Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Tanzio
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 12264
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 09:17

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Tanzio »

caldo2025 wrote:
Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
The problem with 49-0 is that he only reads the first few words of the post he's commenting on so he has no idea that my comment was a favorable discourse for Bhop. And of course, he has to work racism of some kind into this one as well. Somebody really needs to ban him again.
I can't fault turB here. He brings up a pertinent aspect of the subject matter that you implored us not to ignore, BHop's activity related to boxing outside of the ring.

I pretty much agree with turB on this one.
Well, that's not surprising. But my OP explains how Bhop won me over after preliminary disliking him for beating up old ladies and stealing their purses as he freely admits to doing. White, Brown or Purple, most reasonable people wouldn't be rooting for a guy like that initially. But he did his time and turned his life around and in time won me and most of boxing over with his actions in and outside the ring. Now I consider him one of the most important boxers in the last 20 years. And, I really feel like he's going to do more for boxing outside of the ring now. He's improved so much as a commentator and he and Golden Boy are trying to make the fights we all want to see and really seem to be the only ones doing it.

I didn't implore anyone to consider his past when considering his position in history. I merely gave reasoning behind my change of heart and why he ended up being one of my favorites. So maybe you both should read a little bit closer before commenting as we all seem to have the same opinion on the matter.
You really need to work on your prickly pearishness. You asked everyone to consider his outside the ring boxing related activities. I appreciate that you have forgiven BHop out of the kindness of your heart based on his efforts at redemption, but he should not need your (or anyone else's) forgiveness in order to be considered not only an ATG but a GOAT.

The fact that you go to such an effort to (yes implore) others to give BHop another look based on his growth as an individual, leads people to actually consider his entire career related to boxing outside the ring. turB did NOT bring up race in this discussion.

You did.

You should follow your own advise and read others' entire posts and be sure that you comprehend what is being said BEFORE YOU REQUEST ANOTHER POSTER BE BANNED.

To all of you who repeatedly call for others to be banned; let your nutz drop.
stevedoc
Super Middleweight
Posts: 3550
Joined: 24 May 2013, 07:40

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by stevedoc »

Undefeated49-0 wrote:
stevedoc wrote:as good as hopkins was i don't think he has one win over a top level middle weight or light heavy ,he made his name fighting old welterweights

I didn't realize that Tito, Joppy, Echols, Holmes weren't "TOP" MWs and that the same Tarver who had just KO'd Jones was not a TOP LHW.

The ignorance and hate is just dripping from this post. :doh:
wow your really haven't a clue trinidad was a welter weight joppy was a decent middle weight but by no means elite level and we're talking about middle weights not light heavies so what has tarver got to do with it ?.....how you you can call someone ignorant is laughable when you seem to have no knowledge at about boxing you just seem like a groupie to certain boxers i bet you'd love a nice weekend away with yusef mack just the two of you... .
jamesmcdonnell
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 45214
Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by jamesmcdonnell »

Undefeated49-0 wrote:
stevedoc wrote:as good as hopkins was i don't think he has one win over a top level middle weight or light heavy ,he made his name fighting old welterweights

I didn't realize that Tito, Joppy, Echols, Holmes weren't "TOP" MWs and that the same Tarver who had just KO'd Jones was not a TOP LHW.

The ignorance and hate is just dripping from this post. :doh:
None of those names is going to be remembered historically at MW, Tito was an ATG WW, but not MW.

The win over Tarver was possibly Hopkins best win thinking about it.
Undefeated49-0
Welterweight
Posts: 1192
Joined: 13 Nov 2015, 14:36

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Undefeated49-0 »

stevedoc wrote:
Undefeated49-0 wrote:
stevedoc wrote:as good as hopkins was i don't think he has one win over a top level middle weight or light heavy ,he made his name fighting old welterweights

I didn't realize that Tito, Joppy, Echols, Holmes weren't "TOP" MWs and that the same Tarver who had just KO'd Jones was not a TOP LHW.

