calzaghe record
Joe Calzaghe

Hopkins Record
Bernard Hopkins

enjoy;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by intoccabile

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

So Hopkins resume, that includes a LOSS to Joe Calzaghe, is better than Joe Calzaghe's who has lost to NO-ONE!!!

ON PAPER Joe Calzaghe BEAT Roy Jones!!!

In REALITY Calzaghe BEAT Hopkins. The statistics don't lie. That is the ONLY fact. Fact.

---

Yes.. because i happen to know that You can lose to someone and still be greater than them. Are you going to tell me that Jermain Taylor, who beat hopkins twice, is greater than Bernard Hopkins now?

Joes resume has NOTHING on hopkins. Hopkins has fought a great list of fighters with big names, has been in the spot light for a very long time, CONTINUES to dominate at this age/stage of his career, has the 23 defenses and a decade as champion under his belt.

---

I believe you can lose to someone and still be greater than them too. I believe Roy rates above Calzaghe.

Calzaghe has fought a great list of fighters with big names, has been in the spot light for a very long time, CONTINUES to dominate at this age/stage of his career, has the 20 odd defenses and a decade as champion under his belt. Hmm.. similar to Hopkins, no? ;)

---

LOL no. calzaghe has only fought kessler, bhop, jones imo.
and jones was shot in 04

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by match

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrodub

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by match

Actually the majority of ringside press had Hopkins winning the Calzaghe fight, and even if you think he lost, the mere admission that it was close implies it could have gone either way (if a fight is a split decision, most of the time the losing fighter has a gripe). Also how is it 'stupid' to say Hopkins is the true middleweight champ, considering he won the belt Roy VACATED. Everyone knows Roy beat him, unfortunately, when you move up in weight, you don't take your belts with you, otherwise Roy would have entered the Ruiz fight as the reigning middleweight, supermiddleweight, and light heavyweight champion. (and lastly, anyone who puts the fall through of the Jones-Hopkins rematch on only one of the fighters is blinded by the fact that NEITHER one of them saw it as their priority).

---

At what poit did i question the scoring of the calzage hopkins match?
I didnt i said hopkins came up with stupid excses which he did
What you said in your orignal post was guys like jones collect trinkets for titles and hopkins was the true middleweight champ

"The real middleweight champ was Hopkins. The real heavyweight champ was Lennox. All those guys did was pick up trinckets, not titles."

Well sorry no his titles were not trinkets they were genuine titles the only one i can agree with is the lennox lewis bit, to be the true champ you have to beat the champ not lose to him and then get his vacant title because he feels your not good enough to bother competing with anymore,hopkins was a champ but hardly the true champ
The implication above is jones did not beat lewis so he was not the real heavyweight champ fair enough, but to put hopkins in that bracket as well is stupid
Last it was clearly a prioroty for hopkins who ran his mouth off about fighting jones after he beat titto he called him out by name but when jones responded hopkins backed out because of money nothing to do with the fact RJJ said he was gonna move up a weight and b hop did not expect him to say yes LOL

---

Jones did THE EXACT same thing Hopkins did, hide behind money. EVERYONE thought Tito would beat Hopkins and EVERYONE was set for Trinidad-Jones at 168 the very next fight. At NO POINT DID ROY EVER bring up percentages when THAT was the plan. However, as soon as Hopkins won, now BOTH fighters start talking about what they will not accept. That is an indication that BOTH fighters would rather pursue other options. And I know you didn't question the scores, I'm saying when fighters lose split decisions they ALWAYS will say they should have won. And lastly, by your middleweight analogy, Lennox Lewis never became heavyweight champion, being that he never fought Riddick Bowe. I never said Roy won a trinket at middle or super middleweight or light heavy, I said heavyweight.

---

Fair enough i thought you were trying to diminish his achievements.I dont think roy hid behind money if someone beat me and i though i could win i would fight for free and 60 40 was a fair split considering hopkins had only one name on his record

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrodub

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by match

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrodub

At what poit did i question the scoring of the calzage hopkins match?
I didnt i said hopkins came up with stupid excses which he did
What you said in your orignal post was guys like jones collect trinkets for titles and hopkins was the true middleweight champ

"The real middleweight champ was Hopkins. The real heavyweight champ was Lennox. All those guys did was pick up trinckets, not titles."

