i honestly would put him right behind manny, if you consider floyd inactive, what do you guys think?
Printable View
i honestly would put him right behind manny, if you consider floyd inactive, what do you guys think?
Agreed. But never really put much stock in p4p. I think Floyds blowing his peak career last few years.
at least number 3 imo.
It is RIDICULOUS to think a 46 year old belongs on a list like that!
There are a whole bunch of people who obviously belong higher.
There is Manny P and there is...um...well...wait a minute...there's um...DAMN!
More seriously I guess he's in the mix with Sergio right?
He should take Ponglashit's place.
Again this bullshit P4P rankings to just give credit to the smaller fighters. The legend made history last night by becoming the UNDISPUTED light heavyweight champion of the world. Just take it that way.
I'd have him at either 2 or 3. Floyd doesn't belong anywhere near a P4P list these days.
Hold up.
Where was Pascal rated P4P before this fight? He certainly wasn't top 10. MOST people seem to believe Hopkins was "robbed" against him first time. Hopkin's was the betting FAVOURITE. So he jumps in the top 3 by beating someone he already beat?
Where did FRoch get rated P4P after beating Pascal?
Seems like sentimentality to a geriatric. Fact.
You need to look up the definition of the word fact ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
The problem is BHOP didn't beat Pascal the first time. I looked it up in the record book.
Froch has never been a THE MAN champion. He doesn't have anywhere near the resume of BHOP.
You raise a really interesting question though.
Clearly winning a legit title at 46 is fascinating. But is is any more important that winning one at 23 or 29 or 33 or 36?
This might sound a bit odd, but I think his age plays a role in how strong his resume is - becoming the linear LHW champ at 46 is an amazing accomplishment - but age absolutely should not play a role in P4P discussions IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiYou need to look up the definition of the word fact ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
The problem is BHOP didn't beat Pascal the first time. I looked it up in the record book.
Froch has never been a THE MAN champion. He doesn't have anywhere near the resume of BHOP.
You raise a really interesting question though.
Clearly winning a legit title at 46 is fascinating. But is is any more important that winning one at 23 or 29 or 33 or 36?
I don't think that inconsistency is odd, they really are two different categories.Quote:
Originally Posted by CFHThis might sound a bit odd, but I think his age plays a role in how strong his resume is - becoming the linear LHW champ at 46 is an amazing accomplishment - but age absolutely should not play a role in P4P discussions IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by marbleheadmauiYou need to look up the definition of the word fact ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
The problem is BHOP didn't beat Pascal the first time. I looked it up in the record book.
Froch has never been a THE MAN champion. He doesn't have anywhere near the resume of BHOP.
You raise a really interesting question though.
Clearly winning a legit title at 46 is fascinating. But is is any more important that winning one at 23 or 29 or 33 or 36?
But why is winning at 46 more important than doing so at 34. Playing devil's advocate, why did it take him so long ;)
very good arguments guys, but i am not going off of one fight, his recent showings, impressive, he belongs in the top 5 and p4p has alto do with how you win and who you beat, and your status in the weight division your in swell as compared to the champs in other weight classes and i don't think anyone is better than b hop, who should rank higher if you disagree? ....the only reason b hop was a favorite coming in is because ppl were tired of being wrong betting against him....hopkins beat pavlik, redeemed his loss against jones, all thou a washed up jones, nonetheless, and went on to beat on a young champion twice, the same guy who put the loss on THE man at 175 at the time (dawson) thats what i base my judgement on. And you damn sure cant say just because pascale wasn't top 5 hopkins shouldn't be, p4p is full of different weight classes...in other words it doesn't mean he has to fight pac man to be number one
This is why p4p is theatrical smoke-n-mirrors. Anyone with a clear mind can look at Hopkins and know is is a more skilled, better through and through boxer then Carl friggin Froch. Really now ;D
:smilie_whisper: " yah mate thats actually a fact..saw it myself"
The fact Hopkin's didn't beat Pascal first time makes his case WORSE! P4P is about what is currently happening. Hopkins, who was not rated P4P before his last fight, loses it against a guy that was also not rated P4P. Yet Hopkins now qualifies as P4P by beating the very same fighter, who has never been ranked P4P.
You're all rating Hopkins on his history. You're giving him bonus points for being a pensioner. He is a surefire all-time-great. It doesn't mean he is currently among the worlds 10 best fighters let alone top 3.