The ignorance and hate is just dripping from this post. :doh:
wow your really haven't a clue trinidad was a welter weight joppy was a decent middle weight but by no means elite level and we're talking about middle weights not light heavies so what has tarver got to do with it ?.....how you you can call someone ignorant is laughable when you seem to have no knowledge at about boxing you just seem like a groupie to certain boxers i bet you'd love a nice weekend away with yusef mack just the two of you... .
I know Trinidad moved up from being a WW but he fought and KO'd Joppy a legit MW and was fighting at the MW limit so IMO he is a MW. Tito moved up higher to fight RJJr, just FYI you're not telling me anything I don't already know.

You claim you weren't talking about LHW, then what the hell is this you stated: over a top level middle weight or light heavy

Stop talking outta the side of your neck. Hopkins also beat the great Glenn Johnson who was undefeated at MW, that same Johnson put RJJr to sleep.

But in your stupid opinion BHop never beat a top MW.

Get a clue, you have no boxing knowledge at all.
Undefeated49-0
Welterweight
Posts: 1192
Joined: 13 Nov 2015, 14:36

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Undefeated49-0 »

Some people have nothing better to do than to come here to hate and without logic at that, SteveDoc <<<doctor of Hate I guess. :doh:
Undefeated49-0
Welterweight
Posts: 1192
Joined: 13 Nov 2015, 14:36

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Undefeated49-0 »

jockpunk wrote:Unfortunately for Bhop he fought in an era where middleweight was not particularly strong. That said, he fought everyone he could have and dominated the division for years. He also had some decsions go against him that were somewhat questionable.

I rank him around 5th all time at MW. Maybe not top 25 p4p but he is up there. An all time great who would have held his own against the best in any era.

An awesome and honest post, not like some people on this thread. :TU:
Undefeated49-0
Welterweight
Posts: 1192
Joined: 13 Nov 2015, 14:36

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Undefeated49-0 »

Tanzio wrote:You really need to work on your prickly pearishness. You asked everyone to consider his outside the ring boxing related activities. I appreciate that you have forgiven BHop out of the kindness of your heart based on his efforts at redemption, but he should not need your (or anyone else's) forgiveness in order to be considered not only an ATG but a GOAT.

The fact that you go to such an effort to (yes implore) others to give BHop another look based on his growth as an individual, leads people to actually consider his entire career related to boxing outside the ring. turB did NOT bring up race in this discussion.

You did.

You should follow your own advise and read others' entire posts and be sure that you comprehend what is being said BEFORE YOU REQUEST ANOTHER POSTER BE BANNED.

To all of you who repeatedly call for others to be banned; let your nutz drop.
Great post, it is spot on. Look I understand that people here have fighters they like and ones that they don't like but we should not allow our emotion to cloud rational assessment of those who we do not like.

I'm not particularly a fan of Klitschko but I give him his credit, he was the best HW out there for a long time but others are starting to come up, is Klits one of my ATG, yes even though it was not particularly a strong era for HWs but that isn't a knock on him, he did what he was supposed to do and dominated those put before him.

I know there are many people here who hate me on this forum and that's ok but never do I go on the attack and unless someone says something out of place to me first then I will not say anything out of place to them. It happens everyday I'm just having a normal conversation with someone then a poster comes out of nowhere and says something derogatory towards me and I respond in kind, it incites them and then they call for me to be banned because they do not like getting what they've dished out.

I'm here to discuss boxing, if you want to hate on me then please send me a PM so we can discuss those matters privately. I honestly have nothing against anyone on this forum despite the insults being hurled at me constantly.
Last edited by Undefeated49-0 on 06 Jan 2016, 14:52, edited 1 time in total.
stevedoc
Super Middleweight
Posts: 3550
Joined: 24 May 2013, 07:40

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by stevedoc »

Undefeated49-0 wrote:Some people have nothing better to do than to come here to hate and without logic at that, SteveDoc <<<doctor of Hate I guess. :doh:

coming from the a groupie like you that's just funny ....
Undefeated49-0
Welterweight
Posts: 1192
Joined: 13 Nov 2015, 14:36

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Undefeated49-0 »

stevedoc wrote:
Undefeated49-0 wrote:Some people have nothing better to do than to come here to hate and without logic at that, SteveDoc <<<doctor of Hate I guess. :doh:

coming from the a groupie like you that's just funny ....
Is that supposed to be an insult? Wow dude, you really are lame. When someone exposes your BS and you have nothing of substance to come back with you hurl a childish insult.

