We all know the story. No amateur career, started out late as a pro, lost his first fight. I've always liked Hopkins and he will deserve his HOF status, but those comments he made about his own record were ridiculous.
"I've never ducked anyone. Bernard Hopkins has beaten people that nobody else wanted to fight - Winky Wright, Antonio Tarver. I knocked out Felix Trinidad easily, Oscar de la Hoya with a body shot, I had world title 20 defences".
Fair enough, there weren't any great fighters in the Middleweight division but I think his reign is no better than that of Joes.
Look at his record.
Beaten by Jones early in his career. Admittedly Hopkins improved afterwards, but I still think the prime Jones would have been too quick for him.
The Glen Johnson KO win, inflicting his first defeat was an excellent result and ranks for me alongside his Trinidad and Tarver wins as his finest.
Credit must be given for the win over Trinidad being the first to do so, but even then, De La Hoya had already shown how Trinidad could be outboxed. Joppy had perhaps flattered Trinidad when he folded in such spectacular fashion at the MSG but personally I think his best was as a light middleweight.
So Hopkins peaked for the Trinidad fight. So what happens next? He prices himself out of all decent fights and spends the next three years taking on Carl Daniels, Morrade Hakkar, William Joppy and Robert Allen in snoozers, before taking on former lightweight Oscar De La Hoya, whom himself was fresh out of a gift decision from the mighty Felix Sturm. DLH impressed me against Hopkins before six rounds before inevitably fading as he always did. Good body shot (depending on how much it really did hurt him), but at that point the writing was on the cards and DLH would have been thrilled to get out of there before getting beaten up. Running out of steam at a weight above where you should be fighting at is a dangerous game.
Following this, Hops goes on to pose through twelve rounds with Eastman, lose twice to Taylor and then step up to Light heavy where he finally again showed his ability by dominating an immobile Tarver. Good win though all the same but Tarver was there for the taking that night.
Finally Hopkins decides to "solve the puzzle of Winky Wright" and he does so by getting Winky to step up to 170 lbs. An ugly fight and he gets the win but Winky should never have been there in the first place.
So next is the winner of Jones-Trinidad because he's too much of a legend to take on Calzaghe. Not really. Since the Trinidad fight, the only fighter he fought in their prime and at their correct weight was Taylor, and all it resulted in was two defeats. I think Hops is too wise to make that same mistake again.
Hopkins Record
Come on guys be fair. He's been a terrific fighter. These clips are a reminder that he has been exciting at times.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Akkc7KSGBto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Akkc7KSGBto
http://www.boxinginsider.com/fighters/b ... opkins.phpjohnswan1 wrote:Wasn't that while he was in jail? I know he used to fight in there and won the national penitentiary middleweight championship three times, but I don't know of any amateur career outside of that.Crew2 wrote:ACTUALLY HE HAD 99 AMATEUR FIGHTS
EARLY BOXING MEMORY: Winning Pennsylvania Junior Olympics when I was nine. Won a trophy which had to be 2ft tall! When I won that I was the baby in the gym. We had guys like Robert Hines. I got my butt kicked 95% of the time in the gym by guys who were bigger and older than me. But I was too advanced for my level. I beat a guy named 'Bunchie' Williams, a good, good amateur who went 12-1 as a pro but then I think drugs got him. I still see him all the time. He says, 'You didn't really beat me that night, you had the politics with you.' But I knocked him down three times! There was no politics then. We joke. Good connection there. He says Roy Jones is afraid of me.
-
hitman_hatton1
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 6150
- Joined: 26 Nov 2003, 20:57
He was an awesome fighter in his pomp no doubt - I think the only fighter from Light Heavy - Middleweight that could have beaten him from the Joppy fight back was Roy Jones.
I not only include Calzaghe as a person I would have tipped Hopkins to beat, but James Toney, Dariuz Michaelsweki, Benn, Eubank etc etc.
I not only include Calzaghe as a person I would have tipped Hopkins to beat, but James Toney, Dariuz Michaelsweki, Benn, Eubank etc etc.
I'm afraid that at the very least I would have to call this "case unproven"; if we put each of those guys at their best in with Hopkins at his best (and, to be fair to him, asusume that he still had Mackie Shillstone to bulk him up), you'd have some superb match ups. I think he'd have beaten Eubank pretty comfortably, Michalczewski as well; Benn I suspect would have been a case of whether the Bomber could land a huge shot or would have his head boxed clean off. However, I think a prime Joe Calzaghe would still have been too fast for him - remember, Hopkins did chicken out of this one a few years back - and that Toney would have had even more subline skills to counter him.stujones wrote:He was an awesome fighter in his pomp no doubt - I think the only fighter from Light Heavy - Middleweight that could have beaten him from the Joppy fight back was Roy Jones.