Marbleheadmaui - You can't get credit for lineal wins in P4P. Dozens of fighters rated P4P have never been lineal champ. As you yourself point out, Roy Jones has arguably never been THE man but he certainly was regarded P4P no.1 (using The Ring of course) ;)
It took Froch only one go to confirm his superiority over Pascal though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
So the current form says FRoch owns BHop. Fact. (;D).
I agree with that rationale, but Pascal was actually the betting favourite for this one. I don't know why, anyone who saw the first fight would've almost certainly have fancied Hopkins again, but he wasn't the favourite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
That said, this win in no way puts him at 2 or 3. It's supposed to be a take on who is the best fighter on the planet regardless of weight. Age & lineal titles play little role, in fact even inactivity shouldn't, as it's originally not supposed to be the 'what have you done lately' popularity contest it's become. It seems to have become some kind of bizarre division of its own.
LOL, I've been HAD!Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
P4P has become a Popularity contest that Fighters who have done a good recently gets elevated :D
In terms of P4P definition of today
BHOP should be between 5 to 10
P4P where Fighters are the same size
BHOP should be #10
IMO :D
bro it was a feat by itself bhop is 46 y/o.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I think his age is a bigger handy cap then the weight disadvantage that Floyde and Pac have.
Pac
Martinez
Donaire
Hopkins
JMM
I think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinI agree with that rationale, but Pascal was actually the betting favourite for this one. I don't know why, anyone who saw the first fight would've almost certainly have fancied Hopkins again, but he wasn't the favourite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
That said, this win in no way puts him at 2 or 3. It's supposed to be a take on who is the best fighter on the planet regardless of weight. Age & lineal titles play little role, in fact even inactivity shouldn't, as it's originally not supposed to be the 'what have you done lately' popularity contest it's become. It seems to have become some kind of bizarre division of its own.
B Hops resume over last few years show huge upset wins over Taver, Pavlik and Pascal, plus wins over Winky Wright and Roy Jones, along with a draw to Pascal in which most thought he won, and a very close defeat to Calzaghe, again a fight many thought he won.
Contrast that with Martinez who won and lost to Paul Williams, beat Pavlik, drew with Kermit Cintron in a fight we all thought he should have won, and beat some decent little known light middle last time .out.
I would say even discarding the age factor Hopkins resume is better than Martinez. He beat Pavlik and.ruined him, beat two linear champs at 175 and in Calzaghe lost to a better fighter than Martinez has ever faced.
He's above Sergio for me on merit nothing to do with sentimentality over his age...
Not to meantion in boxing age Bernard must be pushing 156 i think he should be on high end of the 10.
b-hop deserves credit, no matter his age.
what we saw last night was a work of art.
the way he made pascal miss and look like a fool, while tagging him repeatedly dead on target! it was great, and I'm happy for him. he might be an asshole, but u gotta give the guy credit. he has fought the best, younger, tougher...and prevailed.
so yes, he deserves to be up there in the p4p rankings!
Yes I agree - Hopkins is clearly a unique individual for his age. He is an all-time-great. Fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlikbro it was a feat by itself bhop is 46 y/o.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
What does that have to do with P4P?
It was a very good win. It wasn't extraordinary. He outfought a man that he'd already had great success against.
I've been having my p4p list for a while now. B-hop on #7 . Pongaswelek(sorry for the spelling) has done nothing in the last year. So taking away PBF because he has not fought is justice-?? Pongswalek ? has fought bums - same as being inactive- he might as well retire
I agree with Fenster yet again in recent times. Strange to think that. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree. Hopkins beat Pascal once and lost to Pascal once. Pascal wasn't ranked in the top twenty p4p fighters. Martinez beat Williams once and lost to Williams once. Williams was ranked in the 5 or 10 p4p fighters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree with this list for the most part.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
But, Hopkins lost to Pascal, an unranked p4p fighter in his fight before this one. And Pascal isn't that huge of a win. Pascal was unranked p4p. It's hard to remain top p4p with a loss in your second to last fight....unless, the loss is to another top p4p fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboI think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinThat said, this win in no way puts him at 2 or 3. It's supposed to be a take on who is the best fighter on the planet regardless of weight. Age & lineal titles play little role, in fact even inactivity shouldn't, as it's originally not supposed to be the 'what have you done lately' popularity contest it's become. It seems to have become some kind of bizarre division of its own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
B Hops resume over last few years show huge upset wins over Taver, Pavlik and Pascal, plus wins over Winky Wright and Roy Jones, along with a draw to Pascal in which most thought he won, and a very close defeat to Calzaghe, again a fight many thought he won.
