Comparing Floyd and Bhop's opposition

[Spicoli]

Why the fuck is preferring one over the other hating? Can anyone with a straight face and stable mind deny Mayweathers ability and skill? Personally I place Hopkins a notch above Mayweather when it comes to all time or 'great' based on opposition faced, career longevity and adaptability, style(s) and on a side note he did it all with no one setting the table for him and from the bottom up.

[Master]

The gap is not as big as I thought it would be as I thought Floyd was better as he has dominated more weight divisions that B Hop. However Hopkins opponents at the weight are more challenging.

[Beanflicker]

adaptability, style(s)

Please please please explain to me how Hopkins beats Floyd in adaptability?

[Beanflicker]

Hopkins pulled off a lot more big upsets than Floyd, but to be fair Floyd has hardly ever (if ever) been an underdog.

Someone explain to me also how going up in weight and dominating Tarver is any better than going up in weight and beating Canelo Alvarez?

Tarver was a solid fighter and the #1 at LHW at the time for sure, but he had 3 losses on his record and had been beaten by Glen Johnson just a few fights previous.

Canelo was the #1 at his division too. Young, undefeated and has gone on to regain the #1 spot in his division now that Floyd has dropped back to WW.

Someone explain to me how the Tarver win is a much higher quality win, because I don't get it.

[Master]

Hopkins pulled off a lot more big upsets than Floyd, but to be fair Floyd has hardly ever (if ever) been an underdog.

Someone explain to me also how going up in weight and dominating Tarver is any better than going up in weight and beating Canelo Alvarez?

Tarver was a solid fighter and the #1 at LHW at the time for sure, but he had 3 losses on his record and had been beaten by Glen Johnson just a few fights previous.

Canelo was the #1 at his division too. Young, undefeated and has gone on to regain the #1 spot in his division now that Floyd has dropped back to WW.

Someone explain to me how the Tarver win is a much higher quality win, because I don't get it.

Beating Canelo is a great victory, very under rated.

[Silkeyjoe]

I dont think the Alavrez win was underrated. Alvarez is a good fighter. Good defense, decent power, reasonably fast, decent movement but I have never rated him as great at any of this. Trout is a good fighter and gave him so much trouble that there was no doubt in my mind Floyd would school him. I also thought Lara would school him and while it wasnt a schooling I still think he should have won. Thats too many off days for me to consider Alvarez great.

As for Bhop I agree what he did for 10 years at MW was special but apart from Trinidad the competition really wasnt that good. De la Hoya really shouldnt have been at the weight and had just got a gift of a win over Sturm in the previous fight. For me he lost his 4 biggest fights. Jones Jr, Calzaghe, Taylor and Dawson and had he won one or 2 of these id have him as an all time great. Dont get me wrong he has had a great career just not of an ATG in my mind.

[Spicoli]

Hopkins pulled off a lot more big upsets than Floyd, but to be fair Floyd has hardly ever (if ever) been an underdog.

Someone explain to me also how going up in weight and dominating Tarver is any better than going up in weight and beating Canelo Alvarez?

Tarver was a solid fighter and the #1 at LHW at the time for sure, but he had 3 losses on his record and had been beaten by Glen Johnson just a few fights previous.

Canelo was the #1 at his division too. Young, undefeated and has gone on to regain the #1 spot in his division now that Floyd has dropped back to WW.

Someone explain to me how the Tarver win is a much higher quality win, because I don't get it.

In fairness Tarver could say he had knocked out and beaten a great. As well the weight jump was a little bit more significant as opposed to some 1,2 lb catch weight carnival. Alvarez was a quality fight and match and scalp for Mayweather but he hadn't been in the deep end on a large scale.

[Beanflicker]

It's the same story every time, people make these statements, and when you ask them to justify their opinion they get all defensive and start screaming about "oohhh I guess no one can disagree with anyone here" and "ooohh I guess I nobody can criticize Floyd."

What ever happened to actually having logic to back an opinion or idea? Sheesh

[Spicoli]

adaptability, style(s)

Please please please explain to me how Hopkins beats Floyd in adaptability?

His entire career was adaptability, literally from very early search and destroy to retooling his approach to the far too often broad brush and dismissal of the defensive sniper stuff he does. Yeh, sometimes it's ugly, but it's also gritty, cagey and full of guile you don't just learn overnight. Both fighters regardless of fandom can be very hunt and peck.