I not only include Calzaghe as a person I would have tipped Hopkins to beat, but James Toney, Dariuz Michaelsweki, Benn, Eubank etc etc.
I'm being hypothetical here, looking to stimulate debate if you will, and I am not saying that this necessarily represents my point of view. However, meet the case for Bernard Hopkins - All Mouth, Very Little Trouser...
Jeez, Man, Beat Up On Someone Your Own Size!
My first point here is that Hopkins' most notable wins as "World" Middleweight Champion came against fighetrs who were naturally (at least) one weight class lower than him. Oscar De La Hoya, even partially retired, is not a particularly big light middleweight and could comfortably make welterweight, and looked tiny against Hopkins, though as has been pointed out managed to be more than competitive for half a fight, whilst Felix Trinidad was a natural welter who had only just moved up to light-middle when he got the call.
Indeed, when the win over Tarver, of which more later, redeemed the Executioner's failing career, Hopkins was far too sensible/chicken to fight one of the other credible light heavies - and whilst I accept that a fight with Clinton Woods may not have been big box office, there would have been far better money for rematches with former opponents Roy Jones and Glen Johnson than there was for what anyone could tell in advance would be the most boring fight ever against Winky Wright. Oh yes, that would be the same Winky Wright who had spent the vast majority of his career at, you guessed it, light-middle and who could only get up close to the right weight by going on a one man mission to rid the world of chilli cheeseburgers!
So, who DID you beat, again?
So, notwithstanding the above, Hopkins made 20 defences of the middleweight belt; an impressive number, I'll grant you, but who did he actually beat in that time? Aside from the aforesaid two blown up welters, and Glen Johnson, which was admittedly a world class performance, his record consists of people never quite good enough to reach the title of has-been - indeed, one could argue that Segundo Mercado, who had Hopkins down twice and in many people's eyes clearly won their first fight, was the next best name on his register. Does anyone remember William Bo James? Andrew Council? Morrade Hakkar? Nope? I wonder why...
Its All About The Matchmaking, Isn't It Bernard?
One of the things that really gets my goat is Hopkins' relentless self publicity and claims to be some form of boxing god - especially when all of the accusations (including the true ones) that he levels at the likes of Calzaghe are even more true of himself. Only two fights abroad, one of those against a guy with a massive losing record, barely a fight against a live contender, not to mention his constant running away from anyone he thinks might beat him (Calzaghe, anyone?). How could he be around for so long at around the same weight class as guys like Nigel Benn, Dariusz Michalczewski, Chris Eubank, Mike McCallum, James Toney, Joe Calzaghe, Mikkel Kessler, Thulani Malinga, Steve Collins, Sven Ottke, Markus Beyer and fight NONE of them?
Even when he does fight someone worthwhile, he does so in circumstances tailor made for him - even beyond the Winky Wright fiasco, you can look at the way he stepped up to face Antonio Tarver knowing that his opponent was far more interested in making movies, and was heavily weight drained come fight night. Likewise, Howard Eastman, a devastating puncher if nowhere near B-Hop's level as a boxer, was avoided until age had dulled the danger he posed.
Failing The Historical Test
Or more accurately, what can we tell about a fighter from the actions of the men he fought? Well, not one of his middleweight victims went on to win a title, nor ever to look like they might. However, I think most telling of all were the performances of the man who eventually dislodged him from the middleweight title, Jermain Taylor.
Now, I like Taylor - he seems like a good kid, has values, repsect his Mum and all that. But he ain't exactly Marvin Hagler, is he? Sure, he beat B-Hop fairly clearly over their two fights (although that was as much because Bernard didn't seem to fancy it as anything) but since then he's done less than nothing - unlerss you count making Kassim Ouma look dangerous and Corey Spinks look interesting as an acheivement.
Conclusion
Sure, he'll end up in Canastota, but only on the basis of statistics. Hopkins could arguably be the most protected and overrated fighter of all time, someone who hides behind a big mouth but won't back up those boasts in the ring. Indeed, I think he needs a Calzaghe on his record far more than any such person might need him...
Jeez, Man, Beat Up On Someone Your Own Size!
My first point here is that Hopkins' most notable wins as "World" Middleweight Champion came against fighetrs who were naturally (at least) one weight class lower than him. Oscar De La Hoya, even partially retired, is not a particularly big light middleweight and could comfortably make welterweight, and looked tiny against Hopkins, though as has been pointed out managed to be more than competitive for half a fight, whilst Felix Trinidad was a natural welter who had only just moved up to light-middle when he got the call.
Indeed, when the win over Tarver, of which more later, redeemed the Executioner's failing career, Hopkins was far too sensible/chicken to fight one of the other credible light heavies - and whilst I accept that a fight with Clinton Woods may not have been big box office, there would have been far better money for rematches with former opponents Roy Jones and Glen Johnson than there was for what anyone could tell in advance would be the most boring fight ever against Winky Wright. Oh yes, that would be the same Winky Wright who had spent the vast majority of his career at, you guessed it, light-middle and who could only get up close to the right weight by going on a one man mission to rid the world of chilli cheeseburgers!
