View Single Post
Old 11-24-2012, 02:45 PM   #34
East Side Guru
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 8,488
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bernard Hopkins - How great?

Originally Posted by Nightcrawler View Post
can't do it myself. like his longevity, love his skills but he lacks either the big names or dominance against elite middleweight opposition to get him into the top 3.

i like hagler's opponents and monzon's consistency better. robinson has better names and wins as well and greb, taking everything into account, probably trumps them all.

hopkins is burdened by being in a TERRIBLE middleweight era and having to, like hagler, fight welters moving up. the problem for hopkins is that the fighters moving up aren't quite in the league of duran, hearns, griffith, or napoles

If I had to decide right now, I'd probably put hopkins 5 behind Greb, Monzon, Hagler and Robinson
Think there's very little, if anything, between Hagler's and Hopkins' reigns. Was Hearns really a better MW than Tito? Doubtful. He never blew out a top MW contender like Tito blew out Joppy as I recall. Was Duran a better MW than DLH? Also doubtful. There's at best room for nitpicking between their reigns.

I'd say the same about Monzon's more or less, although I know that one less well. But great names as Griffith and Napoles are they didn't really do much at MW either, did they? And weren't they aging as well?

Robinson's main wins were over LaMotta. Then we have an aging Graziano. After that he swapped wins and losses against the top MWs he met. Can't see this as a better MW record than Hopkins going unbeaten for 12 years at MW, cleaning out the division in the process.
Bokaj is offline  Top
Reply With Quote