Hopkins p4p ranking?

[JazMerkin]

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.

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.

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.

[marbleheadmaui]

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)

LOL, I've been HAD!

[miron_lang]

P4P has become a Popularity contest that Fighters who have done a good recently gets elevated

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

[Pavlik]

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.

bro it was a feat by itself bhop is 46 y/o.

[Mr140]

I think his age is a bigger handy cap then the weight disadvantage that Floyde and Pac have.

[hardcore_crash]

Pac
Martinez
Donaire
Hopkins
JMM

[Kev]

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.

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.

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.

I think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.

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...

[Mr140]

Not to meantion in boxing age Bernard must be pushing 156 i think he should be on high end of the 10.

[#1FightFan]

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!

[Fenster]

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.

bro it was a feat by itself bhop is 46 y/o.

Yes I agree - Hopkins is clearly a unique individual for his age. He is an all-time-great. Fact.

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.

[gest12645]

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

[Rantcatrat]

Where was Pascal rated P4P before this fight? He certainly wasn't top 10.
Where did Froch get rated P4P after beating Pascal?

I agree with Fenster yet again in recent times. Strange to think that.

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.

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.

Pac
Martinez
Donaire
Hopkins
JMM

I agree with this list for the most part.

.

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.

I think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.

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...

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.

[gest12645]

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

[JazMerkin]

I think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.

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...

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.

*Also noticing that both Fenster & Rant have said B-Hop lost his last fight before this. Might want to check that again fellas

[ICB]

Where was Pascal rated P4P before this fight? He certainly wasn't top 10.
Where did Froch get rated P4P after beating Pascal?

I agree with Fenster yet again in recent times. Strange to think that.

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.

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.

Pac
Martinez
Donaire
Hopkins
JMM

I agree with this list for the most part.

.

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.

I think top 3 is fair. The criticisms you are levelling at Hopkins could just as easily be aimed at Martinez.

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...

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.

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.