So, who DID you beat, again?
So, notwithstanding the above, Hopkins made 20 defences of the middleweight belt; an impressive number, I'll grant you, but who did he actually beat in that time? Aside from the aforesaid two blown up welters, and Glen Johnson, which was admittedly a world class performance, his record consists of people never quite good enough to reach the title of has-been - indeed, one could argue that Segundo Mercado, who had Hopkins down twice and in many people's eyes clearly won their first fight, was the next best name on his register. Does anyone remember William Bo James? Andrew Council? Morrade Hakkar? Nope? I wonder why...
Its All About The Matchmaking, Isn't It Bernard?
One of the things that really gets my goat is Hopkins' relentless self publicity and claims to be some form of boxing god - especially when all of the accusations (including the true ones) that he levels at the likes of Calzaghe are even more true of himself. Only two fights abroad, one of those against a guy with a massive losing record, barely a fight against a live contender, not to mention his constant running away from anyone he thinks might beat him (Calzaghe, anyone?). How could he be around for so long at around the same weight class as guys like Nigel Benn, Dariusz Michalczewski, Chris Eubank, Mike McCallum, James Toney, Joe Calzaghe, Mikkel Kessler, Thulani Malinga, Steve Collins, Sven Ottke, Markus Beyer and fight NONE of them?
Even when he does fight someone worthwhile, he does so in circumstances tailor made for him - even beyond the Winky Wright fiasco, you can look at the way he stepped up to face Antonio Tarver knowing that his opponent was far more interested in making movies, and was heavily weight drained come fight night. Likewise, Howard Eastman, a devastating puncher if nowhere near B-Hop's level as a boxer, was avoided until age had dulled the danger he posed.
Failing The Historical Test
Or more accurately, what can we tell about a fighter from the actions of the men he fought? Well, not one of his middleweight victims went on to win a title, nor ever to look like they might. However, I think most telling of all were the performances of the man who eventually dislodged him from the middleweight title, Jermain Taylor.
Now, I like Taylor - he seems like a good kid, has values, repsect his Mum and all that. But he ain't exactly Marvin Hagler, is he? Sure, he beat B-Hop fairly clearly over their two fights (although that was as much because Bernard didn't seem to fancy it as anything) but since then he's done less than nothing - unlerss you count making Kassim Ouma look dangerous and Corey Spinks look interesting as an acheivement.
Conclusion
Sure, he'll end up in Canastota, but only on the basis of statistics. Hopkins could arguably be the most protected and overrated fighter of all time, someone who hides behind a big mouth but won't back up those boasts in the ring. Indeed, I think he needs a Calzaghe on his record far more than any such person might need him...
-
DavidPayne
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 6248
- Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00
How can you criticise Hopkins for fighting the likes of DLH, Tito an Wright from the weight class below him and then conjure a list of Super-middleweights and Light Heavyweights that he should have fought.
Equally, when he elected to fight Tarver for his Light-heavyweight debut, not withstadning his career debut, the only other viable claimant to the 175 crown, forget the baubles, was Glen Johnson, who be summarily beat at 160 a life time ago.
The reason many of the contenders he faced never returned to become champion, was because Hopkins held the belts. As for Eastman, hard to counternance that Hop was afraid of him given the cat lost to Joppy over 12. A chinny puncher himself. And while Eastman was ageing, so was Hopkins.
I agree aspects of Hop's career have been truimphs of self-publicity over face, but he's beaten Tarver, Johnson, DLH and Trinidad. Irrespective of age, that's an impressive quartet given their preceding and subsequent achievements.
All matchmaking is clever, that's the point. Stupid matchmaking turns down WBC shots on short money, or puts Esham Pickering in with Martinez.
Equally, when he elected to fight Tarver for his Light-heavyweight debut, not withstadning his career debut, the only other viable claimant to the 175 crown, forget the baubles, was Glen Johnson, who be summarily beat at 160 a life time ago.
The reason many of the contenders he faced never returned to become champion, was because Hopkins held the belts. As for Eastman, hard to counternance that Hop was afraid of him given the cat lost to Joppy over 12. A chinny puncher himself. And while Eastman was ageing, so was Hopkins.
I agree aspects of Hop's career have been truimphs of self-publicity over face, but he's beaten Tarver, Johnson, DLH and Trinidad. Irrespective of age, that's an impressive quartet given their preceding and subsequent achievements.
All matchmaking is clever, that's the point. Stupid matchmaking turns down WBC shots on short money, or puts Esham Pickering in with Martinez.