Contrast that with Martinez who won and lost to Paul Williams, beat Pavlik, drew with Kermit Cintron in a fight we all thought he should have won, and beat some decent little known light middle last time .out.
I would say even discarding the age factor Hopkins resume is better than Martinez. He beat Pavlik and.ruined him, beat two linear champs at 175 and in Calzaghe lost to a better fighter than Martinez has ever faced.
He's above Sergio for me on merit nothing to do with sentimentality over his age...
B-hop never lost to Pascal. I had him winning the first one- as 90% of people did. Draw wass alright also. Pascal is surely a top 20 . Near the end but still top 20
Both beat Pavlik, but although Hopkins did it first you can make an argument that Martinez beat him at the weight at which he was established. Add to that a close loss (many felt he won) & a stunning KO of Williams (who was as high as #3 P4P for some people), as well as a win over the undefeated & highly rated Dzinziruk. Hopkins in that same time frame has beaten Enrique Ornelas, Roy Jones & gone 1-0-1 with Pascal. It's a decent resume & there's an argument for him being somewhere around #10, but the fact is if he & Martinez were the same size who do you think would win? I'd have Martinez. Hopkins has a greater resume overall, but he hasn't done as much & looked as good as Martinez has recently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
*Also noticing that both Fenster & Rant have said B-Hop lost his last fight before this. Might want to check that again fellas ;)
He never lost to Jean Pascal, the first fight was a highly controversial draw. Which many think B-Hop won, your also forgetting B-Hop was robbed of two knockdowns vs Jean Pascal.Quote:
Originally Posted by RantcatratI agree with Fenster yet again in recent times. Strange to think that. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree. Hopkins beat Pascal once and lost to Pascal once. Pascal wasn't ranked in the top twenty p4p fighters. Martinez beat Williams once and lost to Williams once. Williams was ranked in the 5 or 10 p4p fighters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree with this list for the most part.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
But, Hopkins lost to Pascal, an unranked p4p fighter in his fight before this one. And Pascal isn't that huge of a win. Pascal was unranked p4p. It's hard to remain top p4p with a loss in your second to last fight....unless, the loss is to another top p4p fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboI think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinThat said, this win in no way puts him at 2 or 3. It's supposed to be a take on who is the best fighter on the planet regardless of weight. Age & lineal titles play little role, in fact even inactivity shouldn't, as it's originally not supposed to be the 'what have you done lately' popularity contest it's become. It seems to have become some kind of bizarre division of its own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
B Hops resume over last few years show huge upset wins over Taver, Pavlik and Pascal, plus wins over Winky Wright and Roy Jones, along with a draw to Pascal in which most thought he won, and a very close defeat to Calzaghe, again a fight many thought he won.
Contrast that with Martinez who won and lost to Paul Williams, beat Pavlik, drew with Kermit Cintron in a fight we all thought he should have won, and beat some decent little known light middle last time .out.
I would say even discarding the age factor Hopkins resume is better than Martinez. He beat Pavlik and.ruined him, beat two linear champs at 175 and in Calzaghe lost to a better fighter than Martinez has ever faced.
He's above Sergio for me on merit nothing to do with sentimentality over his age...
Hopkins did not lose to Pascal, it was a draw where most thought he had won, much the same as Martinez draw with Cintron.Quote:
Originally Posted by RantcatratI agree with Fenster yet again in recent times. Strange to think that. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree. Hopkins beat Pascal once and lost to Pascal once. Pascal wasn't ranked in the top twenty p4p fighters. Martinez beat Williams once and lost to Williams once. Williams was ranked in the 5 or 10 p4p fighters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree with this list for the most part.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
But, Hopkins lost to Pascal, an unranked p4p fighter in his fight before this one. And Pascal isn't that huge of a win. Pascal was unranked p4p. It's hard to remain top p4p with a loss in your second to last fight....unless, the loss is to another top p4p fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboI think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinThat said, this win in no way puts him at 2 or 3. It's supposed to be a take on who is the best fighter on the planet regardless of weight. Age & lineal titles play little role, in fact even inactivity shouldn't, as it's originally not supposed to be the 'what have you done lately' popularity contest it's become. It seems to have become some kind of bizarre division of its own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
B Hops resume over last few years show huge upset wins over Taver, Pavlik and Pascal, plus wins over Winky Wright and Roy Jones, along with a draw to Pascal in which most thought he won, and a very close defeat to Calzaghe, again a fight many thought he won.
