Printable View
Hopkins to me is the only true legend in the sport today besides roy, shane, etc. And probably one of the few fighters of his era that can give guys like Ray Robinson, Ray Leonard, Marvin Hagler, Hearns, Duran, etc, a hell of a fight and could very well win in his prime not the bhop right now. So how will hopkins do against these legends?
Problem is Hopkins never beat anyone in his prime.
He would most likely lose to any other GREAT middleweight.. without ever being totally outclassed by anyone.
He'd lose to everyone of them and he's not a legend.
Bernard Hopkins vs Sugar Ray Robinson = Robinson by UD.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingfrnk
Bernard Hopkins vs Sugar Ray Leonard = Hopkins by close decision.
Bernard Hopkins vs Thomas Hearns = Not sure at the moment.
Bernard Hopkins vs Marvin Hagler = Draw.
Bernard Hopkins vs Roberto Duran = Hopkins by UD.
I totally disagree with Rob and Fenster, first off Sugar Ray Leonard wasn't that great at Middleweight or above IMO. Hagler was past his prime and took too long to get started, Hopkins in the early part of his career. Was just like Marvin Hagler and i think a prime Hopkins would pounce on Leonard right away, something a past his prime Hagler didn't do and i think Hopkins would win a UD.
Sugar Ray Robinson was great at Middleweight unlike Leonard, and he would use his surperior movement to outbox Hopkins and win a UD, although Hopkins would close the distance at times and make it competitive.
Thomas Hearns although great had stamina issues and chin issues, and a prime Bernard Hopkins might just be tough enough to withstand Hearns power and stop him late on, although Hearns maybe able to outbox Hopkins over 12 rounds using his longer reach. Not sure about this match up yet.
Roberto Duran is too small for Bernard Hopkins at Middleweight and Hopkins, would make it a physical fight being too strong for Duran and he would pound out a competitive but clear cut UD.
This next fight is the toughest for me because Marvin Hagler and Bernard Hopkins, both changed there styles. Im not sure if the counter puncher version of Hagler would be more effective, or the aggressive Hagler. And vice a versa for Hopkins very hard match up IMO, both have great chins, both are well rounded boxers. Both had excellent stamina in there prime too close to call.
When was Hopkins prime?
Thats a good questionQuote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
To be honest i think thats very difficult question, i would say after he battered Mercado in the rematch he was just entering his prime. And then i think after the Felix Trinidad fight, he started to change his style more into a defensive counter puncher.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
So its hard to tell if he was past his prime after the Trinidad fight, but i would say his last real good performance was when he took Joppy to school. So i would say round about 1996/2003.
From around 1997 till 2003.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
The only top draw fighter he beat in his prime then was the undersized Tito.
He fought a great fight against Tito, but I dont see that guy beating any true GREAT.
Well you could make an arguement that Marvin Hagler never truly beat a "Great Middleweight" considering Duran, Hearns, were moving up similar to ODLH, Tito. Although Thomas Hearns did do much better at the higher weightclasses, than ODLH, Tito, did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Haglers overall record looks far more impressive than Hopkins though.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBWell you could make an arguement that Marvin Hagler never truly beat a "Great Middleweight" considering Duran, Hearns, were moving up similar to ODLH, Tito. Although Thomas Hearns did do much better at the higher weightclasses, than ODLH, Tito, did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
actually i see him winning against duran, and hearns atleast. but robinson, leonard, and hagler would be the only three out of those 5 that have better chances of winning. and notice i said etc which means other middleweight legends like lamotta, monzon, even james toney so its not just those 5 i mean all of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDevilRob
Hagler did fight in a better era though. The middleweight division in hopkins era lacked other great fighters that were actual middleweights so he had to go for great but smaller fighters in DLH and Trinidad and he knocked them both out. No one else has done that. When a good fighter came along in Taylor, Hopkins was aged 40.Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterHaglers overall record looks far more impressive than Hopkins though.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBWell you could make an arguement that Marvin Hagler never truly beat a "Great Middleweight" considering Duran, Hearns, were moving up similar to ODLH, Tito. Although Thomas Hearns did do much better at the higher weightclasses, than ODLH, Tito, did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by PugilisticFrom around 1997 till 2003.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
the hopkins that beat the hell out of glen johnson was probably the best ive ever seen him. that bhop wouldve done well during the 80s
Totally agree,Quote:
Originally Posted by kingfrnkQuote:
Originally Posted by PugilisticFrom around 1997 till 2003.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
the hopkins that beat the hell out of glen johnson was probably the best ive ever seen him. that bhop wouldve done well during the 80s
A prime bhop would do well in any era.