What subsequent acheivements have any of those guys had? Glen Johnson had some success, fair enough. But he lost his next two fights after the Hopkins fight, and eleven in total. Since the Hopkins fight De La Hoya beat Mayorga and lost to Mayweather. Since the Hopkins fight, Trinidad beat Cherifi and Mayorga before being humiliated by Winky Wright. Tarver has only won a razor thin decision against both Rocky Balboa and Elvir Muriqi.DavidPayne wrote:How can you criticise Hopkins for fighting the likes of DLH, Tito an Wright from the weight class below him and then conjure a list of Super-middleweights and Light Heavyweights that he should have fought.
Equally, when he elected to fight Tarver for his Light-heavyweight debut, not withstadning his career debut, the only other viable claimant to the 175 crown, forget the baubles, was Glen Johnson, who be summarily beat at 160 a life time ago.
The reason many of the contenders he faced never returned to become champion, was because Hopkins held the belts. As for Eastman, hard to counternance that Hop was afraid of him given the cat lost to Joppy over 12. A chinny puncher himself. And while Eastman was ageing, so was Hopkins.
I agree aspects of Hop's career have been truimphs of self-publicity over face, but he's beaten Tarver, Johnson, DLH and Trinidad. Irrespective of age, that's an impressive quartet given their preceding and subsequent achievements.
All matchmaking is clever, that's the point. Stupid matchmaking turns down WBC shots on short money, or puts Esham Pickering in with Martinez.
Actually thats pretty straightforward - it shows that Bernard was pretty willing to fight guys coming up two weight categories to face him (and both Trinidad and Oscar were natural welters) but that eh was too chicken to go up a single category and be the smaller man himself.DavidPayne wrote:How can you criticise Hopkins for fighting the likes of DLH, Tito an Wright from the weight class below him and then conjure a list of Super-middleweights and Light Heavyweights that he should have fought.
Oh, I think Clinton Woods would disagree with that, as would Tomasz Adamek. Certainly both had reason to chase a fight with Tarver at the time.DavidPayne wrote:
Equally, when he elected to fight Tarver for his Light-heavyweight debut, not withstadning his career debut, the only other viable claimant to the 175 crown, forget the baubles, was Glen Johnson, who be summarily beat at 160 a life time ago.
Okay, I'll start by asking "what subsequent acheivements?" - Trinidad was shut out by Wright, Tarver struggled to beat a couple of Mexican road sweepers and DLH - ooh - beat Mayorga!!! Secondly, I think its safe to say that only Johnson was naturally of a weight with Hopkins, with the other three either coming up from below, or struggling on the scales.DavidPayne wrote:
I agree aspects of Hop's career have been truimphs of self-publicity over face, but he's beaten Tarver, Johnson, DLH and Trinidad. Irrespective of age, that's an impressive quartet given their preceding and subsequent achievements.
Actually thats pretty straightforward - it shows that Bernard was pretty willing to fight guys coming up two weight categories to face him (and both Trinidad and Oscar were natural welters) but that eh was too chicken to go up a single category and be the smaller man himself.DavidPayne wrote:How can you criticise Hopkins for fighting the likes of DLH, Tito an Wright from the weight class below him and then conjure a list of Super-middleweights and Light Heavyweights that he should have fought.
Oh, I think Clinton Woods would disagree with that, as would Tomasz Adamek. Certainly both had reason to chase a fight with Tarver at the time.DavidPayne wrote:
Equally, when he elected to fight Tarver for his Light-heavyweight debut, not withstadning his career debut, the only other viable claimant to the 175 crown, forget the baubles, was Glen Johnson, who be summarily beat at 160 a life time ago.
Okay, I'll start by asking "what subsequent acheivements?" - Trinidad was shut out by Wright, Tarver struggled to beat a couple of Mexican road sweepers and DLH - ooh - beat Mayorga!!! Secondly, I think its safe to say that only Johnson was naturally of a weight with Hopkins, with the other three either coming up from below, or struggling on the scales.DavidPayne wrote:
I agree aspects of Hop's career have been truimphs of self-publicity over face, but he's beaten Tarver, Johnson, DLH and Trinidad. Irrespective of age, that's an impressive quartet given their preceding and subsequent achievements.
Actually thats pretty straightforward - it shows that Bernard was pretty willing to fight guys coming up two weight categories to face him (and both Trinidad and Oscar were natural welters) but that eh was too chicken to go up a single category and be the smaller man himself.DavidPayne wrote:How can you criticise Hopkins for fighting the likes of DLH, Tito an Wright from the weight class below him and then conjure a list of Super-middleweights and Light Heavyweights that he should have fought.
Oh, I think Clinton Woods would disagree with that, as would Tomasz Adamek. Certainly both had reason to chase a fight with Tarver at the time.DavidPayne wrote:
Equally, when he elected to fight Tarver for his Light-heavyweight debut, not withstadning his career debut, the only other viable claimant to the 175 crown, forget the baubles, was Glen Johnson, who be summarily beat at 160 a life time ago.