Good job but you really seem like an Angry Little Man.

Have a nice day :wave:
jockpunk
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 524
Joined: 28 Oct 2005, 16:20

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by jockpunk »

Tito absolutely was a middleweight. While his resume at MW pales to his resume at WW, he was a MW by the time he fought hopkins.

I hope no one is dumb enough to say that kovalev's best win is over a middleweight. The same thing applies here. Just like hopkins was a 175lber when kovalev beat him, tito was a 160lber when hopkins beat him. Both HOFers who were very good at the higher weight although perhaps not as good as they were at a lower.
Undefeated49-0
Welterweight
Posts: 1192
Joined: 13 Nov 2015, 14:36

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Undefeated49-0 »

jockpunk wrote:Tito absolutely was a middleweight. While his resume at MW pales to his resume at WW, he was a MW by the time he fought hopkins.

I hope no one is dumb enough to say that kovalev's best win is over a middleweight. The same thing applies here. Just like hopkins was a 175lber when kovalev beat him, tito was a 160lber when hopkins beat him. Both HOFers who were very good at the higher weight although perhaps not as good as they were at a lower.
Spot on again, but you have to understand that on this forum 99% of people speak out of emotion when it comes to the fighters they hate/dislike.

I find the double standard if funny when those types apply it to a situation that favors them but when it doesn't they either avoid it altogether, go another route on the conversation to try and distract you from the original debate or hurl insults when they've been spotlighted for being a Hater or full of BS.
caldo2025
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 16 Dec 2014, 07:37

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by caldo2025 »

Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
Tanzio wrote: I can't fault turB here. He brings up a pertinent aspect of the subject matter that you implored us not to ignore, BHop's activity related to boxing outside of the ring.

I pretty much agree with turB on this one.
Well, that's not surprising. But my OP explains how Bhop won me over after preliminary disliking him for beating up old ladies and stealing their purses as he freely admits to doing. White, Brown or Purple, most reasonable people wouldn't be rooting for a guy like that initially. But he did his time and turned his life around and in time won me and most of boxing over with his actions in and outside the ring. Now I consider him one of the most important boxers in the last 20 years. And, I really feel like he's going to do more for boxing outside of the ring now. He's improved so much as a commentator and he and Golden Boy are trying to make the fights we all want to see and really seem to be the only ones doing it.

I didn't implore anyone to consider his past when considering his position in history. I merely gave reasoning behind my change of heart and why he ended up being one of my favorites. So maybe you both should read a little bit closer before commenting as we all seem to have the same opinion on the matter.
You really need to work on your prickly pearishness. You asked everyone to consider his outside the ring boxing related activities. I appreciate that you have forgiven BHop out of the kindness of your heart based on his efforts at redemption, but he should not need your (or anyone else's) forgiveness in order to be considered not only an ATG but a GOAT.

The fact that you go to such an effort to (yes implore) others to give BHop another look based on his growth as an individual, leads people to actually consider his entire career related to boxing outside the ring. turB did NOT bring up race in this discussion.

You did.

You should follow your own advise and read others' entire posts and be sure that you comprehend what is being said BEFORE YOU REQUEST ANOTHER POSTER BE BANNED.

To all of you who repeatedly call for others to be banned; let your nutz drop.
Tanzio, why do you continue to send comments my way? Honestly. You know that I think that you're an absolute jackass and couldn't care less about your opinion of me, so can't you find something more worthwhile to do with your time? You and your little brother 49-0 just log on to antagonize and belittle people when most of us just want to have some entertaining discussions about Boxing that may just open our minds up to consider some contrary opinions.

Even after two exchanges with you, you still don't see to understand that I was merely asking where fans positioned Bhop in history and asked to consider what he's done in the ring and what he's done as a promoter, not the crimes he committed as a teenager. Which ended up being the focus of your boy's post. And again, you and your little brother should READ the posts you chime in on because it really helps in a discussion with another human.

Historically it will prove unpopular to move him ahead of MMH or other MWs because many people dislike him for his "never lose to a whiteboy" comment (which is why most people dislike him).