Well sorry no his titles were not trinkets they were genuine titles the only one i can agree with is the lennox lewis bit, to be the true champ you have to beat the champ not lose to him and then get his vacant title because he feels your not good enough to bother competing with anymore,hopkins was a champ but hardly the true champ
The implication above is jones did not beat lewis so he was not the real heavyweight champ fair enough, but to put hopkins in that bracket as well is stupid
Last it was clearly a prioroty for hopkins who ran his mouth off about fighting jones after he beat titto he called him out by name but when jones responded hopkins backed out because of money nothing to do with the fact RJJ said he was gonna move up a weight and b hop did not expect him to say yes LOL

---

Jones did THE EXACT same thing Hopkins did, hide behind money. EVERYONE thought Tito would beat Hopkins and EVERYONE was set for Trinidad-Jones at 168 the very next fight. At NO POINT DID ROY EVER bring up percentages when THAT was the plan. However, as soon as Hopkins won, now BOTH fighters start talking about what they will not accept. That is an indication that BOTH fighters would rather pursue other options. And I know you didn't question the scores, I'm saying when fighters lose split decisions they ALWAYS will say they should have won. And lastly, by your middleweight analogy, Lennox Lewis never became heavyweight champion, being that he never fought Riddick Bowe. I never said Roy won a trinket at middle or super middleweight or light heavy, I said heavyweight.

---

Fair enough i thought you were trying to diminish his achievements.I dont think roy hid behind money if someone beat me and i though i could win i would fight for free and 60 40 was a fair split considering hopkins had only one name on his record

---

I hear ya. The main thing is that everyone has different criteria for what they consider greatness. Some people believe it's the number of belts you win or how high you can go, some believe it's the level of competition or your record, others factor in if you've lost and if so, how close or lopsided. There's no right or wrong really, it's all subjective.

To me it is the combo of most of the above and jones covers all the bases for me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

There's nothing wrong with Calzaghe's win over Hopkins. Hopkins showed top form before the loss and even better after. Roy beat Hopkins fair and square too.

So Hopkins is definitely 3rd.

1. Roy
2. Calzaghe
3. Hopkins

---

No he didn't lol people are gettin way to hyped up on the Pavlik win, Bernard would have taken him out in the middle rounds in his prime. He looked horrid against Winky Wright before Calzaghe, adn they fought a super close fight. When there is a 7 year age factor I think it is very relevant, all in all I think Hopkins because I thought he beat Calzaghe, and would have beaten Calzaghe in their prime deserves the nod for being the best ATG, then Roy just because in his prime he was the best, and then Calzaghe or Toney.
People forget that Toney won the cruiserweight title, and almost the heavyweight title but he was on steriods for an arm injury. He deserved that title from Ruiz IMO. Toney has had just a long and fulfilled career full of great opponents and great fights that he deserves to be in the running with any of these guys even if Roy outclassed him.

How is demanding 60/40 hiding behind money? Or demanding 70/30 From Calzaghe? Thats what Mayweather the p4p #1 took to fight Oscar De La Hoya, why wouldn't they? Roy from 1998-2002 was far more accomplished then either Hopkins or Calzaghe, they hid as much from fighting Roy as vice virsa, Bernard expected Roy to change weight divisions, as did Joe Calzaghe because they both wanted catch weights which is fine in and of itself, but Roy wanted to go up to heavyweight, and by that point he was around 30, Calzaghe definitely wouldn't drop down to face Bernard, Bernard wouldn't drop down at all to face Winky, or even face Winky at 160.

I think the fact of the matter none of them truly wanted to face eachother at the other person's advantage, they all knew how good the others were, and they knew they had easier fights against other guys, but if Joe wanted Roy so bad why didn't he move up to the LHW division to force Roy to fight him? If Bernard wanted Roy so bad why didn't he go up to LHW in 2000 as opposed to waiting until after he lost at MW. ONCE again Mayweather went up to 154 to fight Oscar De La Hoya. Oscar was the best fighter he could fight the most money, etc, etc. He chased taht fight and said fuck everything else(despite winning the legitimate WW belt at the time before doing so). Roy would have made Hopkins and Calzaghe HUGE money back then, he was p4p #1, he was the won who moved up from their weightclasses to dominated at 175. ITS THEIR JOB TO fight the more popular fighter on his terms. Thats how boxing works. Do you think Billy Conn tried for a catch weight against Joe Louis? Did Leonard demand a catch weight against Hagler? IMO it was way easier for Joe Calzaghe and especially Bernard Hopkins to move up to the LHW division that it was for Roy to move back down, Roy was way too big to get back down to 168 let alone 164. Hell even when he fought Trinidad at 170, he looked WAY smaller then he did back when he ruled the LHW division.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

