Is Bernard Hopkins the greatest Middleweight of all time?

I stress this point constantly John and not just about Hopkins, but about ALL modern fighters when comparing like for like. they have to be thought of at a division heavier. Hopkins by example would have been fighting L-HWs & HWs, now that certainly puts things into perspective.

the Classic Golden Age, late 20s - mid late 50s wasn't the Greatest period in Boxing for nothing.

 

I love Hopkins (no homo) but I don't think you can make him the no.1 middleweight at all.

He has a solid record at Middleweight with stand out wins like Trinidad & DLH and a lot of good ones vs top contenders like Holmes, Eastman, Allen, Johnson, Joppy etc. but it's not enough to be comparable with the top tier middleweights ever IMO.

Still in the modern era, to unify all the main belts was a great achievement.

 

Hopkins was the best middleweight who had the best post middleweight reign, but not the best middleweight.

 

actually, not even close

 

this is a fact and shared by many :good, but not around here.

 

your being kind Colonel, the actual answer Is NOT AT ALL...

with fights scheduals on average every 3 weeks Hopkins like every other fighter then would first fight at his natuaral weight, that would be L-HW and then spend most of his fights in Catchweight contest making him a L-HW cum HW...

easy to make weight when you've got months to do it. but to think this same luxary could be lived out at a time of 3-5 weeks bouts same & day weighin, No Way.

No time to enjoying peace and quite while gaining 10 - 20 lbs and then slowly take it off in a long training camp 2 months or more.

Hopkins would never have seen middleweight in the Golden Age and not just him but damn near alll modern fighters who compete at a division or two below their real weight!

 

I literally don't know what you mean.

 

:huh

 

Yuck at that post Booj has quoted.

 

He meant say that he went onto have more success when moving up from middleweight than other upper tier middleweights did. So out of all the best middleweights people are mentioning, he was the best when fighting in a different division.

At least that's what I think he meant.

 

Harry Greb says no.

 

Roy Jones is one of the best. Once Roy cleared out, Hopkins moved in and made a name for himself in a weak division. People put too much stock in his fight w Trinidad. I thought it was obvious Hopkins would take it. one of those man vs boy matchups

 

Who did Jones beat at middleweight apart from a green Hopkins? You trying to tell me Jones fought in a strong middleweight division and Hopkins in a weak one?

Hopkins had never fought in a superfight before he faced Trinidad. Not many people thought that Hopkins could beat Trinidad, considering the way he had demolished Vargas and Joppy. What you're saying above is fine with the benefit of hindsight.

 

hagler is number one with monzon at two but hopkins and jones are both in the top 10 160 pounders

 

Hard to make a case for him as the best. He never showed that unbelievable top ability and he doesn't beat Hagler or Monzon in terms of dominance and longevity. I do have him close to them, perhaps even on par with Hagler, though. Top 3, at least top 5.