Trinidad/De La Hoya Vs Hopkins

[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.

[DaxxKahn]

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.

Dlh Same size as Hagler...you think Hagler was too small to beat Hopkins?....Tito was bigger then Both Hagler and Leonard....Think neither could hang with Hopkins....The undersized crap does not fly with me...there have been bigger size differences and the smaller guy has dominated

[Spicoli]

These two always bug me.Remember all of the hype and assertions favoring Tito going into that fight.Imo,He was much more of a legit Middleweight than DeLahoya based on previous performances,crushing respected Joppy but his best weight was indeed Welterweight.Hopkins point blank out thought and out fought him.This may be an unpopular opinion but as far as DLH goes... Imo,he was no full fledged middleweight,never should have been.That fight always struck me personally as more of a business arrangement than an actual "who wins" match up.P4P I take Hopkins 8 days out of a 7 day week.

[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.

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.

I know what you are saying I'm just trying to make you understand why people have that opinion.

Trinidad was at his all time peak when he fought Hopkins. He was being compared to Ray Robbinson for crying out loud. And I'm not making this up. Who do you think that Robbinson trophy was for? I'll give you a hint, it was not for Hopkins.

In the other hand, it was a forgone conclusion that DLH was going to lose, especially after that mess of a fight against Sturm. It's one of those fights that I just never understood what was the point other than to make money.

[Pugilistic]

When i view Hopkins wins over Trinidad and Oscar, I view them as this.

Hopkins win against Trinidad was a very good win, Trinidad proved his worth at middleweight by destroying William Joppy, no one has stopped joppy like that, Hopkins and Taylor both went the distance with Joppy a few years after that especially Hopkins who hit Joppy with everything he had and still couldn't stop him. Hopkins broke Tito mentally and then physically using accurate Counterpunching, defense and footwork.

Hopkins win against Oscar was a decent win. In my opinion Oscar totally didn't belong at middleweight, Sturm proved that. Even though Oscar didn't belong there he was still a multiple world champion and is a skilled fighter.

P4P i favor Hopkins over both Trinidad and De La Hoya.

Hopkins would break tito down very similar to what he did.

Hopkins defense, footwork and counterpunching would always be too much for tito trinidad.

As for DLH, Oscar was only competitive early against hopkins which was because Hopkins wasn't really doing much, plus people don't seem to remember that Hopkins was not in his prime. The Hopkins that fought Tito would of dominated Oscar.

P4P He is simple a better boxer. Oscars fake landing flurries wouldn't win him the fight, Hopkins more accurate more effective punches would win him the fight.

[kingfrnk]

When i view Hopkins wins over Trinidad and Oscar, I view them as this.

Hopkins win against Trinidad was a very good win, Trinidad proved his worth at middleweight by destroying William Joppy, no one has stopped joppy like that, Hopkins and Taylor both went the distance with Joppy a few years after that especially Hopkins who hit Joppy with everything he had and still couldn't stop him. Hopkins broke Tito mentally and then physically using accurate Counterpunching, defense and footwork.

Hopkins win against Oscar was a decent win. In my opinion Oscar totally didn't belong at middleweight, Sturm proved that. Even though Oscar didn't belong there he was still a multiple world champion and is a skilled fighter.

P4P i favor Hopkins over both Trinidad and De La Hoya.

Hopkins would break tito down very similar to what he did.

Hopkins defense, footwork and counterpunching would always be too much for tito trinidad.

As for DLH, Oscar was only competitive early against hopkins which was because Hopkins wasn't really doing much, plus people don't seem to remember that Hopkins was not in his prime. The Hopkins that fought Tito would of dominated Oscar.

P4P He is simple a better boxer. Oscars fake landing flurries wouldn't win him the fight, Hopkins more accurate more effective punches would win him the fight.

i agree completly, especially with this

[Spicoli]

I am hard pressed to remember a fighter that was more deformed and misshapen as Joppy was after Hopkins got through with him.Gruesome.Was Quasimodo ever a boxer?

[The Rookie Fan]

People that say Trinidad had no power at Middleweight forget that Joppy had never been stopped before and went on for another 7 years and 10 fights before being stopped again. Oh and Trinidad put him down in the very first round.