There's nothing wrong with Calzaghe's win over Hopkins. Hopkins showed top form before the loss and even better after. Roy beat Hopkins fair and square too.

So Hopkins is definitely 3rd.

1. Roy
2. Calzaghe
3. Hopkins

---

No he didn't lol people are gettin way to hyped up on the Pavlik win, Bernard would have taken him out in the middle rounds in his prime. He looked horrid against Winky Wright before Calzaghe, adn they fought a super close fight. When there is a 7 year age factor I think it is very relevant, all in all I think Hopkins because I thought he beat Calzaghe, and would have beaten Calzaghe in their prime deserves the nod for being the best ATG, then Roy just because in his prime he was the best, and then Calzaghe or Toney.
People forget that Toney won the cruiserweight title, and almost the heavyweight title but he was on steriods for an arm injury. He deserved that title from Ruiz IMO. Toney has had just a long and fulfilled career full of great opponents and great fights that he deserves to be in the running with any of these guys even if Roy outclassed him.

---

No he didn't lol.. what? :-\

Hopkins-Winky was always going to be a shit fight. The important part is Hopkins beat him.

Tarver = Won.
Winky = Won.
Calzaghe = Lost.
Pavlik = Won.

These are facts.

You can't praise Hopkins for beating these guys, through this period of his career, then discredit Calzaghe for beating Hopkins.

That is totally flawed and inconsistent.

Once again FENSTER, if you ever read what I post, I don't think Joe beat Bernard. So I don't consider that any more of victory for Joe then what Bernard did against Winky.

Tarver=weight drained junk when Bernard fought him
Wright=natural 154 pounder who moved up to fight Bernard because Winky fights anyone, anywhere, anytime, and he still lost by maybe a point on my scorecard. This doens't show to me that Bernard was in his prime that he could barely beat a guy way above his natural weight and past his own prime.
Against Calzaghe I saw a similar fight to Hopkins-Wright, except Bernard was able to land cleaner on Calzaghe. I think compubox was out to lunch on this fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Once again FENSTER, if you ever read what I post, I don't think Joe beat Bernard. So I don't consider that any more of victory for Joe then what Bernard did against Winky.

Tarver=weight drained junk when Bernard fought him
Wright=natural 154 pounder who moved up to fight Bernard because Winky fights anyone, anywhere, anytime, and he still lost by maybe a point on my scorecard. This doens't show to me that Bernard was in his prime that he could barely beat a guy way above his natural weight and past his own prime.
Against Calzaghe I saw a similar fight to Hopkins-Wright, except Bernard was able to land cleaner on Calzaghe. I think compubox was out to lunch on this fight.

---

I know you think Hopkins won. You scored the fight 6 rounds each with Hopkins winning for the knockdown (see i read your posts ;)).

I'm stating FACTS though.

Even if Hopkins was passed his "prime" when beating Tarver, Winky, losing to Calzaghe and beating Pavlik.. he was still a formidable opponent. One of the very toughest in ALL boxing.

You can say Hopkins would beat Calzaghe in their primes.. BUT we'll never know. It's as simple as that. If you compare "prime" Hopkins record with Calzaghe's, who can you honestly say Hopkins beat that would have DEFINITELY beat Calzaghe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by match

Hopkins
Calzaghe
Jones

(Calzaghe's win over Jones has nothing to do with him rated higher IMO).

---

I have it in the same order as you match

Calzaghes career kind of reminds me of Rocky Marcianos. Both undefeated both have great records on paper, but their biggest wins are against great fightera arguably past prime. I think of the three fighters, Hopkins fought the best fighters in their prime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Once again FENSTER, if you ever read what I post, I don't think Joe beat Bernard. So I don't consider that any more of victory for Joe then what Bernard did against Winky.