Contrast that with Martinez who won and lost to Paul Williams, beat Pavlik, drew with Kermit Cintron in a fight we all thought he should have won, and beat some decent little known light middle last time .out.
I would say even discarding the age factor Hopkins resume is better than Martinez. He beat Pavlik and.ruined him, beat two linear champs at 175 and in Calzaghe lost to a better fighter than Martinez has ever faced.
He's above Sergio for me on merit nothing to do with sentimentality over his age...
@Jazmerkin Your opinion that Hopkins would lose to Martinez is just that, an opinon, just as Pavliks ideal weight being 160 is an opinion also. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Pavlik fighting at supermiddleweight now? And did he not weigh in at 170 a couple weeks ago, same as against B Hop? You can just as easily argue 170 is his iseal weight, certainly Pavlik himself now seems to think so..
Anyway back to acomplishments, Hopkins has simply beaten better fighters.
Tarver,
Pavlik
Pascal,
Winky,
Jones Jr
compared to
Williams
Pavlik
Dzinzurik
Martinez also drew with Cintron and lost to Wiliams, Hopkins drew with Pascal and lost to Calzaghe.
His opposition is better across the board.
@Fenster, Pascal wasnt in many p4p lists, but Dawson certainly was and Pascal was coming off a win over him was he not?
How many of Martinez opponents have been p4p? Williams...and?
Hopkins beat Pavlik when he was p4p, Calzaghe was number 3 p4p and some of you think he won that fight.
Over his career yes, if you read what I said, he has a better resume. Recently, as in the last 2 years, Williams, Pavlik & Dzinziruk >>>> Ornelas, Jones Jr & Pascal.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboHopkins did not lose to Pascal, it was a draw where most thought he had won, much the same as Martinez draw with Cintron.Quote:
Originally Posted by RantcatratI agree with Fenster yet again in recent times. Strange to think that. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree. Hopkins beat Pascal once and lost to Pascal once. Pascal wasn't ranked in the top twenty p4p fighters. Martinez beat Williams once and lost to Williams once. Williams was ranked in the 5 or 10 p4p fighters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree with this list for the most part.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
But, Hopkins lost to Pascal, an unranked p4p fighter in his fight before this one. And Pascal isn't that huge of a win. Pascal was unranked p4p. It's hard to remain top p4p with a loss in your second to last fight....unless, the loss is to another top p4p fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboI think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinThat said, this win in no way puts him at 2 or 3. It's supposed to be a take on who is the best fighter on the planet regardless of weight. Age & lineal titles play little role, in fact even inactivity shouldn't, as it's originally not supposed to be the 'what have you done lately' popularity contest it's become. It seems to have become some kind of bizarre division of its own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
B Hops resume over last few years show huge upset wins over Taver, Pavlik and Pascal, plus wins over Winky Wright and Roy Jones, along with a draw to Pascal in which most thought he won, and a very close defeat to Calzaghe, again a fight many thought he won.
Contrast that with Martinez who won and lost to Paul Williams, beat Pavlik, drew with Kermit Cintron in a fight we all thought he should have won, and beat some decent little known light middle last time .out.
I would say even discarding the age factor Hopkins resume is better than Martinez. He beat Pavlik and.ruined him, beat two linear champs at 175 and in Calzaghe lost to a better fighter than Martinez has ever faced.
He's above Sergio for me on merit nothing to do with sentimentality over his age...
@Jazmerkin Your opinion that Hopkins would lose to Martinez is just that, an opinon, just as Pavliks ideal weight being 160 is an opinion also. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Pavlik fighting at supermiddleweight now? And did he not weigh in at 170 a couple weeks ago, same as against B Hop? You can just as easily argue 170 is his iseal weight, certainly Pavlik himself now seems to think so..
Anyway back to acomplishments, Hopkins has simply beaten better fighters.
