Boxing  

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


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-27-2007, 06:42 AM   #46
Stewbear
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 271
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senya13
Why include only title fights? Robinson had a helluva non-title fights at welter too. Robinson was an average puncher at middleweight. Fullmer KO means nothing, they fought 4 times, Ray was only able to do that once with a perfectly timed punch.

Whatever problems Hearns had at middleweight, is irrelevant, he showed only average punching power there and had a very mediocre career at this weight. Short-lived title-holder, there had been hundreds of fighters who also won one title only to lose it in 1st defense, middleweight Hearns is no better than any of them.
Roldan was a mediocrity. Thousands of fighters had won by knockout over opponents of such level, that doesn't mean anything. Same with Shuler, another mediocre fighter in a fight that proves absolutely nothing.
Maynard fight was an illegal punch that Hearns should have been disqualified for, not declared a winner by KO. A punch to the back of the head, everyone except the referee saw it.
How was Hearns' power at 154?
Stewbear is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 08-27-2007, 06:55 AM   #47
Senya13
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Russia
Posts: 3,927
vCash: 1210
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Jones stopped Tate, Malinga and Sosa, all of whom had excelent chin and durability. All three were better than Roldan or Shuler, and were more durable.

What weight did Duran, Andries, Maynard and "many others" happen at? 160lb? There must be something wrong with my eyes then, as I figured these fights happened either at 154lb limit or at 175lb limit or at 190lb limit, and I'm talking about middleweight limit (160lb) where Hearns had an average punching power and a VERY MEDIOCRE career. Hagler's win over Hearns at 160lb is less significant than his win over Vito Antuofermo, who had a similar ratio of KO/points wins at this weight and who had won unified 160lb championship and drew in 1st defense. It is also worse than Hagler's win over Alan Minter, who won the unified 160lb championship and defended it once. Hearns has achieved less than either of these two fighters at 160lb.

And stop mentioning Maynard fight, like I said, it was a disgraceful decision to stop the fight and award it to Hearns after he floored Maynard with an obvious blow to the back of the head.
Senya13 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 08:24 AM   #48
Jack
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 11,319
vCash: 15000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by cuchulain
While many feel Leonard did not deserve the win over Hagler, the point is , he did get the decision. Therefore your sentence: His three best wins are over Hearns, Leonard and Duran. is factually incorrect.
It's shows how good my post was, when people mention one overrexaggeration from me

I know Hagler lost, but I don't think he did, therefore I said it was his "best win". My basis for this was the usual stance of saying Hopkins beat Taylor at least once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuchulain
I rate him behind Hagler and Monzon (and Jones) and SRR. That puts him 5 alltime in my book.

Can you name me five more?
Harry Greb, Mickey Walker, Jake LaMotta, Charley Burley and Marcel Cerdan have better wins. Do you agree?

Even someone like Mike McCallum has a better resume and maybe even skills. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big McCallum fan, so the "even..." may look a bit off, but just compare how highly rated both men are. It's put into perspective how overrated Hopkins is. Granted McCallum is a 154lber naturally and would lose, but as he did fight at 160lbs, I chose to mention him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSTR
Yes I can definitely see past prime Hagler and especially Monzon having trouble with Taylor.


****ing hell!!!

Cory Spinks almost beat Jermain Taylor, and you think that Taylor would give Hagler or Monzon problems? Hagler would knock him out in 3 and Monzon around 8.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSTR
Great to see someone finally making an honest assesment about Monzon. Some people make out like he was this unbeatable fighter who just destroyed people.
Just because he doesn't look great on video, look at his resume. You talk about his notbeaing unbeatable, which he obviously wasn't, but he was very close to it. He looks like he has so many flaws, but when you look at the list of fighters who didn't beat him, then you understand he was special. He beat far too many great fighters for you to take away from him, because he doesn't look good on video.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senya13
Hearns had an average punching power at 160.
Ernie Singletary - points
Murray Sutherland - points
James Shuler - KO1, but Shuler is a mediocrity
Doug DeWitt - points
Juan Domingo Roldan - KO4, another mediocrity

This is an average record and average punching power.
Singletary was tough as ****. Not KOing him, something plenty of hard hitting natural 160lbers couldn't do, is nothing to be ashamed of.
Sutherland lasted a long time against top class light heavyweights.
Shuler had a good chin, and was ranked highly by The Ring.
DeWitt was another tough guy, who fougt good, strong opponents without being knocked out before Hearns.
Roldan was very tough. Only KOed by elite fighters.