Tarver=weight drained junk when Bernard fought him
Wright=natural 154 pounder who moved up to fight Bernard because Winky fights anyone, anywhere, anytime, and he still lost by maybe a point on my scorecard. This doens't show to me that Bernard was in his prime that he could barely beat a guy way above his natural weight and past his own prime.
Against Calzaghe I saw a similar fight to Hopkins-Wright, except Bernard was able to land cleaner on Calzaghe. I think compubox was out to lunch on this fight.

---

I know you think Hopkins won. You scored the fight 6 rounds each with Hopkins winning for the knockdown (see i read your posts ;)).

I'm stating FACTS though.

Even if Hopkins was passed his "prime" when beating Tarver, Winky, losing to Calzaghe and beating Pavlik.. he was still a formidable opponent. One of the very toughest in ALL boxing.

You can say Hopkins would beat Calzaghe in their primes.. BUT we'll never know. It's as simple as that. If you compare "prime" Hopkins record with Calzaghe's, who can you honestly say Hopkins beat that would have DEFINITELY beat Calzaghe?

---

I think he would, it would be a close fight, but Hopkins would still be sharper fighter, and he was much faster, and threw a lot of punches, I think stylewise Bernard in his prime was an even worse match up for Joe Calzaghe.

Fenster, don't get me wrong I think Calzaghe did very well against Hopkins, he adapted great, I don't criticize that he slapped it seemed the only way he could hit Hopkins the few times he did, but I thought going into it he was really going to be the first guy to really hand Hopkins his ass, but Joe couldn't do that at all. I was expecting more from him, but I am not saying that he isn't a great fighter either. I just think if you had taken his strengths (stamina and will to win), along with his physical attributes and actually tought him how to fight the same way Roy or Bernard learned he would be better than either of them. I don't feel the mistakes he makes help him be a better fighter, I think the things that make him a great fighter are his stamina and will, not his unorthodox punches, I think Roy has shown you can throw punches from a million angles, but still throw them crisply. I am not sure if Joe has/had the speed to quite throw them like Roy did, but he definitely would have been a monster with proper technique.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by intoccabile

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by intoccabile

Yes.. because i happen to know that You can lose to someone and still be greater than them. Are you going to tell me that Jermain Taylor, who beat hopkins twice, is greater than Bernard Hopkins now?

Joes resume has NOTHING on hopkins. Hopkins has fought a great list of fighters with big names, has been in the spot light for a very long time, CONTINUES to dominate at this age/stage of his career, has the 23 defenses and a decade as champion under his belt.

---

I believe you can lose to someone and still be greater than them too. I believe Roy rates above Calzaghe.

Calzaghe has fought a great list of fighters with big names, has been in the spot light for a very long time, CONTINUES to dominate at this age/stage of his career, has the 20 odd defenses and a decade as champion under his belt. Hmm.. similar to Hopkins, no? ;)

---

LOL no. calzaghe has only fought kessler, bhop, jones imo.
and jones was shot in 04

---

Coz you knew Lacy was no good didd't ya :rolleyes:

By your rationale who did Hopkins fight before Tito ?? well RJJ, but he lost
So Hopkins has fought

Tito (Welterweight)
De La Hoya (Welterweight)
Taylor (Lost)
Winky (Light Middleweight fighting at 170)
Calzaghe (lost)

Pavlik is the same as Lacy ;)

Like I have said before you can pick apart anybodies record, but Hopkins' is particularly easy. Seriously you are trying to say he fought this great list of opponents, who did he fight in his own reign at Middleweight (apart from the aforementioned comparitive midgets)

I think B-Hop is a legend and I don't think it would've matter who he fought during that time, but fact his his resume at Middlweight is crap.

Calzaghe hey he did beat both of them by pretty wide margins IMO
Jones did beat BHop
Hopkins lost too both of them

As plain as I can see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by intoccabile

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

I believe you can lose to someone and still be greater than them too. I believe Roy rates above Calzaghe.