Tarver,
Pavlik
Pascal,
Winky,
Jones Jr
compared to
Williams
Pavlik
Dzinzurik
Martinez also drew with Cintron and lost to Wiliams, Hopkins drew with Pascal and lost to Calzaghe.
His opposition is better across the board.
@Fenster, Pascal wasnt in many p4p lists, but Dawson certainly was and Pascal was coming off a win over him was he not?
How many of Martinez opponents have been p4p? Williams...and?
Hopkins beat Pavlik when he was p4p, Calzaghe was number 3 p4p and some of you think he won that fight.
You also seem to not realize that all p4p is based on is opinion. There are no empirical facts that determine the rankings ;)
Bilbo just to further your point, Winky Wright was also ranked 9th P4P when B-Hop beat him.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboHopkins did not lose to Pascal, it was a draw where most thought he had won, much the same as Martinez draw with Cintron.Quote:
Originally Posted by RantcatratI agree with Fenster yet again in recent times. Strange to think that. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree. Hopkins beat Pascal once and lost to Pascal once. Pascal wasn't ranked in the top twenty p4p fighters. Martinez beat Williams once and lost to Williams once. Williams was ranked in the 5 or 10 p4p fighters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree with this list for the most part.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
But, Hopkins lost to Pascal, an unranked p4p fighter in his fight before this one. And Pascal isn't that huge of a win. Pascal was unranked p4p. It's hard to remain top p4p with a loss in your second to last fight....unless, the loss is to another top p4p fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboI think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinThat said, this win in no way puts him at 2 or 3. It's supposed to be a take on who is the best fighter on the planet regardless of weight. Age & lineal titles play little role, in fact even inactivity shouldn't, as it's originally not supposed to be the 'what have you done lately' popularity contest it's become. It seems to have become some kind of bizarre division of its own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
B Hops resume over last few years show huge upset wins over Taver, Pavlik and Pascal, plus wins over Winky Wright and Roy Jones, along with a draw to Pascal in which most thought he won, and a very close defeat to Calzaghe, again a fight many thought he won.
Contrast that with Martinez who won and lost to Paul Williams, beat Pavlik, drew with Kermit Cintron in a fight we all thought he should have won, and beat some decent little known light middle last time .out.
I would say even discarding the age factor Hopkins resume is better than Martinez. He beat Pavlik and.ruined him, beat two linear champs at 175 and in Calzaghe lost to a better fighter than Martinez has ever faced.
He's above Sergio for me on merit nothing to do with sentimentality over his age...
@Jazmerkin Your opinion that Hopkins would lose to Martinez is just that, an opinon, just as Pavliks ideal weight being 160 is an opinion also. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Pavlik fighting at supermiddleweight now? And did he not weigh in at 170 a couple weeks ago, same as against B Hop? You can just as easily argue 170 is his iseal weight, certainly Pavlik himself now seems to think so..
Anyway back to acomplishments, Hopkins has simply beaten better fighters.
Tarver,
Pavlik
Pascal,
Winky,
Jones Jr
compared to
Williams
Pavlik
Dzinzurik
Martinez also drew with Cintron and lost to Wiliams, Hopkins drew with Pascal and lost to Calzaghe.
His opposition is better across the board.
@Fenster, Pascal wasnt in many p4p lists, but Dawson certainly was and Pascal was coming off a win over him was he not?
How many of Martinez opponents have been p4p? Williams...and?
Hopkins beat Pavlik when he was p4p, Calzaghe was number 3 p4p and some of you think he won that fight.
[/QUOTE] Over his career yes, if you read what I said, he has a better resume. Recently, as in the last 2 years, Williams, Pavlik & Dzinziruk >>>> Ornelas, Jones Jr & Pascal.
You also seem to not realize that all p4p is based on is opinion. There are no empirical facts that determine the rankings ;)[/QUOTE]
This is what I mean. But, we've talked about this in other threads and I value the win over Dzinziruk higher than you do because I ranked him as the top, or top 2 or 3 junior middleweights. I also probably rate the Pascal win lower than you do.
And sorry about saying he lost to Pascal, I blanked on that one. Not that a draw with an unranked p4p fighter is much better.
His win over Winkie was at 170. His win over Pavlik was at 170. I discount those wins a lot. You seemingly don't. Pavlik looked a lot better at 160 than he has above 160. A lot.
