Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

 
  


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-11-2013, 08:48 PM   #106
lora
Fighting Zapata
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4,555
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

You think Dawson and Pascal are as good as Fullmer?.

Even Basilio at middle was miles better than either.

Hopkins didn't look good in any of these fights.Nothing in them suggests i should think he's "damn good" any more.it's a dire state light heavy is in and even in stronger divisions plenty of fighters throughout history have picked up a few wins without being any more than average or mediocre.Hell in the alphabet era there are numerous champs with a decent number of defences that were never more than 5 out of 10 fighters.

I don't see a comparison between Hopkins light heavy career and Robinson's past prime exploits at all.Robinson wasn't as old, and was fighting much better fighters.There's a helluva lot more back and forth, two-way quality in Robinson vs Fullmer and Basilio fights than there is in any of hopkins late bouts.

I do think Hopkins looked good against Tarver and pavlik.Those were good wins.It's the later stuff that bothers me he is given so much credit for.The gets them to fight his fight thing is tiresome and overplayed.Ruiz was good at getting you to fight his fight as well..if you were third rate.Nobody ever gave him much credit for it.Hopkins isn't much different these days.
lora is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 09:48 PM   #107
sweet_scientist
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,870
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

Fullmer is twice the fighter Dawson or Tarver is.

And I'm just talking about Don.
sweet_scientist is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 10:29 PM   #108
NoNeck
Pugilist Specialist
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,256
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lora View Post
Maybe cherrypicking was the wrong word to convey what i feel about what he's done.My main stance is i think he's taken advantage of flawed overhyped fighters that have crawled to the top of a desolate weightclass, nothing wrong with it really especially considering his age, but when i watch him fight i haven't seen a bout worthy of especial praise since the calzaghe and Pavlik(who was himself a massive hypejob of only average ability, but i dug the way hopkins looked and fought there) ones.

Criticising Foreman? i can appreciate that too, but to me hacks like Dawson and Pascal are not any more notable than guys like Briggs, Schulz, Coetzer, Alex stewart, fat qawi, bert cooper etc You can say "ah but he's the recognised top light heavy" or whatever...that doesn't mean they can fight well.If hopkins fought someone who came out of nowhere and they looked very capable and yet he was able to beat them i'd give him his due no problem.

Bottom line i find little of value in Hopkins recent efforts...they are not good quality fights and he does not look a good fighter in them to me.I'm not even arguing he doesn't have some of the best longevity in the history of the sport...i'd actually agree there.

I'm simply saying i don't feel he'd have been able to do this in a stronger era to anywhere near the same extent and it's got nothing to do with bias against "the modern era".I'm interested in talent and good boxing, not dates.
Chad Dawson is a hack now? Sit your crotchety ass down.
NoNeck is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-11-2013, 10:54 PM   #109
ripcity
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: "Somebody may beat me, but they are going to have to bleed to do it."
Posts: 10,232
vCash: 917
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

In my opinion Hopkins has had a better career at 40 and beyond than Moore.
ripcity is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 07:06 PM   #110
frankwornank
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 273
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

No. Hopkins is a good albeit boring fighter but his longevity is as much the lack of good competition as it is his ability. At LH he would be ranked somewhere between 5th and 10th in the 60's and 70's because Moore, Harold Johnson, Gregorio Peralta, Wayne Thornton, Eddie Cotton, Willie Pastrano, Roger Rouse and others would be too tough and too strong for him. As a middle weight in the 50 and 60's, he would be lucky to break the top 10. Ray Robinson, Eduardo Lausse, Joey Giardello, Gene Fullmer, Rory Calhoun, Spider Webb, Bobo Olson, Tiger Jones, Dick Tiger, Holly Mims, George Benton, Joey Archer and a few others, would best him on most nights.
frankwornank is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 07:07 PM   #111
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,233
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

Some tunes are going to have to change around here if he is still relevant at fifty. Like it or not every single win against a top contender enhances his standing now. If a guy is ranked he should have your respect, if he has your respect it's ****ing crazy for an old man to beat him.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 09:45 PM   #112
lora
Fighting Zapata
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4,555
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

It's an embarassing reflection on the current talent pool is what it is.
lora is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 11:17 PM   #113
mckay_89
Haw you!
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Funky Town
Posts: 2,285
vCash: 1065
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

Threads like this exemplify why the Classic pisses me off. If you think Moore is the better choice thats absolutely fine, but try and justify your reasons by telling us what you like about the stuff Archie did rather than pick holes in the stuff Hopkins has done, especially when you're making up bollocks about how Hopkins has cherrypicked. Pascal was number 1 in the division when they fought, Dawson was the number one contender, Cloud was a top 5 guy. Who should he have fought if he wasn't 'cherrypicking'?
mckay_89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 09:43 PM   #114
gilad
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 284
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

Does the win over Murat (limited, but legitimate top 10 fighter) 3 months shy of age 49 (!) change anything in the Hopkins-Moore comparison?
In my book, if Hopkins at 49 manages to beat Shumenov (I think this will be his next fight), he will secure his place as the best old fighter ever.
gilad is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2013, 11:32 PM   #115
NoNeck
Pugilist Specialist
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,256
vCash: 500
Default Re: Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

Quote:
Originally Posted by gilad View Post
Does the win over Murat (limited, but legitimate top 10 fighter) 3 months shy of age 49 (!) change anything in the Hopkins-Moore comparison?
In my book, if Hopkins at 49 manages to beat Shumenov (I think this will be his next fight), he will secure his place as the best old fighter ever.
He already has secured that spot. The only thing that could screw it up is if he fails a peds test.
NoNeck is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013