Calzaghe has fought a great list of fighters with big names, has been in the spot light for a very long time, CONTINUES to dominate at this age/stage of his career, has the 20 odd defenses and a decade as champion under his belt. Hmm.. similar to Hopkins, no? ;)

---

LOL no. calzaghe has only fought kessler, bhop, jones imo.
and jones was shot in 04

---

Coz you knew Lacy was no good didd't ya :rolleyes:

By your rationale who did Hopkins fight before Tito ?? well RJJ, but he lost
So Hopkins has fought

Tito (Welterweight)
De La Hoya (Welterweight)
Taylor (Lost)
Winky (Light Middleweight fighting at 170)
Calzaghe (lost)

Pavlik is the same as Lacy ;)

Like I have said before you can pick apart anybodies record, but Hopkins' is particularly. Seriously you are trying to say he fought this great list of opponents, who did he fight in his own reign at Middleweight (apart from the aforementioned comparitive midgets)

I think B-Hop is a legend and I don't think it would've matter who he fought during that time, but fact his his resume at Middlweight is crap.

---

People change weights all the time. So, if Roy didn't beat Ruiz you'd cry that he isn't a heavyweight. If PBF didn't beat Gatti, Sharma Mitchell, or anyone else he beat north of his first weight classs. we'd cry he isn't a welterweight.

The fact is, Bhop fought guys who were p4p threats and COULD perform at those weights. He won... PBF moved up and beat oscar.. so why cant these guys move up and beat Bhop?
Stop taking his credit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by intoccabile

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by intoccabile

LOL no. calzaghe has only fought kessler, bhop, jones imo.
and jones was shot in 04

---

Coz you knew Lacy was no good didd't ya :rolleyes:

By your rationale who did Hopkins fight before Tito ?? well RJJ, but he lost
So Hopkins has fought

Tito (Welterweight)
De La Hoya (Welterweight)
Taylor (Lost)
Winky (Light Middleweight fighting at 170)
Calzaghe (lost)

Pavlik is the same as Lacy ;)

Like I have said before you can pick apart anybodies record, but Hopkins' is particularly. Seriously you are trying to say he fought this great list of opponents, who did he fight in his own reign at Middleweight (apart from the aforementioned comparitive midgets)

I think B-Hop is a legend and I don't think it would've matter who he fought during that time, but fact his his resume at Middlweight is crap.

---

People change weights all the time. So, if Roy didn't beat Ruiz you'd cry that he isn't a heavyweight. If PBF didn't beat Gatti, Sharma Mitchell, or anyone else he beat north of his first weight classs. we'd cry he isn't a welterweight.

The fact is, Bhop fought guys who were p4p threats and COULD perform at those weights. He won... PBF moved up and beat oscar.. so why cant these guys move up and beat Bhop?
Stop taking his credit.

---

Tito is a great name, but when did he ever 'perform' at Middleweight, Hopkins and Winky both destroyed him. I'm not taking any credit from Hopkins, I said he would've beatten whomever he fought, but I'm saying your argument that his has fought the great list of opponenents aint true. Well it is partly co athey were great names, but they weren;t great Middleweights. At Middleweight he was fighting guys like Robert Allen 3 times. Why did Allen get a 3rd fight after he was stopped in the 2nd. Why did Echols get a rematch when B-Hop won every round in their fisrt fight?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by intoccabile

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Coz you knew Lacy was no good didd't ya :rolleyes:

By your rationale who did Hopkins fight before Tito ?? well RJJ, but he lost
So Hopkins has fought

Tito (Welterweight)
De La Hoya (Welterweight)
Taylor (Lost)
Winky (Light Middleweight fighting at 170)
Calzaghe (lost)

Pavlik is the same as Lacy ;)

Like I have said before you can pick apart anybodies record, but Hopkins' is particularly. Seriously you are trying to say he fought this great list of opponents, who did he fight in his own reign at Middleweight (apart from the aforementioned comparitive midgets)

I think B-Hop is a legend and I don't think it would've matter who he fought during that time, but fact his his resume at Middlweight is crap.

---

People change weights all the time. So, if Roy didn't beat Ruiz you'd cry that he isn't a heavyweight. If PBF didn't beat Gatti, Sharma Mitchell, or anyone else he beat north of his first weight classs. we'd cry he isn't a welterweight.

The fact is, Bhop fought guys who were p4p threats and COULD perform at those weights. He won... PBF moved up and beat oscar.. so why cant these guys move up and beat Bhop?
Stop taking his credit.