Okay, I'll start by asking "what subsequent acheivements?" - Trinidad was shut out by Wright, Tarver struggled to beat a couple of Mexican road sweepers and DLH - ooh - beat Mayorga!!! Secondly, I think its safe to say that only Johnson was naturally of a weight with Hopkins, with the other three either coming up from below, or struggling on the scales.DavidPayne wrote:
I agree aspects of Hop's career have been truimphs of self-publicity over face, but he's beaten Tarver, Johnson, DLH and Trinidad. Irrespective of age, that's an impressive quartet given their preceding and subsequent achievements.
-
DavidPayne
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 6248
- Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00
1 - But it isn't about being chicken. That's just playground. Why are modern day fighters denigrated for staying at one weight? Weight jumping isn't the only ticket to greatness. Had Winky stayed at 154 and dominated I would have had as much, if not more respect for him, than 'challenging' Taylor and Hopkins at higher weights. Equally, what were Hagler's greates victories? Duran, Hearns and Mugabi. How many career Middleweights are there there? Now don't get me wrong we're talking about all time greats in 2 of the three. However, is it Hopkins fault Tito, DLH and Wright didn't provide more competitive opponents because historically they would compare favouribly with Duran, Hearns and Mugabi? Agree?Tykemania wrote:Actually thats pretty straightforward - it shows that Bernard was pretty willing to fight guys coming up two weight categories to face him (and both Trinidad and Oscar were natural welters) but that eh was too chicken to go up a single category and be the smaller man himself.DavidPayne wrote:How can you criticise Hopkins for fighting the likes of DLH, Tito an Wright from the weight class below him and then conjure a list of Super-middleweights and Light Heavyweights that he should have fought.
Oh, I think Clinton Woods would disagree with that, as would Tomasz Adamek. Certainly both had reason to chase a fight with Tarver at the time.DavidPayne wrote:
Equally, when he elected to fight Tarver for his Light-heavyweight debut, not withstadning his career debut, the only other viable claimant to the 175 crown, forget the baubles, was Glen Johnson, who be summarily beat at 160 a life time ago.
Okay, I'll start by asking "what subsequent acheivements?" - Trinidad was shut out by Wright, Tarver struggled to beat a couple of Mexican road sweepers and DLH - ooh - beat Mayorga!!! Secondly, I think its safe to say that only Johnson was naturally of a weight with Hopkins, with the other three either coming up from below, or struggling on the scales.DavidPayne wrote:
I agree aspects of Hop's career have been truimphs of self-publicity over face, but he's beaten Tarver, Johnson, DLH and Trinidad. Irrespective of age, that's an impressive quartet given their preceding and subsequent achievements.
2 - They may disagree but come on, lets be realistic, Woods and Adamcek wouldn't be globally recognised as LH champ. And as you suggest both were CHASING Tarver. What does that tell you? Tarver was, rightly or wrongly, the fighter of note at the weight.
3 - Subsequent achievements obviously related to Johnson, who has been widely recognised as the #1 or #2 Light Heavyweight for 3 years. Preceding achievements for Tito, DLH and Wright. And lest we forget, for all the commentary about the age of his opponents, Hopkins was older than all of them. Equally, though mixed fortunes both Tito and DLH had fought at 160 before tackling Hop. Granted DLH was awful but as commented he fought well for six rounds and went onto come close to beating the P4P king at 154 pounds.
4 - Hopkins is a cute operator. In and out of the ring. I don't deny that. But we could pick holes in the careers of Joe Louis, Larry Holmes, Ricardo Lopez and other longstanding champions. But longevity in a single division is to be applauded. It isn't as though Hopkins ducked great middleweights of his era is it? There simply were not any around.
I just want balance on these things. Hopkins is neither the greatest middleweight of all time, nor is he a fraud. He's a terrific champion, incredibly hard to beat and a hard, hard negotiator.
I think your being Harsh there Tykemania. Yeah, Trinidad and DLH are his most NOTIBLE wins - but Hopkins had CLEANED OUT his own devision. Something Calzaghe can now unfortunately never do.
Name me one MIDDLEWEIGHT in Hopkins' reign as champion that he should have fought.... Okay, thinking on it there was Harry Simon and maybe Lonnie Bradley - but both of whom were champions at middleweight for a very brief period before out of the ring problems (for Bradley it was an eye problem) really made them inactive.
Joppy, Holmes, Echols, Allen, Eastman, Johnson - These were his main rivals.... Not exactly a who's who - but the best at the time.
Hopkins ACHIEVEMENTS are possibly better than Hagler - his best wins game against a Welterweight also. He possibly cleaned out the devision more thoroughly than Hagler did - but albeit his contemparies were not as the Marvelous one.