See the above comment has everything to do with racism and the subject matter had no place for it and had nothing to do what I originally though of Bhop out of the gate. The majority of posters on this site are sick of the race talk and the accusations that your boy throws at everyone when he's losing an exchange. This OP had absolutely nothing to do with a racist comment or any comments of any kind. It's about one boxers amazing rags to riches story and his deserving place in the books.

Do me a favor and ignore my name when you see it on here. I've got zero interest in anything you have to offer.
Tanzio
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 12264
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 09:17

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Tanzio »

caldo2025 wrote:
Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
Well, that's not surprising. But my OP explains how Bhop won me over after preliminary disliking him for beating up old ladies and stealing their purses as he freely admits to doing. White, Brown or Purple, most reasonable people wouldn't be rooting for a guy like that initially. But he did his time and turned his life around and in time won me and most of boxing over with his actions in and outside the ring. Now I consider him one of the most important boxers in the last 20 years. And, I really feel like he's going to do more for boxing outside of the ring now. He's improved so much as a commentator and he and Golden Boy are trying to make the fights we all want to see and really seem to be the only ones doing it.

I didn't implore anyone to consider his past when considering his position in history. I merely gave reasoning behind my change of heart and why he ended up being one of my favorites. So maybe you both should read a little bit closer before commenting as we all seem to have the same opinion on the matter.
You really need to work on your prickly pearishness. You asked everyone to consider his outside the ring boxing related activities. I appreciate that you have forgiven BHop out of the kindness of your heart based on his efforts at redemption, but he should not need your (or anyone else's) forgiveness in order to be considered not only an ATG but a GOAT.

The fact that you go to such an effort to (yes implore) others to give BHop another look based on his growth as an individual, leads people to actually consider his entire career related to boxing outside the ring. turB did NOT bring up race in this discussion.

You did.

You should follow your own advise and read others' entire posts and be sure that you comprehend what is being said BEFORE YOU REQUEST ANOTHER POSTER BE BANNED.

To all of you who repeatedly call for others to be banned; let your nutz drop.
Tanzio, why do you continue to send comments my way? Honestly. You know that I think that you're an absolute jackass and couldn't care less about your opinion of me, so can't you find something more worthwhile to do with your time? You and your little brother 49-0 just log on to antagonize and belittle people when most of us just want to have some entertaining discussions about Boxing that may just open our minds up to consider some contrary opinions.

Even after two exchanges with you, you still don't see to understand that I was merely asking where fans positioned Bhop in history and asked to consider what he's done in the ring and what he's done as a promoter, not the crimes he committed as a teenager. Which ended up being the focus of your boy's post. And again, you and your little brother should READ the posts you chime in on because it really helps in a discussion with another human.

Historically it will prove unpopular to move him ahead of MMH or other MWs because many people dislike him for his "never lose to a whiteboy" comment (which is why most people dislike him).

See the above comment has everything to do with racism and the subject matter had no place for it and had nothing to do what I originally though of Bhop out of the gate. The majority of posters on this site are sick of the race talk and the accusations that your boy throws at everyone when he's losing an exchange. This OP had absolutely nothing to do with a racist comment or any comments of any kind. It's about one boxers amazing rags to riches story and his deserving place in the books.

Do me a favor and ignore my name when you see it on here. I've got zero interest in anything you have to offer.
Why would I do you any favors? You are a blatant, 24 carat hypocrite.

"My boy" turB? No racist overtones there, eh caldo?

You need to request that everyone be banned since you can't handle anyone disagreeing with your opinions. You aren't interested in talking boxing. You are only interested in talking at people.

You opened the door, naively or not, to BHop's outside the ring activities. The Tito incident is a significant part of BHop's outside the ring activities.

Acting innocent, like there is no racial component involved, about BHop's criminal record while simultaneously ignoring the white gorilla in the corner, is ignorant at best. But given your response to turB's post, it is clearly hypocritical.

I'm sure that BHop could not care less whether or not you have forgiven him of his transgressions thanks to his hard labor towards redemption, but what does any of that have to do with the unprecedented career accomplishments of the man inside the ring? BHop's legacy inside the ring is legendary, unlikely ever to be matched or exceeded.