It's not average power at all
Quote:
Originally Posted by sues2nd
2- Another person, yet again blaming Hopkins for beating smaller men, yet not taking anything away from others who did the same thing.

I was going to reply to your enitre post, but then I saw this post.

MY ORIGINAL POST WAS ALL ABOUT THE SMALLER MEN HAGLER AND MONZON BEAT WERE ELITE AT MIDDLEWEIGHT!

This point has pissed me off so much. **** off, you cunt. if you can't be bothered to read my intial post and reply to that, don't bother replying at all.

Dickhead.
Jack is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 08:45 AM   #49
Smith
Monzon-like
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 2,984
vCash: 484
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
Just because he doesn't look great on video, look at his resume. You talk about his notbeaing unbeatable, which he obviously wasn't, but he was very close to it. He looks like he has so many flaws, but when you look at the list of fighters who didn't beat him, then you understand he was special. He beat far too many great fighters for you to take away from him, because he doesn't look good on video.
Amen

ps.Don't bother getting pissed with some of these stupid cunts Jack, they have their heads so far up Hopkins ass theyre faling to see the bigger picture!
Smith is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 08:50 AM   #50
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,407
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by boydsmith
Amen

ps.Don't bother getting pissed with some of these stupid cunts Jack, they have their heads so far up Hopkins ass theyre faling to see the bigger picture!
I love Monzon but I don't think that he's that far ahead of Hopkins, if at all.

I have Hopkins at 5 and Monzon at 2.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 09:06 AM   #51
PATSYS
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,188
vCash: 75
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Hopkins' recent wins over Tarver and Wright somewhat narrowed the gap.

I always maintain that Hopkins' competition at 160 was crap. He lost to the only 2 legit & good MW he fought - Jones and Taylor.
PATSYS is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 09:37 AM   #52
Smith
Monzon-like
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 2,984
vCash: 484
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain
I love Monzon but I don't think that he's that far ahead of Hopkins, if at all.

I have Hopkins at 5 and Monzon at 2.
I agree he's not that far ahead, but to me, his competition and run/legacy completely outdo's B-Hop. Don't get me wrong, i think Bernard is a ****ing smashing fighter, and will go down in history as one of the best middleweights im sure, but for me he's in at 11 in my MW rankings(Monzon being no.1 for me, sure people will disagree with that but its my honest view)
Smith is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 10:12 AM   #53
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,407
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by boydsmith
I agree he's not that far ahead, but to me, his competition and run/legacy completely outdo's B-Hop. Don't get me wrong, i think Bernard is a ****ing smashing fighter, and will go down in history as one of the best middleweights im sure, but for me he's in at 11 in my MW rankings(Monzon being no.1 for me, sure people will disagree with that but its my honest view)

Monzon is a perfectly reasonable pick for #1 I think.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 12:35 PM   #54
Drofrah
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Manchester
Posts: 409
vCash: 814
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

I dont think Hopkins on his day would be able to beat Monzon or Hagler, but he would definatley run them close. He deserves a lot of the credit he recieves. He is just shy of the status of Hagler or Monzon
Drofrah is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 12:49 PM   #55
Senya13
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Russia
Posts: 3,927
vCash: 1210
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
Singletary was tough as ****. Not KOing him, something plenty of hard hitting natural 160lbers couldn't do, is nothing to be ashamed of.
Sutherland lasted a long time against top class light heavyweights.
Shuler had a good chin, and was ranked highly by The Ring.
DeWitt was another tough guy, who fougt good, strong opponents without being knocked out before Hearns.
Roldan was very tough. Only KOed by elite fighters.

It's not average power at all
Don't bother. I know already that Hearns nuthuggers will come up with every single excuse for every single case that shows Hearns not such a monster as they try to make him out to be.
Hearns had an average power at 160lb. Tens of middleweights had better punching power than him. Same with Hagler. Every single fighter who has gone the distance with him is a tough SOB, super durable and super skillful. While it's clear to anyone who actually has a brain, that Hagler had only average punching power as well.
Senya13 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 12:53 PM   #56
Carlos Primera
Martinez is a badman
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Obama can keep the change
Posts: 3,563
vCash: 75
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Monzon is King!
Carlos Primera is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 01:04 PM   #57
Rumsfeld
Moderator
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Go to the Mushroom Mag!
Posts: 18,775
vCash: 655
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

I'm a big fan of Hagler and Hopkins, and the more time goes by, the better I think this bout may have been. But....

People around here seem to forget how good of a boxer Hagler used to be at his best.