Name me one MIDDLEWEIGHT in Hopkins' reign as champion that he should have fought.... Okay, thinking on it there was Harry Simon and maybe Lonnie Bradley - but both of whom were champions at middleweight for a very brief period before out of the ring problems (for Bradley it was an eye problem) really made them inactive.
Joppy, Holmes, Echols, Allen, Eastman, Johnson - These were his main rivals.... Not exactly a who's who - but the best at the time.
Hopkins ACHIEVEMENTS are possibly better than Hagler - his best wins game against a Welterweight also. He possibly cleaned out the devision more thoroughly than Hagler did - but albeit his contemparies were not as the Marvelous one.
Actually I don't need to be hypothetical here - I'm afraid that the triumvirate of Hearns, Duran and Mugabi is more than a match for Tito, DLH and Wright; and Haglet fought his three at their best, whereas Hopkins fought De La Hoya well past his prime and Wright so bloated he could hardly move.DavidPayne wrote: 1 - But it isn't about being chicken. That's just playground. Why are modern day fighters denigrated for staying at one weight? Weight jumping isn't the only ticket to greatness. Had Winky stayed at 154 and dominated I would have had as much, if not more respect for him, than 'challenging' Taylor and Hopkins at higher weights. Equally, what were Hagler's greates victories? Duran, Hearns and Mugabi. How many career Middleweights are there there? Now don't get me wrong we're talking about all time greats in 2 of the three. However, is it Hopkins fault Tito, DLH and Wright didn't provide more competitive opponents because historically they would compare favouribly with Duran, Hearns and Mugabi? Agree?
At the time, it was a paper thin call between Tarver and Johnson for the #1 rating at light heavy - but that didn't take into account his inactivity and weight problems, nor the fact that being "the man" doesn't mean you are the best fighter (which for my money was Adamek at that time)DavidPayne wrote: 2 - They may disagree but come on, lets be realistic, Woods and Adamcek wouldn't be globally recognised as LH champ. And as you suggest both were CHASING Tarver. What does that tell you? Tarver was, rightly or wrongly, the fighter of note at the weight.
Oh come on, De La Hoya lost to Sturm (in everyone's mind save the judges) and Trinidad had clobbered the overrated Joppy.DavidPayne wrote: 3 - Subsequent achievements obviously related to Johnson, who has been widely recognised as the #1 or #2 Light Heavyweight for 3 years. Preceding achievements for Tito, DLH and Wright. And lest we forget, for all the commentary about the age of his opponents, Hopkins was older than all of them. Equally, though mixed fortunes both Tito and DLH had fought at 160 before tackling Hop. Granted DLH was awful but as commented he fought well for six rounds and went onto come close to beating the P4P king at 154 pounds.
We could pick holes in all that you mention, though in each instance I would argue that the other acheivements of the person concerned outweighed the flaws in a manner much greater than we could apply to Hopkins. If Hopkins didn't duck great middleweights - and I appreciate that overlaps with the likes of McClellan, Toney and McCallum are short - he certainly didn't show any willingness to go searching for worthwhile challengesDavidPayne wrote: 4 - Hopkins is a cute operator. In and out of the ring. I don't deny that. But we could pick holes in the careers of Joe Louis, Larry Holmes, Ricardo Lopez and other longstanding champions. But longevity in a single division is to be applauded. It isn't as though Hopkins ducked great middleweights of his era is it? There simply were not any around.
As I said originally, I was not necessarily expressing an opinion, merely giving an alternate, and I believe very credible, interpretation of the same set of facts that many use to argue for Hopkins overall greatness.DavidPayne wrote: I just want balance on these things. Hopkins is neither the greatest middleweight of all time, nor is he a fraud. He's a terrific champion, incredibly hard to beat and a hard, hard negotiator.
My view, for the record, is similar to but slightly less generous than yours - he is a good champion who did an effective job of hanging on to his crown (after the Mercado fight, noone got close to beating him until Taylor did, which is a good record for anyone to have). However, I don't think his "negotiating skills" should be given as a positive - I think he is a guy with relatively low box office clout who uses that fact to avoid the hardest fights by claiming, and setting up elaborate smokescreens to support the view, that he is the money in the fight and should be paid accordingly.
Duran though was significantly SMALLER than both of Hopkins' modern greats victims.Terry D wrote:Hagler fought smaller guys but they were Duran, Hearns and Leonard. Hopkins fought Tito and Oscar, considerably poorer versions of Hagler's opposition.
Hagler also beat better men on the way up. His Philly fights alone came against really good fighters.
I'd put both Tito and Oscar in the Hearns bracket in terms of All time standing (mearly my take though).
