A Lot Of Similarities In JMM And B-Hops Careers

When you really look at and break down the records of the two fighters, there are a lot of similarities. First off, they both lost there pro debuts. Neither would lose again till they both lost their first World Title fight shot by UD. In defeat they both proved that they were still learning, but could compete at that level. Marquez would go on to have an undefeated streak of 16 fights before losing a close, controversial decision to Chris John for the title. Hopkins would go on to have a legendary undefeated streak of 26 before losing a close, controversial decision to Jermaine Taylor for the title. Both fighters are among the most skilled in the world and neither fighter has decisively lost a fight since losing their bid at their first world titles. Both went under the radar up until the later years of their career and are now current top 3 p4p fighters.

This is true, however I think because JMM isn't a great defensive fighter, he won't go as long as Bernard did, but his star might burn brighter in a shorter period. He is more exciting, he is fighting the fights people want to see, and he's winning more often than not against anyone except Pacquiao which is certainly excusable.

True, Bernard hasnt been in a lot of wars. Hes not a take one to land one type of fighter.

Cant help but think if JMM had got the decision agaist Pac, in either fight, he would be reguarded as p4p #1 undoubtedly, he should be anyways. He became the best lightweight by beating the best lightweights. I excuse him for not fighting Nate because he fought some of the same guys and was more immpressive and hes not 135 anymore anyways. Pac only fought one lightweight who was ranked lower than Diaz and Casa at the time. But on paper, the Oscar win put him at #1 in a lot of peoples minds. Also if Hop got the decision over Calzaghe he could easily be p4p #1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

This is true, however I think because JMM isn't a great defensive fighter, he won't go as long as Bernard did, but his star might burn brighter in a shorter period. He is more exciting, he is fighting the fights people want to see, and he's winning more often than not against anyone except Pacquiao which is certainly excusable.

---

JMM will not last into his 40's as mentioned because of his instinct to fight. He also travelled the weights to make the fights whereas B Hop made them come to him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

JMM will not last into his 40's as mentioned because of his instinct to fight. He also travelled the weights to make the fights whereas B Hop made them come to him.

---

Yeah he has had a lot of wear and tear on his body. I think going to 140 could be a mistake. If he elects to trade with some of those guys he could be in trouble. Even as great as he was the other night, if he fought that way against someone like Hatton, the result wouldnt be the same.

Strange that JMM is as great as B Hop if not greater but will not get the credit because he has to chase the big fights which will ultimately shorten his career.

The reason why I ahve Pacquiao higher, is even though they are almost even against eachother, I think Pacquiao does better against opposition. The things JMM can exploit that Manny does nobody else has been able to. I also think because Pacquiao is that much faster, and still moves so well, that he will enjoy more success moving up, and I would also have to say with that movement against orthodox fighters he is actually harder to hit than Marquez, I mean we've seen Juan Diaz, Joe Casamayor, and MAB land at will on JMM, yet MAB, ODLH, and David Diaz certainly didn't land at will on Manny, nor did Morales in their last bout, nor did Jorge Solis who is a solid figher about 5 inches taller than Manny.

That being said this isn't about Manny, I think there are a huge amount of similarities between JMM and Hopkins. Both weren't the most blessed athletically(though both are plenty fast). Both had their set backs, and didn't get credit for what they did in the prime of their career. While their styles differ drastically, they are both technique first fighters. Both have been coached unbelievably well and it shows when they are out there. More than that I think both got overshadowed by guys with athletic talent who were able to beat their opposition more impresively (RJJ and Pacman).

Thats a good point about RJJ and Pac being able to keep Hopkins and Marquez out of the light for a while.

I think it was a marketablity thing to. Roy was flashy in and out of the ring. Did things in the ring that no one else could do, and fans loved to watch him. Meanwhile, Hopkins was defending his titles in winning performances. Some fights were great to watch, but others were uninspiring because Hop was so much better than the other guy so hed just cruise to a win. But all that changed after the longtime middleweight king got his opportinity to shine against the favored hero Felix Trinidad. He did, and well into his 30s he was in the second phase of his career.

In the lighter divisions, Initially it was Naz that was stealing the light from all the other fighters for similar reason to Jones. Then it was Barrera, the first and only man to beat Naz, that became the most known smaller man at the time along with fellow great Morales. That is until Pacman came along, and the rest is history. And while all this was going on, there was another force in the background that was getting stronger and stronger, who was working his way up the ranks and winning big fights of his own while searching for that one fight that would put him in the position he always knew he belonged. Of course that man was Juan Manuel Marquez.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoomBoom

When you really look at and break down the records of the two fighters, there are a lot of similarities. First off, they both lost there pro debuts. Neither would lose again till they both lost their first World Title fight shot by UD. In defeat they both proved that they were still learning, but could compete at that level. Marquez would go on to have an undefeated streak of 16 fights before losing a close, controversial decision to Chris John for the title. Hopkins would go on to have a legendary undefeated streak of 26 before losing a close, controversial decision to Jermaine Taylor for the title. Both fighters are among the most skilled in the world and neither fighter has decisively lost a fight since losing their bid at their first world titles. Both went under the radar up until the later years of their career and are now current top 3 p4p fighters.

