View Single Post
Old 11-24-2012, 08:29 PM   #67
Boxed Ears
Reality ✓!
East Side VIP
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: sIZZLER
Posts: 30,038
vCash: 75
Default Re: Bernard Hopkins - How great?

Originally Posted by Bokaj View Post
Of course not. Still doesn't make 40 a virgin age. 40 is old for a top athlete any way you twist it.

And it's hardly like Hagler was a ring wreck himself when he lost to Leonard. He was about the same age, but with less fights, as a certain former LW was when he gave Hagler some trouble.

We don't know really what version of Hagler a 40-year old Hopkins would translate into, and how that version of Hagler would do against Taylor.
But we do know that Hopkins at no stage in his career had trouble with former LWs past their prime or lost to former WWs coming off long lay-offs.
Blue: If you understood me correctly, this would not be here. It's like an umpire and a coach are arguing out or safe and some drunken fan stumbles in and starts yammering about corked bats. I cannot argue about corked bats with you, Bo. Nor was I talking about them to begin with.

Green: When a guy dethrones one of the great welterweight champions, was clearly a top shelf welterweight, even by historical standards, becomes a light middleweight champion and goes on to become a middleweight champion and is regarded by most as one of the top 5-10 greatest fighters to ever live, he's still just a lightweight. Meanwhile, Jermain Taylor is just Jermain Taylor. Hopkins lost rounds to a former super featherweight, however, I should mention, since we're being silly.

Originally Posted by the cobra View Post
This comes across as a critical somewhat negative post, but I think you rate him as high as anyone, my man. No one really claims he deserves better than 30-50. I'll still pick him over Cleverly, btw, if that actually goes down.

Also: Mayweather - fine, whatever, fine...but **** that De la Hoya ****.

If it's negative to rate a guy in the top 50 fighters to ever live, I don't think you'd like to see me give my more critical opinions. Yeah, many rate Hopkins higher than 30-50. More than you'd think, apparently. ODLH? Well, Hopkins' best win, as far as quality of opponent in the time and place he defeated them was arguably over a guy I have ODLH clearly defeating at said opponent's best weight, which was two weights lower. I think Oscar's got the better resume overall, and clearly, in my opinion. And I prefer his accomplishments. Both were sporadically ranked the top p4p fighter on many lists and more often than not in the top tens on all the lists while still fresh. If you think it's a bit crazy, I can't help that. I just can't consider them so far off, let alone in the position of Hopkins ahead and being so far off. But if we all saw everything the same way, this forum would be fairly boring.
Boxed Ears is offline  Top
Reply With Quote