That's all I have to say.
Rumsfeld is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 02:11 PM   #58
cuchulain
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Muirthemne
Posts: 10,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack

It's shows how good my post was, when people mention one overrexaggeration from me

No, it doesn't .

It shows you had a factully incorrect statement in your post that needed correction.

(BTW: what is overexaggeration? sounds like a Bushism)


I know Hagler lost, but I don't think he did, therefore I said it was his "best win". My basis for this was the usual stance of saying Hopkins beat Taylor at least once.


I might have ignored the error if you had put best wins in quotes (like you did in your response) but there was no indication in your first post that you were aware of the result as a Leonard win.

For the record, I scored both Hopkins-Taylor fights narrowly for Taylor.



Harry Greb, Mickey Walker, Jake LaMotta, Charley Burley and Marcel Cerdan have better wins. Do you agree?

With the POSSIBLE exception of Greb, no I don't agree.

As I mentioned, I have Hopkins at 5 alltime.



Cory Spinks almost beat Jermain Taylor, and you think that Taylor would give Hagler or Monzon problems? Hagler would knock him out in 3 and Monzon around 8.

Taylor would KO both Monzon and Marvin Hagler ON THE SAME NIGHT if they were the age Bernard was when Bernard fought Taylor.



.
cuchulain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 02:15 PM   #59
Shareef
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 260
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senya13
Don't bother. I know already that Hearns nuthuggers will come up with every single excuse for every single case that shows Hearns not such a monster as they try to make him out to be.
Hearns had an average power at 160lb. Tens of middleweights had better punching power than him. Same with Hagler. Every single fighter who has gone the distance with him is a tough SOB, super durable and super skillful. While it's clear to anyone who actually has a brain, that Hagler had only average punching power as well.
Hagler was a very heavy handed fighter and he didn't have average punching power by no means. He wasn't a one punch type of guy but when he hit you he hurt you.

Hearns was a big puncher at 160 as well. When you list Sutherland for lasting the distance with Hearns remember that Sutherland went the distance with Light Heavyweigth Michael Spinks and trust me Spinks could punch. Hearns hurt and staggered Sutherland on many occasions. Singletary was again hurt and staggered many times its not like he was walking through Hearns shots. Say whatever you want about Schuler the man was undefeated at the time and Hearns put him out in one round can't ask for more than that. And Juan Roldan was a very strong tough fighter. He gave Hagler one of his tougher title challenges and was doing very well before his eye started closing up.
Shareef is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 02:26 PM   #60
Shareef
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 260
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What seperates Monzon and Hagler from Hopkins

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdp000109
The fact is Bernard Hopkins knocked out 2 atg's in Oscar De La Hoya and Felix Trinidad and is the only one to have knocked either one out. I hate when people try to take away from Hopkins victories over those 2 when Hagler was fighting a lightweight in Duran, and welterweights in Hearns and Leonard. I mean I respect Hopkins and Hagler for all of their good competition reguardless of where they used to fight but its stupid when people try to use that against either guy.
The difference is Hagler's oppositions of Hearns, duran, leonard is superior to Oscar and Tito. As it has been said before Oscar did nothing at middleweight so what makes him a good win at that weight it doesn't matter what he did at lower weights. Duran still did 6 yrs after the hagler fight being a old 37 yrs old win the middleweight Title against Iran Barkley. Duran is a better middleweight win than oscar is. Hearns also accomplished more than Tito at middleweight and higher weights. Although the tito win is a good win regardless because he did look awesome against Joppy and going into the hopkins fight he was favoured by many. But the oscar win is a meaningless win at middleweight.

Hamsho, Roldan, Antuofermo these guys were tough no nonsense guys they were good legit tough middleweights. Just because they weren't multiple time titleholders because things were different in there time doesn't mean they weren't very good fighters. The Glen Johnson that fought Hopkins wasn't better than these guys at middleweight. The tarver win is a good win for hopkins at light heavy against a true light heavy which is a nice addition to his resume. The Winky win isn't as impressive and doesn't make his resume too much richer in my book. Fighters like Eugene Hart, Bennie Briscoe, Mugabi all murderous punchers are still good solid wins which are better than the likes of robert allen, mercado etc. If you match up resumes Hagler has Hopkins beat all hopkins has over hagler is his light heavyweight title winning effort agianst Antonio Tarver which as i said before is a nice addition to his resume.

Also claiming that monzon and halger retired early and how hopkins is still going in his 40's doesn't really mean nothing. Athletes are aging better these days than they did in previous generations also they both had far more fights than hopkins so although he has fought for 10 more years he has considerably less fights.
Shareef is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > General 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 12:00 AM.


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