---

Brilliant analysis...

And I'll only say this good things come to those who wait... They both went the less traveled road but in the end people can see greatness no matter what road was traveled.

JMM reminds me more of the explosive thin man in CMM's signature then he does of Bernard Hopkins.

His fight against Diaz was absolutely beautiful

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Majesty

JMM reminds me more of the explosive thin man in CMM's signature then he does of Bernard Hopkins.

His fight against Diaz was absolutely beautiful

---

As far as styles yes he's closer to Alexis.
BoomBoom meant it as far as career goes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Majesty

JMM reminds me more of the explosive thin man in CMM's signature then he does of Bernard Hopkins.

His fight against Diaz was absolutely beautiful

---

As far as styles yes he's closer to Alexis.
BoomBoom meant it as far as career goes.

---

Either way JMM is gonna be a hall of famer for sure. I just hope he fights again soon, not on PPV.

But they were saying how Hatton would be too much for him, I don't think it would be that bad, but I think Pacquiao will beat Hatton and it will set up a third fight.

The worst that can happen with pacquiao hatton is a draw.

Thanks Mick :) ...Yeah, I meant career wise. Syle wise I agree with ya Majesty, they are a different kind of fighter, though both have superior ring knowledge. Both first ballot HOFers imo. I dont see Pac climbing back in with Marquez mainly because im sure the people around him are telling him he already beat him and there are much less risky, bigger paydays out there. Which is why hes fighting guys like Oscar and Hatton.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Strange that JMM is as great as B Hop if not greater but will not get the credit because he has to chase the big fights which will ultimately shorten his career.

---

How is JMM greater than Hopkins? IMO Hopkins has the better fighters on his resume, and he hasn't choked since reaching the top level, besides that one Mercado fight he has been great.

B Hop lost against Roy Jones, so you could say he choked there. JMM has beaten Manny Pac twice in most peoples eyes.

First of all both Roy Jones Jr, and Bernard Hopkins were green, second can you name one fighter that would have even competed with that version of Roy Jones JR at middleweight or supermiddleweight? This is the guy who would have destroyed prett anybody he fought, he was too fast, too smart, too good.

Second, the first fight could have easily gone either way, and was a super close fihgt. The second fight was also close, but even without the knockdown round people should have had Pacquiao ahead by a point. With the knockdown it takes a Marquez hardcore fan boy IMO to see him winning, just like the people who thought Oscar's fight with Mayweather was close.

I think the thing that sets JMM apart from anyone else is his ring intellect and his ability to adapt on the fly. There isn't another fighter alive that could recover from a Pacquiao three knockdown first round the way he did to come back and essentially dominate. I think the comparison to Hopkins is valid in the sense that both fighters are incredibly cerebral and able to adjust and take advantage of their opponents' weaknesses on the fly. I think as boxing fans, we should appreciate what the man brings to the game and salute him for exemplifying the fact that this is the sweet science.

JMM dominates at more than one weight which BHop has done done. Hopkins avoided Galzaghe at super middle and when he fought at Light Heavy he has been selective. JMM would have taken on the best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

JMM dominates at more than one weight which BHop has done done. Hopkins avoided Galzaghe at super middle and when he fought at Light Heavy he has been selective. JMM would have taken on the best.

---

I dont think he avoided Calzaghe. Nobody knew who Calzaghe was prior to the Lacy fight. He wouldnt have been worth going up in weight to fight at the time. If Hopkins fought him pre-Lacy people would have said he only fought him because his record was against weak opposition.

BHOp is very smart and he knows he could never beat Joe who would be too busy for him. the only reason there fight was close was because he was very negative and would have been stopped if he did not unsportingly fake the low blow.

I dont thnk Calzaghe could stop him. Hopkins had a better chance to stop Calzaghe. He was just too caution first in his approach, and it was still very close.

Cautious or negative :confused:

His gameplan was to let Calzaghe come to him and land effective counterpunches. I dont call that negative, Id call it a bad gameplan. he tried to steal rounds by landing the more meaningful punches, and he did. Just not enough.

He tried the same negative tactics against Taylor throwing no punches for 6 rounds.