Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?
40+ I'll say---------
1) Hop-- Still lookin sharp in all phases.
2) Moore-- The Ol' Mongoose beat Durelle in a LHW title defense, a draw with Willie Pastrano, & put Marciano down.
3) Foreman-- Was being outboxed by Moorer but the end result is what counts. HW champ @ 45 yrs of age.
I wouldn't try to argue flip flopping these 3 guys in any position to be quite honest. Especially Hop & Moore.
Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?
I was never a big fan, but I can't help but be impressed with him. I wouldn't say he is still primed, but IMO he can box at a higher level than any 40+ year old that I have ever witnessed.
Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lb4lb
I was never a big fan, but I can't help but be impressed with him. I wouldn't say he is still primed, but IMO he can box at a higher level than any 40+ year old that I have ever witnessed.
The word "prime" is a tough word because many people use different definitions. If we are talkin purely physical then a 42 yr old guy is not in his "prime". When u add in the mental aspects then the fighter could be in his "prime".
Re: Is Hopkins the best 42+ year old fighter in history?
Quote:
Originally Posted by silent assassin
Quote:
Originally Posted by lb4lb
I was never a big fan, but I can't help but be impressed with him. I wouldn't say he is still primed, but IMO he can box at a higher level than any 40+ year old that I have ever witnessed.
The word "prime" is a tough word because many people use different definitions. If we are talkin purely physical then a 42 yr old guy is not in his "prime". When u add in the mental aspects then the fighter could be in his "prime".
Good point. He probably is mentally stonger than he ever was, but IMO I would have to say that he was the most dominating in the late 90's or early 2000's. Don't get me wrong he has not declined by much as he has found a way to slow down aging.