In sum, I guess I value Martinez's win over Williams higher than you do, and you value Hopkins' win over Pavlik higher than I do. We can agree to disagree. I will say one thing, if Hopkins faces Bad Chad, which he is contractually obligated to do, and beats Bad Chad, he will take over Martinez's spot certainly.
And how about Donaire? You haven't mentioned him much.
Yup. Unless we agree on a criteria? This discussion is even more pointless than the rest of the ones we share.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinOver his career yes, if you read what I said, he has a better resume. Recently, as in the last 2 years, Williams, Pavlik & Dzinziruk >>>> Ornelas, Jones Jr & Pascal.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboHopkins did not lose to Pascal, it was a draw where most thought he had won, much the same as Martinez draw with Cintron.Quote:
Originally Posted by RantcatratI agree with Fenster yet again in recent times. Strange to think that. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree. Hopkins beat Pascal once and lost to Pascal once. Pascal wasn't ranked in the top twenty p4p fighters. Martinez beat Williams once and lost to Williams once. Williams was ranked in the 5 or 10 p4p fighters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
I agree with this list for the most part.Quote:
Originally Posted by hardcore_crash
But, Hopkins lost to Pascal, an unranked p4p fighter in his fight before this one. And Pascal isn't that huge of a win. Pascal was unranked p4p. It's hard to remain top p4p with a loss in your second to last fight....unless, the loss is to another top p4p fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboI think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkinThat said, this win in no way puts him at 2 or 3. It's supposed to be a take on who is the best fighter on the planet regardless of weight. Age & lineal titles play little role, in fact even inactivity shouldn't, as it's originally not supposed to be the 'what have you done lately' popularity contest it's become. It seems to have become some kind of bizarre division of its own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
B Hops resume over last few years show huge upset wins over Taver, Pavlik and Pascal, plus wins over Winky Wright and Roy Jones, along with a draw to Pascal in which most thought he won, and a very close defeat to Calzaghe, again a fight many thought he won.
Contrast that with Martinez who won and lost to Paul Williams, beat Pavlik, drew with Kermit Cintron in a fight we all thought he should have won, and beat some decent little known light middle last time .out.
I would say even discarding the age factor Hopkins resume is better than Martinez. He beat Pavlik and.ruined him, beat two linear champs at 175 and in Calzaghe lost to a better fighter than Martinez has ever faced.
He's above Sergio for me on merit nothing to do with sentimentality over his age...
@Jazmerkin Your opinion that Hopkins would lose to Martinez is just that, an opinon, just as Pavliks ideal weight being 160 is an opinion also. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Pavlik fighting at supermiddleweight now? And did he not weigh in at 170 a couple weeks ago, same as against B Hop? You can just as easily argue 170 is his iseal weight, certainly Pavlik himself now seems to think so..
Anyway back to acomplishments, Hopkins has simply beaten better fighters.
Tarver,
Pavlik
Pascal,
Winky,
Jones Jr
compared to
Williams
Pavlik
Dzinzurik
Martinez also drew with Cintron and lost to Wiliams, Hopkins drew with Pascal and lost to Calzaghe.
His opposition is better across the board.
@Fenster, Pascal wasnt in many p4p lists, but Dawson certainly was and Pascal was coming off a win over him was he not?
How many of Martinez opponents have been p4p? Williams...and?
Hopkins beat Pavlik when he was p4p, Calzaghe was number 3 p4p and some of you think he won that fight.
You also seem to not realize that all p4p is based on is opinion. There are no empirical facts that determine the rankings ;)
And THAT is REALLY saying something ;)
Bilbo - Was Pascal P4P when he DREW with the old boy? No. Was the old boy P4P? No. Were either P4P Saturday? No.
The Pavlik and Calzaghe fights were three years ago. Since then Hopkins has fought three guys NOT rated P4P - Ornales, virtually dead Roy and Carl Froch victim Pascal.
P4P is about current events. Just because you've got a free bus pass, it doesn't mean you can beat a decent fighter and dive into the top 3.
Jermain Taylor entered the top 10 P4P with his win over Hopkins. He was kicked out BEFORE he ever lost a fight.
P4P is nonsense. You're all currently favouring BHOP just because he's BHOP. Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Explain to how Martinez has done more?
Was Bunema p4p? Nope. Was Cintron p4p? Nope Was Williams p4p? Yep, and he beat Martinez first time around. Was Dzinurik p4p? nope Was Pavlik p4p? Again nope.
