Printable View
How come you rate Hopkins so high then?Quote:
Originally Posted by asero
a) What is different about his middleweight reign - compared with John (:-\) and Calzaghes?
and
b) What drama is there in a Hopkins fight? Many would say he is a very BORING fighter.
my question to you is...why cant joe cal cant KO bhop where in bhop KOed trinidad and delahoya...bhop was a natural 160 fight joe at a higher weight. bhop's reign in 160 is so long just to deny him a top 40 spot. at he is a measure for future generations of still being competitive p4p past the age of 40..he is timeless and his wins are sgnificant.
why only question on JC is why cant he KO jones and bhop..please answer me...he performed well in those two fights, but where is the drama?
hopkins may be boring and dirty but his wins has huge historical implications. record breaking title defenses at one of the premiere division. he denied dela hoya and trinidad entry to the top 50. and defies age to continue to be top 5 p4p..forget foreman, bhop is the new standard
You made the list my friend. You rated Hopkins 30. That's why i'm asking you to justify his position. I agree he is a GREAT fighter BUT what is so special about his middleweight reign that elevates him so far above Calzaghe?Quote:
Originally Posted by asero
Your questions..
Hopkins ko'd Oscar and Trinidad because their best weight was Welter. He was naturally much bigger than them.
Hopkins fought Tarver at 175 before facing Calzaghe. Calzaghe moved up in weight to face Hopkins.
You are marking down Calzaghe for not being able to KO TWO GREAT fighters. That's a bit harsh isn't it? Especially considering Calzaghe is a veteran himself with a career history of hand problems, especially his left, which by his own admission is knackered. ;)
To be honest I think Joe could have taken out Jones if he wanted to, as for B-Hop although the fight was very close, Imo there was a chance Joe could have stopped him late if Hopkins didn't take his 5 min break. Still think Hopkins deserves to be rated high though, the mans a freak.
I would take points away from fighters that never fought outside there comfort zone ie PBF, RJJ. Thats where old school guys like Ali and Tyson score high for me because they fought all over the world, true World champions
Sorry but RJJ beat 4 HOF's Floyd Mayweather beat two top 10 P4P fighters, aswell as a load of other good names like RJJ did. I can't believe you say they never fought outside there comfort zone. When they moved up so many weightclasses. Then say someone like Mike Tyson fought outside his comfort zone, when he avoided more fighters in the 90s than i can count on my fingers and toes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil
guys, how would you put lewis, holyfield, holmes, foreman and frazier in your top 100.. i may have overrated lewis and underrated foreman but im ok with that placing. foreman is not a top 50 guy for me...how would you rank these heavies?
no I know they both moved up and beat quality opponents but what I meant by never fought outside there comfort zone(probably the wrong phrase) is that they fought there whole carears in there own country, and I know people say RJJ was right to because of the olympics but for me a true great ie Ali fights and wins all over the worldQuote:
Originally Posted by ICBSorry but RJJ beat 4 HOF's Floyd Mayweather beat two top 10 P4P fighters, aswell as a load of other good names like RJJ did. I can't believe you say they never fought outside there comfort zone. When they moved up so many weightclasses. Then say someone like Mike Tyson fought outside his comfort zone, when he avoided more fighters in the 90s than i can count on my fingers and toes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil
I'll give you that, the middleweight division has the history and glamour, but maybe it slightly flatters Hopkins too.Quote:
Originally Posted by asero
Apart from Hopkins being an American, fighting solely in America, is there much difference between his middleweight run and Sven Ottke's run at supermiddle (21 defences)?
Dare I say it but.. if Ottke was from the US i'm sure he would be hailed as an all-time GREAT too.. especially considering Hopkins being boring doesn't harm his standing?
Thoughts?
look at ottke KO ratio is there a HOF that he beaten...that alone proves the big disparity bet the two...hopkins is knocking out opponents in the division that is so rich. he denies dela hoya and trinidad top 50 greatness..
that is the same reasoning why PBF is being accused of ducking opponents. while cotto and margarito is knocking down contenders, PBF doesnt want to fight them. that is clearly not the case for joan guan accusing pacquiao of ducking him..guzman is good but he is not putting an emphatic ending in his fights. when was the last time guzman KO his opponents??
You seem to be putting a strong emphasis on the KO yet have plenty of non-punchers in your list.Quote:
Originally Posted by asero
Barring Oscar and Tito, who fought Hopkins above their optimum fighting weight, I don't see the great wins, or a huge number of KO's (admittedly his stoppage of Glen Johnson reads well). Not wins that necessarily standout above Sven Ottke's anyway.
Guzman hasn't carried his power up through the weights. But is another fighter with hand problems, which i guess is understandable considering he's fought over 300 amateur bouts.
I did this in one of my books, but anyone who posts a subjective list opens himself up for a savage beating. It is virtually impossible to get it right. If I rate SRR first, I'll get 20 who list Ali first. If I list Willie Pep second, I'll get 40 who say SSR should be second and so on. It's a death of a thousand cuts. If I rate Foreman infront of Holmes, I get brutalized and visa versa. :fighting0043gi5:
What's the book called?Quote:
Originally Posted by holmcall
Quote:
Originally Posted by holmcall
And righfully so! :lickish:
Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterWhat's the book called?Quote:
Originally Posted by holmcall
I sent you an private message on it.