Whether or not he made mistakes in his life, that he has paid for, should have absolutely no bearing on that legacy. His outside the ring mistakes and accomplishments should be a separate subject.

If they become a component of the discussion there is no escaping the racial aspects involved.
Undefeated49-0
Welterweight
Posts: 1192
Joined: 13 Nov 2015, 14:36

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Undefeated49-0 »

caldo2025 wrote:Tanzio, why do you continue to send comments my way? Honestly. You know that I think that you're an absolute jackass and couldn't care less about your opinion of me, so can't you find something more worthwhile to do with your time? You and your little brother 49-0 just log on to antagonize and belittle people when most of us just want to have some entertaining discussions about Boxing that may just open our minds up to consider some contrary opinions.

Even after two exchanges with you, you still don't see to understand that I was merely asking where fans positioned Bhop in history and asked to consider what he's done in the ring and what he's done as a promoter, not the crimes he committed as a teenager. Which ended up being the focus of your boy's post. And again, you and your little brother should READ the posts you chime in on because it really helps in a discussion with another human.

Historically it will prove unpopular to move him ahead of MMH or other MWs because many people dislike him for his "never lose to a whiteboy" comment (which is why most people dislike him).

See the above comment has everything to do with racism and the subject matter had no place for it and had nothing to do what I originally though of Bhop out of the gate. The majority of posters on this site are sick of the race talk and the accusations that your boy throws at everyone when he's losing an exchange. This OP had absolutely nothing to do with a racist comment or any comments of any kind. It's about one boxers amazing rags to riches story and his deserving place in the books.

Do me a favor and ignore my name when you see it on here. I've got zero interest in anything you have to offer.
Again, you are an angry little man for some reason. I never insulted you but you continue to throw the "race card" at me just because i stated the facts.

What happened when BHop made that comment "I'll never let a whiteboy beat me"? I'll tell you what happened; many white people were all over the internet talking about how he was being racist and making a lot of derogatory comments about him, if that makes you uncomfortable because I mentioned that and you want to label me as playing the "Race Card" then that is your prerogative but all I did was post that fact.

Go do a Google search and see how people reacted to his comments, many fans that probably didn't dislike the man (Hopkins) started to hate him.

Is that me being racial or just reporting the facts?

Now onto your garbage about bringing up the man's past in the first place, Tanzio did a good job of correcting you on that. What Hopkins did outside of the ring has no bearing on his record in it and not to mention that was a very long time ago when he was a young, dumb 17 year old kid.

If you hold that against him and feel that is something significant in terms of what he accomplished in the sport then obviously you have other motives or else; why bother to mention it in the first place if all you wanted was to know according to your topic "Historically, where does he belong??"

What am I missing here?
Tony1244
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 24713
Joined: 03 Jun 2010, 21:31

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Tony1244 »

"""Historically it will prove unpopular to move him ahead of MMH or other MWs because many people dislike him for his "never lose to a whiteboy" comment (which is why most people dislike him)."""


Can't we accept the fact that we all, certainly most of us, sometimes say stupid things? Often it's out of temporary anger, sometimes we're just kinda f kidding.

Ali said stupid things about white people. Holmes was rude regarding Marciano, because he had just lost a close decision to M. Spinks. Hopkins should not have disrespected the Puerto Rican flag and his whiteboy comment was silly at best, stupid at worst.

Sometimes we become overly Politically Correct. This should NOT effect how Hopkins is viewed. Maybe this is why Trump is resonating."People are beheading people out there, and we're worried about this Crap."
gilgamesh
Cruiserweight
Posts: 46550
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 16:21

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by gilgamesh »

I think Bernard Hopkins could fight virtually any Middleweight to Light Heavyweight that ever lived, and hold his own at worst, and I think he would defeat a great deal of them.

He's an All Time Great fighter. One of the 50 best in the sports history I'd say.
Undefeated49-0
Welterweight
Posts: 1192
Joined: 13 Nov 2015, 14:36

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Undefeated49-0 »

Tony1244 wrote:"""Historically it will prove unpopular to move him ahead of MMH or other MWs because many people dislike him for his "never lose to a whiteboy" comment (which is why most people dislike him)."""