[Beanflicker]

[QUOTE=Spicoli;1280370]

His entire career was adaptability, literally from very early search and destroy to retooling his approach to the far too often broad brush and dismissal of the defensive sniper stuff he does. Yeh, sometimes it's ugly, but it's also gritty, cagey and full of guile you don't just learn overnight. Both fighters regardless of fandom can be very hunt and peck.

Bhop adopted for sure, but can we say he was more adaptive than Floyd? Whenever Bhop ran into a tough style for him, he seemed to lose. He never made the adjustments to Jermain Taylor to find a way to win. He even had a second chance, and again could not adapt. He couldn't adapt to Cazlaghe, Dawson, or Kovalev. He kept doing the same thing.

Floyd has consistently made adjustments and gotten stronger as the fight progressed. We saw it with Mosley. With Castillo, who arguably should have won the first fight, he adjusted and dominated the rematch. With Oscar, he adjusted and controlled the mid and later parts of the fight. He took over the mid and later rounds vs Maidana and dominated the rematch.

Floyd has been adapting his style seamlessly into his advanced age, as his legs have started to go we've seen him start working smarter to compensate.

[El Kabong]

If Floyd was to fight GGG that would be on par with BHop fighting Kovalev....it was a very dangerous fight for anyone much less a 50 year old

[ruthless rocco]

Remember how Bernard was completely dominated--every second of every round for 12 rounds? That was awesome!

[Beanflicker]

If Floyd was to fight GGG that would be on par with BHop fighting Kovalev....it was a very dangerous fight for anyone much less a 50 year old

I don't know how that works because Bhop and Kovalev were in the same weight division and of similar size and weight. GGG is two divisions up from Floyd, and even at WW Floyd is routinely outweighed by more of a gap than Kovalev outweighed Bhop, which I believe was 7 lbs.

[SlimTrae]

Hop IMO does't have a resume that questions who he didn't fight.

I think we all can find a fighter or two that PBF didn't fight: For me its Paul Williams who wanted him @ WW, Margarito as well... and a guy named: pacman.

That's why PBF has adjusted to all his challenges: because he chose which ones and when, Hop didn't.

[Spicoli]

[QUOTE=Beanflicker;1280388]

His entire career was adaptability, literally from very early search and destroy to retooling his approach to the far too often broad brush and dismissal of the defensive sniper stuff he does. Yeh, sometimes it's ugly, but it's also gritty, cagey and full of guile you don't just learn overnight. Both fighters regardless of fandom can be very hunt and peck.

Bhop adopted for sure, but can we say he was more adaptive than Floyd? Whenever Bhop ran into a tough style for him, he seemed to lose. He never made the adjustments to Jermain Taylor to find a way to win. He even had a second chance, and again could not adapt. He couldn't adapt to Cazlaghe, Dawson, or Kovalev. He kept doing the same thing.

Floyd has consistently made adjustments and gotten stronger as the fight progressed. We saw it with Mosley. With Castillo, who arguably should have won the first fight, he adjusted and dominated the rematch. With Oscar, he adjusted and controlled the mid and later parts of the fight. He took over the mid and later rounds vs Maidana and dominated the rematch.

Floyd has been adapting his style seamlessly into his advanced age, as his legs have started to go we've seen him start working smarter to compensate.

Ya know. I put Taylor 1 squarely on Hopkins. He assumed, he let his fat ego get in the way and did indeed grow stronger down the stretch, Hopkins has gotten stronger in the late rounds for the longest time, but he refused to insist on a ko there. He pooched it. That was a 1 point fight...and Taylor was rocking and rolling late.

Hopkins adapted to Oscar as well. He left him in a heap. And before we start railing on Oscar not being a middle (I do agree and hated that fight)...its not as if Mayweather has never beat on a guy who jumps a division just to make an "event"? At least Oscar had previously made the weight..and fought there albeit getting his ears boxed. Hopkins had been in "tough" and adapted well enough. Ask Allen, Mercado and Echols how he adapted and came back. With a jacked up shoulder and basically bashing the latter with one arm no less. No one expected less off Mayweather when he adapted to Marcos-Maidana. At the same point in his career Hopkins was adapting to an entirely different division and second career..legitimately..and dominating THE recognized Lt heavyweight champion not to mention a top ranked p4p fighter in Tarver.