I aint disputing that Hagler isn't the better fighter or the better champion. His win over Hearns especially was always going to be considered better than had he fought the likes of Herol Graham and not fought Hearns. However, Hopkins had fought pretty much all of his "Herol Graham's" and then beat the little guys.
Hopkins had less opportunities than Hagler to prove his greatness as a Middleweight, cause his generation wasn't as good. However, I don't think he could have done much more - he beat everyone. Yes, maybe if he would have gone to Super Middle/Light Heavy and beat Joe and a few others he might have improved his standing in the overall all time great bracket.... but then weight movers have their critics aswell and his standing as a great MIDDLEWEIGHT would have declined.
And I repeat, I'm stimulating debate rather than stating my own definitive opinion. However, I would say that Calzaghe has done as well with his division as Hopkins did in the same circumstances.stujones wrote: I think your being Harsh there Tykemania. Yeah, Trinidad and DLH are his most NOTIBLE wins - but Hopkins had CLEANED OUT his own devision. Something Calzaghe can now unfortunately never do.
Oh come on, Hagler beat way more quality fighters than did Hopkins, and without picking his opponents to nearly the same extent. As for guys Hopkins missed, you could also throw in Toney, McCallum and McClellan, whose middleweight days crossed over with his albeit briefly, or, as I would, ask whether a genuinely great fighter (who was naturally bigger than middleweight anyway) would not have gone up in search of more worthy opponents.stujones wrote:
Name me one MIDDLEWEIGHT in Hopkins' reign as champion that he should have fought.... Okay, thinking on it there was Harry Simon and maybe Lonnie Bradley - but both of whom were champions at middleweight for a very brief period before out of the ring problems (for Bradley it was an eye problem) really made them inactive.
Joppy, Holmes, Echols, Allen, Eastman, Johnson - These were his main rivals.... Not exactly a who's who - but the best at the time.
Hopkins ACHIEVEMENTS are possibly better than Hagler - his best wins game against a Welterweight also. He possibly cleaned out the devision more thoroughly than Hagler did - but albeit his contemparies were not as the Marvelous one.
Hopkins was a smallish Middleweight in his pomp.... It was part of a reason why so many people tipped Tito. What weight did he come in against DLH.
Yes, he said after Tarver he feels refreshed at Light Heavy - didn't look that refreshed vs a Fatty Winky Wright. THe reason why he looked so refreshed is because Tarver is now pretty awful and shot goods.
If you want to throw in McCallum for Hopkins - then why not McCallum for Hagler then.
Toney was at Super Middleweight throughout Hopkins' reign.
As for Joe Calzaghe - I'll repeat it again - Sven Ottke IBF champion for 8 of Joe's 10 year reign. IBF/WBA champion for 1 of those years. Markus Beyer WBC champion for at least 5 of Joe's 10 year reign..... Like them or not, these are HUGE factors. These two were Joe's natural rivals.... Just like Dariuz's was Roy Jones.
I'll give you McLellan and I'll add Julian Jackson also - Yes, Hopkins should have fought Jackson especially.
Yes, he said after Tarver he feels refreshed at Light Heavy - didn't look that refreshed vs a Fatty Winky Wright. THe reason why he looked so refreshed is because Tarver is now pretty awful and shot goods.
If you want to throw in McCallum for Hopkins - then why not McCallum for Hagler then.
Toney was at Super Middleweight throughout Hopkins' reign.
As for Joe Calzaghe - I'll repeat it again - Sven Ottke IBF champion for 8 of Joe's 10 year reign. IBF/WBA champion for 1 of those years. Markus Beyer WBC champion for at least 5 of Joe's 10 year reign..... Like them or not, these are HUGE factors. These two were Joe's natural rivals.... Just like Dariuz's was Roy Jones.
I'll give you McLellan and I'll add Julian Jackson also - Yes, Hopkins should have fought Jackson especially.
-
DavidPayne
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 6248
- Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00
Tyke,
I've enjoyed the discussion. I guess in summary, it's a subjective proposition Hop's career. And like you, it is possible to argue the point eitherway.
Sometimes, it depends which way the wind is blowing which argument I take up. As you suggest are opinion isn't as far as apart as it may appear. I do however believe the crossover you propose of his career with McCallum, McClellan and Toney is very, very fleeting and then, even more than now, Hop was far from the type of opponent any of three you mention would have pursued either. Though I appreciate I risk sounding like Bernard in saying that. Hop fought Jones at that time, so he was far from shy of a challenge.
You make a good case though. Hopkins and Calzaghe's careers are very comparable for they contain a lot of mediocrity.
See you on the next topic.
I've enjoyed the discussion. I guess in summary, it's a subjective proposition Hop's career. And like you, it is possible to argue the point eitherway.