Can't we accept the fact that we all, certainly most of us, sometimes say stupid things? Often it's out of temporary anger, sometimes we're just kinda f kidding.

Ali said stupid things about white people. Holmes was rude regarding Marciano, because he had just lost a close decision to M. Spinks. Hopkins should not have disrespected the Puerto Rican flag and his whiteboy comment was silly at best, stupid at worst.

Sometimes we become overly Politically Correct. This should NOT effect how Hopkins is viewed. Maybe this is why Trump is resonating."People are beheading people out there, and we're worried about this Crap."
I understand that some people say stupid things in the heat of the moment and while I did not like BHop's comment no more than anyone else, I did however feel that it was inappropriate though I understand he was trying to get into Calzaghe's head and make him angry so he can run him into shots and it actually worked.

Yes he was wrong for throwing down the PR Flag too and I will not give any excuse for that one because there are none but I understand that he did go back to San Juan and apologize to Tito and the PR people for doing such a dastardly deed.
ElJefe
Middleweight
Posts: 2545
Joined: 22 Apr 2014, 13:13

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by ElJefe »

Bernard is without doubt an ATG. The most dominant middleweight champion since the great Marvin Hagler, he upset the odds time and again against the likes of Trinidad, Pavlik and Tarver. Any fighters' record can be picked apart after they've retired, but really what's the point? Bernard deserves to be appreciated for what he's done in the sport. Dominant run and middleweight and he consistently took on big challenges at light heavy, unified light heavyweight champion, even faced one of the most feared men in boxing in Kovalev at 49.

He says it best himself, "I always ran to the fire not away from the fire. I come from an era that is not the era of today, I just happen to be here." Old school, throwback, legend. :TU:
zorndeslammes
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 537
Joined: 01 Jul 2007, 00:21

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by zorndeslammes »

The knocks against Bernard in my mind:

1) Boring style. No easy way to say that. He couldn't consistently draw big numbers as a result.

2) I don't believe any professional athlete can compete at a world class level in their late 40s without chemical assistance and he lives in an era where that is widespread. OTOH, I'm sure most or all of his opposition in the last decade has used PEDs too, so it is unfair to target him specifically.

As far as where he rates all time, guys post 1965 when the TV deals changed for boxing and activity dropped appreciably makes me not want to rank guys against one another. Post that, I think Hagler and Monzon are above him at MW. In a P4P sense, I'd have him below Pacquiao and Mayweather within this generation. I'd put him about equal with Oscar and possibly a little ahead given how many losses Oscar took. Mosley and him are super close - my instinct says above Shane, but there's a part of me that thinks Shane's biggest successes would outweigh Hopkins'. I would rate him above RJJ based on longevity, strength of opposition, and success against said strong opposition. Roy didn't manage any great successes after losing his title to Tarver (you can argue Trinidad, I guess?) and Hopkins had many post Taylor. He's clearly above Wladimir Klitschko and the group of featherweights that emerged in the late 90s (Morales/Barrera/Marquez/Hamed). I'd put him over Trinidad, Cotto, Calzaghe, Donaire, and Toney too. Roman Gonzalez might actually be in close with him; I think he's already an ATG Flyweight with a ledger of victories second to none at that weight.
BAD INTENTIONS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1885
Joined: 22 Oct 2005, 17:45

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by BAD INTENTIONS »

Top 5 middleweight.
Top 15-20 all time.

There's too much emotion surrounding Hopkins.
When people 30 years from now really look at his career, he'll be legendary.
Not just in boxing, but in all of sports.

I know I'm jumping B-Hop over a lot of fighters, but I think this will be the dominant opinion in a few decades.

On a side note, I think Hopkins is underrated compared to past middleweights. Hopkins is 175 pound tough.
Haggler wouldn't have KO'ed him prime for prime at 160 because Kovalev couldn't KO the version of Hopkins he faced.
If you can accept that no middleweight ever would have blown Hopkins away, that means they'd have to beat Hopkins by decision.
And if you come to that conclusion, not many guys could do that to Hopkins (circa 1995 - 2007)
caldo2025
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 16 Dec 2014, 07:37

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by caldo2025 »

"My boy" turB? No racist overtones there, eh caldo?