Was Pascal more highly regarded at the time of the first Hopkins fight than Cintron, Pavlik, Dzinziruk and Bunema were when Martinex fought them? Being the recognised 175 champ with three straight wins over Diaconu and Dawson (a p4p fighter) then yes absolutely he was better than all of the above other than Williams, who to be fair he's probably equal to unless you regard beating Margarito and Winky and going 1-1 with Carlos Quintana as more of an acjievement than beating Diaconu twice, Dawson and losing a close 12 rounder to Carl Froch..
Martinez is 3-1-1 in his last 5 fights and if you going take away credit from Hopkins for fighting Pavlik and Winky at 170 then you HAVE to take credit away from Martinez for fighting a light middle unranked at 160 for his middleweight title defence. Fair's fair after all.
Add to the fact that Hopkins is a proven legend with 20 years worth of acomplishments and a first ballot Hall of Famer then he should be rated above a 35 year old guy who most people have only heqrd of in the last couple years and who is currently the middleweight champ only because there was a complete void of talent in the division that encouraged him to move up. Williams and Pavlik were good wins, but no better than Tarver, Pavlik and Pascal.
Hopkins should be number 2 behind Manny imo.
If its about current events why is Pascal a Carl Froch victim and not a Chad Dawson conquerer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Martinez is better because he beat a Hopkins victim, a Quintana victim and drew with a Margarito victim? Is this your argument?:-\
Well I haven't even been arguing a case for Martinez but he is EASILY above Hopkins.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboIf its about current events why is Pascal a Carl Froch victim and not a Chad Dawson conquerer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Martinez is better because he beat a Hopkins victim, a Quintana victim and drew with a Margarito victim? Is this your argument?:-\
This is how the performances compare over their last 5 fights.
Martinez
Kermit Cintron - top ranked KO artist. Martinez wins KO 7.
Paul Williams - P4P rated. Martinez loses a MD (robbery).
Kelly Pavlik - Lineal 160 champ. Martinez wins by landslide UD.
Paul Williams - P4P rated. Martinez wins KO 2.
Sergiy Dzinziruk - unbeaten longtime WBO champ. Martinez wins KO 8.
Hopkins
Kelly Pavlik - 10lbs above prime weight. Hopkins wins UD.
Enrique Ornelas - Borderline journeyman. Hopkins wins UD.
Roy Jones Jr - Corpse. Hopkins wins UD.
Jean Pascal - Hopkins gets dropped twice. Draw.
Jean Pascal - Hopkins wins UD.
Martinez has not only faced by far the stronger opposition he is WINNING in a far more impressive fashion. Hopkins can't even stop dead men, journeymen and guys he's dragged WAY above their optimum weight. Martinez is DESTROYING P4P rated guys, unbeaten guys and deadly punchers.
Hopkins over Martinez? Laughable. Fact.
:goodpost:Quote:
Originally Posted by FensterWell I haven't even been arguing a case for Martinez but he is EASILY above Hopkins.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboIf its about current events why is Pascal a Carl Froch victim and not a Chad Dawson conquerer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Martinez is better because he beat a Hopkins victim, a Quintana victim and drew with a Margarito victim? Is this your argument?:-\
This is how the performances compare over their last 5 fights.
Martinez
Kermit Cintron - top ranked KO artist. Martinez wins KO 7.
Paul Williams - P4P rated. Martinez loses a MD (robbery).
Kelly Pavlik - Lineal 160 champ. Martinez wins by landslide UD.
Paul Williams - P4P rated. Martinez wins KO 2.
Sergiy Dzinziruk - unbeaten longtime WBO champ. Martinez wins KO 8.
Hopkins
Kelly Pavlik - 10lbs above prime weight. Hopkins wins UD.
Enrique Ornelas - Borderline journeyman. Hopkins wins UD.
Roy Jones Jr - Corpse. Hopkins wins UD.
Jean Pascal - Hopkins gets dropped twice. Draw.
Jean Pascal - Hopkins wins UD.
Martinez has not only faced by far the stronger opposition he is WINNING in a far more impressive fashion. Hopkins can't even stop dead men, journeymen and guys he's dragged WAY above their optimum weight. Martinez is DESTROYING P4P rated guys, unbeaten guys and deadly punchers.
Hopkins over Martinez? Laughable. Fact.