---

Tito is a great name, but when did he ever 'perform' at Middleweight, Hopkins and Winky both destroyed him. I'm not taking any credit from Hopkins, I said he would've beatten whomever he fought, but I'm saying your argument that his has fought the great list of opponenents aint true. Well it is partly co athey were great names, but they weren;t great Middleweights. At Middleweight he was fighting guys like Robert Allen 3 times. Why did Allen get a 3rd fight after he was stopped in the 2nd. Why did Echols get a rematch when B-Hop won every round in their fisrt fight?

---

I thought Felix Trinidad performed well at Middleweight beating the living heck out of. Ricardo Mayorga and William Joppy.

Secondly BIG H have you ever seen Bernard Hopkins vs Antwun Echols 1 ? because it doesn't look like you have and it sounds like you just read the judges scorecards.

That was a very competitive fight and Antwun Echols. Could of been awarded a knockdown in the first round, although the punch seemed to be on the break.

But he was giving Bernard Hopkins fits until the later rounds when Bernard Hopkins took over. I only had Bernard Hopkins winning by about 3 rounds at max, and if the knockdown would of been scored in the first round. It would of been very close.

Bernard Hopkins did need to rematch Robert Allen a 2nd time, because Robert Allen was coming on until Mills Lane accidentally pushed Bernard Hopkins out of the ring and injured Bernard Hopkins shoulder.

But many people thought Bernard Hopkins was faking the injury, because Robert Allen was coming on at that point. So a rematch needed to happen, not sure why a 3rd fight happened though that was indeed pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by intoccabile

People change weights all the time. So, if Roy didn't beat Ruiz you'd cry that he isn't a heavyweight. If PBF didn't beat Gatti, Sharma Mitchell, or anyone else he beat north of his first weight classs. we'd cry he isn't a welterweight.

The fact is, Bhop fought guys who were p4p threats and COULD perform at those weights. He won... PBF moved up and beat oscar.. so why cant these guys move up and beat Bhop?
Stop taking his credit.

---

Tito is a great name, but when did he ever 'perform' at Middleweight, Hopkins and Winky both destroyed him. I'm not taking any credit from Hopkins, I said he would've beatten whomever he fought, but I'm saying your argument that his has fought the great list of opponenents aint true. Well it is partly co athey were great names, but they weren;t great Middleweights. At Middleweight he was fighting guys like Robert Allen 3 times. Why did Allen get a 3rd fight after he was stopped in the 2nd. Why did Echols get a rematch when B-Hop won every round in their fisrt fight?

---

I thought Felix Trinidad performed well at Middleweight beating the living heck out of. Ricardo Mayorga and William Joppy.

Secondly BIG H have you ever seen Bernard Hopkins vs Antwun Echols 1 ? because it doesn't look like you have and it sounds like you just read the judges scorecards.

That was a very competitive fight and Antwun Echols. Could of been awarded a knockdown in the first round, although the punch seemed to be on the break.

But he was giving Bernard Hopkins fits until the later rounds when Bernard Hopkins took over. I only had Bernard Hopkins winning by about 3 rounds at max, and if the knockdown would of been scored in the first round. It would of been very close.

Bernard Hopkins did need to rematch Robert Allen a 2nd time, because Robert Allen was coming on until Mills Lane accidentally pushed Bernard Hopkins out of the ring and injured Bernard Hopkins shoulder.

But many people thought Bernard Hopkins was faking the injury, because Robert Allen was coming on at that point. So a rematch needed to happen, not sure why a 3rd fight happened though that was indeed pointless.

---

Mayorga and Joppy both deserved to beaten shitless ;) That does not impress me.

Yes I have seen Hopkins Vanderpool and I had Hopkins winning 9 rounds ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Tito is a great name, but when did he ever 'perform' at Middleweight, Hopkins and Winky both destroyed him. I'm not taking any credit from Hopkins, I said he would've beatten whomever he fought, but I'm saying your argument that his has fought the great list of opponenents aint true. Well it is partly co athey were great names, but they weren;t great Middleweights. At Middleweight he was fighting guys like Robert Allen 3 times. Why did Allen get a 3rd fight after he was stopped in the 2nd. Why did Echols get a rematch when B-Hop won every round in their fisrt fight?

---

I thought Felix Trinidad performed well at Middleweight beating the living heck out of. Ricardo Mayorga and William Joppy.