Wow, you and 49-0 are two peas in a pod. Do you both call each other and examine every word in a post and try to find a way you could somehow. someway, twist it into a racial insult? It's uncanny. Oh, let me just double check that last sentence I typed to see if i can do it too.

Got it. "Peas, ha Caldo? you know the band Black Eyed Peas? Yeah they are African American so that's racist".

How'd I do, Tanzio/49-0/KBB/KC? Do i show any promise?
Bard of Boxrec
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 13113
Joined: 22 Feb 2002, 20:00

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Bard of Boxrec »

he was an ATG middleweight but I've always said his reign at middle was no better than Calzaghe's at supermiddle, yet Calzaghe gets way more criticism for fighting soft touches than Bernard.
Tanzio
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 12264
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 09:17

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Tanzio »

caldo2025 wrote:"My boy" turB? No racist overtones there, eh caldo?



Wow, you and 49-0 are two peas in a pod. Do you both call each other and examine every word in a post and try to find a way you could somehow. someway, twist it into a racial insult? It's uncanny. Oh, let me just double check that last sentence I typed to see if i can do it too.

Got it. "Peas, ha Caldo? you know the band Black Eyed Peas? Yeah they are African American so that's racist".

How'd I do, Tanzio/49-0/KBB/KC? Do i show any promise?
First you criticize both of us for not reading your posts thoroughly. Now you accuse us of having the audacity to "examine every word" of your posts.

You are a confused puppy, caldo.

You need to thoroughly examine your own posts, before you projectile vomit them upon all of us, to be sure that you are actually communicating clearly. You opened up BHop's outside the ring activities to consideration relative to his legacy, not us. When you naively (or otherwise) did so race issues came into play.

Therefore, you brought the racially charged issues to the table, ignorantly or otherwise. You are responsible for what you say in your posts here. You need to have the nutz to defend your position or to admit when you are wrong.

But you are like a high school freshman explaining the poor grade that he has received on his first creative writing paper to his parents with "that's how I wanted to say it. I don't care what others think. I didn't write it for them. I wrote it for myself. People are just too stupid to understand."

BHop's legacy inside the ring should be a separate issue from his activities (positive and negative) outside the ring. Do you see how that works, caldo? That is not what you communicated in your original post. You told everyone to weigh his overall legacy, inside and outside the ring, together like you have in order to find it in our hearts to forgive BHop for previous transgressions.

BHop's boxing legacy should not depend on your (or anyone's) judgement of his personal and professional life outside the ring. He does not need your forgiveness of his outside the ring activities in order to be considered an ATG.

BHop may end up an ATG outside the ring too, but that is a completely separate issue from what he has accomplished inside the ropes.
Undefeated49-0
Welterweight
Posts: 1192
Joined: 13 Nov 2015, 14:36

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by Undefeated49-0 »

Tanzio wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:"My boy" turB? No racist overtones there, eh caldo?



Wow, you and 49-0 are two peas in a pod. Do you both call each other and examine every word in a post and try to find a way you could somehow. someway, twist it into a racial insult? It's uncanny. Oh, let me just double check that last sentence I typed to see if i can do it too.

Got it. "Peas, ha Caldo? you know the band Black Eyed Peas? Yeah they are African American so that's racist".

How'd I do, Tanzio/49-0/KBB/KC? Do i show any promise?
First you criticize both of us for not reading your posts thoroughly. Now you accuse us of having the audacity to "examine every word" of your posts.

You are a confused puppy, caldo.

You need to thoroughly examine your own posts, before you projectile vomit them upon all of us, to be sure that you are actually communicating clearly. You opened up BHop's outside the ring activities to consideration relative to his legacy, not us. When you naively (or otherwise) did so race issues came into play.

Therefore, you brought the racially charged issues to the table, ignorantly or otherwise. You are responsible for what you say in your posts here. You need to have the nutz to defend your position or to admit when you are wrong.

But you are like a high school freshman explaining the poor grade that he has received on his first creative writing paper to his parents with "that's how I wanted to say it. I don't care what others think. I didn't write it for them. I wrote it for myself. People are just too stupid to understand."