Sometimes, it depends which way the wind is blowing which argument I take up. As you suggest are opinion isn't as far as apart as it may appear. I do however believe the crossover you propose of his career with McCallum, McClellan and Toney is very, very fleeting and then, even more than now, Hop was far from the type of opponent any of three you mention would have pursued either. Though I appreciate I risk sounding like Bernard in saying that. Hop fought Jones at that time, so he was far from shy of a challenge.
You make a good case though. Hopkins and Calzaghe's careers are very comparable for they contain a lot of mediocrity.
See you on the next topic.
I agree with 90% of your post.... I didn't suggest that Duran wouldn't give any Light Middleweight of all time a push - which is the weight DLH is at Maximum. However, the natural 9 stone 9 fighter was always too small to be an effective Middleweight. I would think that DLH would give more Middleweight problems than Duran... His record at Middleweight isn't great okay (but only had two fights there), but I think his record at Light Middleweight was better than Duran's.Terry D wrote: I'd say that if you put Oscar and Duran in the ring Duran's size would see him being able to match Oscar. Plus his skill is infinitely better.
You talk a lot of sense Stu but surely a deranged stranger made the statement that Tito is on a par with Hearns? Destructive power yes but Hearns was a masterful boxer and Tito never was, even in his welterweight pomp he was quite predictable.
Hearns boxed beautifully against Benitez and his KO of Schuler is the best power punching performance ever in my opinion.
Tito is nowhere near his level for my money.
Like Hagler Hopkins beat everyone but I think Hagler beat better. Even a faded Bennie Briscoe is a very good scalp, good fight also. Pre-Vito Marvin, when he had the legs as well, is the best fighter I have watched. Louis, Locche, Napoles and many others come close but that Hagler was superb, a real nightmare.
As for Herol, he failed against Hagler-lite so I think his chances versus Hagler are pretty poor.
Post-middle Hopkins has been very canny. Tarver is pish.
I can see what your saying regarding Hearns vs Tito... I just hope though that the generation that is now ending (Jones, Tito, Barrera, DLH, Mosley etc) will be looked on in a more positive light in years to come. Yes, Tito was a tad practicable - but he was pretty damn near invincible at one point.. Like Rocky Marciano, you don't have to be a master boxer to be a great.
I agree with everything that you said regarding Hagler, I loved the guy - I aint disputing anything that you say. Of course I rank him above Hopkins. However, whilst I agree with your view on a perspective Hagler vs Graham match - unfortunately thats all it is... our opinion. There are less guys who we can say that about Hopkins at MIDDLEWEIGHT, cause Hopkins did fight pretty much everyone he could. Calzaghe missed Svenny and Markus.
Sorry, this post was a reponse to Tyke's response to my post.Terry D wrote:If he was so small Duran would not have so many problems concerning size, no?stujones wrote:Hopkins was a smallish Middleweight in his pomp.... It was part of a reason why so many people tipped Tito. What weight did he come in against DLH.
Yes, he said after Tarver he feels refreshed at Light Heavy - didn't look that refreshed vs a Fatty Winky Wright. THe reason why he looked so refreshed is because Tarver is now pretty awful and shot goods.
If you want to throw in McCallum for Hopkins - then why not McCallum for Hagler then.
Toney was at Super Middleweight throughout Hopkins' reign.
As for Joe Calzaghe - I'll repeat it again - Sven Ottke IBF champion for 8 of Joe's 10 year reign. IBF/WBA champion for 1 of those years. Markus Beyer WBC champion for at least 5 of Joe's 10 year reign..... Like them or not, these are HUGE factors. These two were Joe's natural rivals.... Just like Dariuz's was Roy Jones.
I'll give you McLellan and I'll add Julian Jackson also - Yes, Hopkins should have fought Jackson especially.
I agree on Tarver.
Not sure what you mean RE McCallum. I was pointing out that Herol did not get past Mike and would not beat Hagler THE awkward, long-armed, southpaw.
Actually I'm not sure you're addressing me but Toney, for me, was a response to the idea that Hopkins could beat James. I don't see it. Toney had all Hopkins has and more. Mobility aside.
He mentioned McCallum as a possible Hopkins opponent and Toney and he said Hopkins should have moved up cause he was too big for Middleweight.
-
DavidPayne
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 6248
- Joined: 11 Mar 2004, 11:00
During his reign Calzaghe missed
Catley and Beyer - WBC
Mundine, Ottke, Sanavia - WBA
Vanderpool, Ottke, Lucas - IBF
Off the top of my head. Not to mention, if I'm correct Reid rematch, Haussler, Green, Echols and Froch.
I'm not saying he would have lost to any of them but he accomodated much inferior fighters.
Catley and Beyer - WBC
Mundine, Ottke, Sanavia - WBA
Vanderpool, Ottke, Lucas - IBF
Off the top of my head. Not to mention, if I'm correct Reid rematch, Haussler, Green, Echols and Froch.
I'm not saying he would have lost to any of them but he accomodated much inferior fighters.