Incidentally, I don't think Hopkins was embarrassed outclassed or exposed.

This might be a bit controversial on here, as Hopkins has a kind of legendary status on this board .... but (to me, anyway) he was always a decent, tough and solid old pro. He was never that exciting to watch, nobody ever looked good against him ....... a solid scuffler who has learnt how to survive in the ring, by coming up the hard way.

In a previous age, Hopkins would have been a solid 'gatekeeper' - the guy that you had to go though to get to a world title (maybe a bit like a Robbie Simms or a Gerry Quarry type status - a headline act and a contender, but he falls short of greatness. Maybe a bit of a Jersey Joe Walcott as well?

It's not his fault - he is a solid professional who never undertrains and has come a long way in life ... a genuinely tough man, just not a 'great' fighter.

Yes, he had middleweight titles for a long time, but I think you need more than that to be called 'great' - you need to fight dangerous guys who are your size, you need to show a bit of class etc etc.

I'm sure there are people here who disagree - this is just my opinion, but Hopkins is/was a very good fighter ............. but not a great one.

Good pros hardly ever get enbarrassed, outclassed and exposed because they know what they are doing in there - they can fiddle and fudge, hols and slip, follow with the head or elbow, pace the fight and often come out unmarked .... but there is a difference between trying not to lose, and trying to win.

I've never seen Bernard 'let it all hang out' and throw caution to the wind in order to get an unlikely victory.