BHop's legacy inside the ring should be a separate issue from his activities (positive and negative) outside the ring. Do you see how that works, caldo? That is not what you communicated in your original post. You told everyone to weigh his overall legacy, inside and outside the ring, together like you have in order to find it in our hearts to forgive BHop for previous transgressions.

BHop's boxing legacy should not depend on your (or anyone's) judgement of his personal and professional life outside the ring. He does not need your forgiveness of his outside the ring activities in order to be considered an ATG.

BHop may end up an ATG outside the ring too, but that is a completely separate issue from what he has accomplished inside the ropes.
Very eloquently stated and I agree 100%.

I don't even have anything against Caldo or anyone on this forum for that matter but we cannot sum up a man's life by one mistake he's made, especially when that said person hasn't made the same mistake ever again in their life.

If you don't like BHop for whatever reason be it the "White boy" comment then just say so and we will understand your dislike and frustration for the man and why you don't want to rate him highly. Nothing wrong with having your biases no matter how irrational they are but don't bother to question one's response to your banter if you open up the can of worms.

Did Bhop have a career of fighting Tomato Cans? No more so than JLC Sr, no more so than all these other fighters with lengthy records of nobodies who went on to do nothing more but be contenders, pretenders or neverhasbeens so whether you think he does deserve to be placed highly or not, the fact of the matter is that it isn't up to you.

History will be kind to him because they will remember his legacy in the ring, the Oldest Champion, longest reigning MW Champion in history, Lineal LHW Champion and a span of about 10 years as a P4P fighter. I'm sure when he's inducted into the HOF that they won't hold his stupid mistake he made as a young boy against him.
BroughtonRulesRefuge
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 2773
Joined: 16 Dec 2008, 06:55

Re: Bernard Hopkins: Historically, where does he belong?

Post by BroughtonRulesRefuge »

- Not surprised to see the typical goofs here thinking one of the all time fraudulent crybabies in boxing is some kind of one off all great because of his age.

Let's be clear, 48 year old Archie Moore would have knocked him into the 5th row, no sweat, easy work against a feather fisted propped up GB fighter. His first career was propped up with a slew of Don King mostly unranked small town patsies. He got tired of fighting for peanuts under King and signed with Dibella who lined him up with 2 fights guaranteed to make him into somebody with good money in his pocket, the undefeated Calzaghe and the rematch with Jones Jr. He promptly filled his shorts and broke the contract with Dibella who ended up winning a $2 million dollar breach of contract suit against him.

Several years later past the relevancy of those fights, when things were starting to heat up, Super Joe slapped at his beltline and he dropped to all fours squealing like a stuck pig. The pathetic Joe Cortez who had been allowing him to hold all night after breaking up Hatton a dozen times anytime he got on top of TUE, why instead of declaring him TKOed as 99% of the refs in history would have done, this was typical American homecooking and he milked out all his allotted recovery time crying about his jewels. You can see from the pic that his protector was illegally well up from his trunk beltline, yet was never reprimanded by Cortez.

Image

He opened up against Roy Jones with a blizzard of headbutts and low blows, so when Jones first caught him behind the ear, he started bawling like a newborn baby, so Tony Weeks pulled a Joe Cortez and gave him all sorts of recovery time when he should have been declared KTFO. How anyone could even score such a filthy brawl fest as followed speaks to the fraudulent nature of boxing. Here he is after winning that fraudulent fight still wailing:

Image

Here he is early in his career after mysteriously "flying" out of the ring when little banty Mills Lane broke a clinch with Robert Allen, you gotta be kiddin'...

Image

Here he is after jumping in with a flying knee aimed at Chad Dawson's crotch. Dawson ducked away as dear ol' Pop's ended up draped over him, so Dawson gave a little shoulder shuck and Pops goes flying away once more with this result rightly ruled a KO, but overturned by the GB run Cali commish.

Image

Now I understand it's a new generation of metromen fans and yummies, but still, he ain't never gonna be old school in the mold of Bob Foster, Michael Spinks, Hagler, ect. He's a sissy hiding behind his silly executioner/alien prison mask, likely congenital since it seems to be reflexive with him no matter the couple of legacy type fights he had in him.

It's all good though as the usuals got the kind of champ you deserve, enjoy!
Post Reply