Secondly BIG H have you ever seen Bernard Hopkins vs Antwun Echols 1 ? because it doesn't look like you have and it sounds like you just read the judges scorecards.

That was a very competitive fight and Antwun Echols. Could of been awarded a knockdown in the first round, although the punch seemed to be on the break.

But he was giving Bernard Hopkins fits until the later rounds when Bernard Hopkins took over. I only had Bernard Hopkins winning by about 3 rounds at max, and if the knockdown would of been scored in the first round. It would of been very close.

Bernard Hopkins did need to rematch Robert Allen a 2nd time, because Robert Allen was coming on until Mills Lane accidentally pushed Bernard Hopkins out of the ring and injured Bernard Hopkins shoulder.

But many people thought Bernard Hopkins was faking the injury, because Robert Allen was coming on at that point. So a rematch needed to happen, not sure why a 3rd fight happened though that was indeed pointless.

---

Mayorga and Joppy both deserved to beaten shitless ;) That does not impress me.

Yes I have seen Hopkins Vanderpool and I had Hopkins winning 9 rounds ;)

---

BIG H im telling you now Bernard Hopkins vs Antwun Echols 1 was very competitive. Until the championship rounds where Bernard Hopkins stamina was better and he outworked Antwun Echols. And a knockdown could of been scored in the 1st round.

William Joppy, Ricardo Mayorga, were respectable names at that time BIG H. And the point im making is that Felix Trinidad still showed the power at Middleweight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

I thought Felix Trinidad performed well at Middleweight beating the living heck out of. Ricardo Mayorga and William Joppy.

Secondly BIG H have you ever seen Bernard Hopkins vs Antwun Echols 1 ? because it doesn't look like you have and it sounds like you just read the judges scorecards.

That was a very competitive fight and Antwun Echols. Could of been awarded a knockdown in the first round, although the punch seemed to be on the break.

But he was giving Bernard Hopkins fits until the later rounds when Bernard Hopkins took over. I only had Bernard Hopkins winning by about 3 rounds at max, and if the knockdown would of been scored in the first round. It would of been very close.

Bernard Hopkins did need to rematch Robert Allen a 2nd time, because Robert Allen was coming on until Mills Lane accidentally pushed Bernard Hopkins out of the ring and injured Bernard Hopkins shoulder.

But many people thought Bernard Hopkins was faking the injury, because Robert Allen was coming on at that point. So a rematch needed to happen, not sure why a 3rd fight happened though that was indeed pointless.

---

Mayorga and Joppy both deserved to beaten shitless ;) That does not impress me.

Yes I have seen Hopkins Vanderpool and I had Hopkins winning 9 rounds ;)

---

BIG H im telling you now Bernard Hopkins vs Antwun Echols 1 was very competitive. Until the championship rounds where Bernard Hopkins stamina was better and he outworked Antwun Echols. And a knockdown could of been scored in the 1st round.

William Joppy, Ricardo Mayorga, were respectable names at that time BIG H. And the point im making is that Felix Trinidad still showed the power at Middleweight.

---

We all score fights different I suppose.

What were the official scorecards?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Mayorga and Joppy both deserved to beaten shitless ;) That does not impress me.

Yes I have seen Hopkins Vanderpool and I had Hopkins winning 9 rounds ;)

---

BIG H im telling you now Bernard Hopkins vs Antwun Echols 1 was very competitive. Until the championship rounds where Bernard Hopkins stamina was better and he outworked Antwun Echols. And a knockdown could of been scored in the 1st round.

William Joppy, Ricardo Mayorga, were respectable names at that time BIG H. And the point im making is that Felix Trinidad still showed the power at Middleweight.

---

We all score fights different I suppose.

What were the official scorecards?

---

The official scorecards were one sided which was a surprise to me, but the commentators pretty much had it the sameway i did. I thought Antwun Echols put on effective pressure and he was landing hard flush shots.

But then he seemed to fade badly down the stretch, which allowed Bernard Hopkins to outwork him and distance himself points wise.

But i actually think Antwun Echols gave Bernard Hopkins, one of his toughest fights of his career.

Hopkins' fights vs Robert Allen were the toughest for him (as well as the toughest for the fans to watch). In hindsight Hopkins-Griffin would have been a big match up back in the day