Trinidad/De La Hoya Vs Hopkins

[SweetPea]

Hopkins beat both Oscar and Tito because he was better than them, not because he was bigger.

[BIG H]

Not sure about that one, I'd go with DLH p4p over Hopkins.

[Fenster]

Not sure about that one, I'd go with DLH p4p over Hopkins.

Me too.

Apart from Hopkins looking much bigger than Oscar (did Tito too.. but not so marked) the difference is - Trinidad fought Hopkins after smashing Joppy to bits whereas Oscar fought Hopkins after losing to Sturm. Their middleweight debuts couldn't have been any more different.

[SweetPea]

Not sure about that one, I'd go with DLH p4p over Hopkins.

He didn't beat either of them simply by overwhelmingly them with size and power. He outskilled them. He had better defense, he was a more accurate puncher in those fights, he was flat-out better.

[Tins06]

Not sure about that one, I'd go with DLH p4p over Hopkins.

He didn't beat either of them simply by overwhelmingly them with size and power. He outskilled them. He had better defense, he was a more accurate puncher in those fights, he was flat-out better.

#

I would disagree with the DLH bout. At first B-Hop tried to box and Oscar was holding his own. Until B-Hop decided to use his physical advantage, and then the body shot.....

[kingfrnk]

you can argue about who is better p4p between oscar and bhop personally i feel bhop is a better boxer, but thats my decision. But tito was just straight beatin up bhop made him look like an c class fighter and so did winky, and i like tito when he was a welter, and JMW.

im sure we will be hearing from Puglistic soon

[Kel]

Not sure about that one, I'd go with DLH p4p over Hopkins.

He didn't beat either of them simply by overwhelmingly them with size and power. He outskilled them. He had better defense, he was a more accurate puncher in those fights, he was flat-out better.

What about the punch resistance he would have againsed the smaller men? You fail to address that.

[ICB]

Not sure about that one, I'd go with DLH p4p over Hopkins.

He didn't beat either of them simply by overwhelmingly them with size and power. He outskilled them. He had better defense, he was a more accurate puncher in those fights, he was flat-out better.

Im not sure i agree with that ODLH at Super Featherweight/Lightweight was amazing, he had dynamite in both fists and great handspeed. And it was clear from the Felix Sturm fight he didn't belong at Middleweight, and just remember that was ODLH's 6th weightclass.

And Felix Trinidad although more limited that Bernard Hopkins, was still was a monster at Welterweight and the only fighters who went the distance with him, in his prime were great fighters like Pernell Whitaker, ODLH, Hector Camacho etc.

Felix Trinidad's problem against Bernard Hopkins was he couldn't hurt Bernard Hopkins. who was the much bigger man i don't think Felix Trinidad had any real problems landing.

If we are saying P4P Hopkins vs Trinidad then i would say Trinidad could for certain hurt Hopkins, and he would have Hopkins on the backfoot and it would be much more competitive. Because Hopkins wouldn't be able to stay inside as much as he did.

ODLH vs Hopkins P4P ? i can see ODLH outspeeding Hopkins and throwing the flashier punches to win a decision, i honestly think P4P both fights would be very competitive.

[SweetPea]

Felix Trinidad's problem against Bernard Hopkins was he couldn't hurt Bernard Hopkins. who was the much bigger man i don't think Felix Trinidad had any real problems landing.

Disagree. Felix Trinidad's problem was that he couldn't land anywhere near as many clean flush shots as Bernard Hopkins was landing. Hopkins outboxed him for 12 rounds. His technical superiority is what allowed him to KO Tito in the 12th.

And I should add that Felix Trinidad is one of my 4-5 favorite fighters ever. So when I'm backing up BHop in this thread, it's not because I'm a big BHop fan. Believe me, I wish Tito had been better than BHop.

[Puya]

Not sure about that one, I'd go with DLH p4p over Hopkins.

He didn't beat either of them simply by overwhelmingly them with size and power. He outskilled them. He had better defense, he was a more accurate puncher in those fights, he was flat-out better.

I was the fact he new that none of them could hurt him.

[Bookkeeper]

Not sure about that one, I'd go with DLH p4p over Hopkins.

He didn't beat either of them simply by overwhelmingly them with size and power. He outskilled them. He had better defense, he was a more accurate puncher in those fights, he was flat-out better.

I was the fact he new that none of them could hurt him.

That's what I said, people act like Tito was not landing, but he was landing big punches that had very little effect on Hopkins, those blows at WW or SW would have KO'd someone

[ICB]

He didn't beat either of them simply by overwhelmingly them with size and power. He outskilled them. He had better defense, he was a more accurate puncher in those fights, he was flat-out better.

I was the fact he new that none of them could hurt him.

That's what I said, people act like Tito was not landing, but he was landing big punches that had very little effect on Hopkins, those blows at WW or SW would have KO'd someone

Agreed all you have to do is look at the short list of fighters, that went the distance with Felix Trinidad in his prime Pernell Whitaker, ODLH, Hector Camacho, David Reid,

David Reid never recovered from that beating, ODLH had to use his feet all night to survive. Hector Camacho is tougher than a coffin nail, and so is Pernell Whitaker but even Pernell Whitaker suffered a broken jaw.

[The Rookie Fan]

Hopkins beat both Oscar and Tito because he was better than them, not because he was bigger.

Agree 100%. And you all know I'm a huge Tito fan.

As for the OP. There are several factors you have to take into consideration.

Trinidad was an undefeated champion who had just blown through a respected Middleweight champion.

De la Hoya was a three time defeated former Junior Feather weight who was just made to look real bad by an unknown european title holder.

I am not making this sound worst than it is, I am stating facts.

Fact is Hopkins was a great fighter long before he fought Trinidad, we just realized it afterwards.

[Bookkeeper]

Hopkins beat both Oscar and Tito because he was better than them, not because he was bigger.

Agree 100%. And you all know I'm a huge Tito fan.

As for the OP. There are several factors you have to take into consideration.

Trinidad was an undefeated champion who had just blown through a respected Middleweight champion.

De la Hoya was a three time defeated former Junior Feather weight who was just made to look real bad by an unknown european title holder.

I am not making this sound worst than it is, I am stating facts.

Fact is Hopkins was a great fighter long before he fought Trinidad, we just realized it afterwards.

Trinidad beating William Joppy should be a testament to him being an overachiever not a true Middleweight, and I was not trying to make this into a math class on what weights they started out, the whole point is that both individuals were undersized and only one get's an excuse for it.

[eagle]

Hopkins beat both Oscar and Tito because he was better than them, not because he was bigger.

Agree 100%. And you all know I'm a huge Tito fan.

As for the OP. There are several factors you have to take into consideration.

Trinidad was an undefeated champion who had just blown through a respected Middleweight champion.

De la Hoya was a three time defeated former Junior Feather weight who was just made to look real bad by an unknown european title holder.

I am not making this sound worst than it is, I am stating facts.

Fact is Hopkins was a great fighter long before he fought Trinidad, we just realized it afterwards.

Trinidad beating William Joppy should be a testament to him being an overachiever not a true Middleweight, and I was not trying to make this into a math class on what weights they started out, the whole point is that both individuals were undersized and only one get's an excuse for it.

Yes they were both undersized, but DLH was more undersized than Tito. Does that make sense?
Tito was taller than DLH and also naturally heavier. He started at 147, DLH at 130. Tito in reality was probably one weightclass higher than he should have been whereas DLH was probably 2 if not 3 weight classes too high at that point.
I think these are great wins for Bhop, if u din give him credit for these then u cannot give Hagler credit for Hearns and Duran.