How would Hopkins have done as a heavyweight?

hopkins is a natutal super mw -lhw . hagler is clearly smaller

 

Ok so even though Hopkins is taller, rangier and would be heavier you still wouldn't class him as bigger than Norris.

I wonder if the two have ever been photographed together?

Either way your example of Tucker being proof of the skill level of Ruiz is clearly nonsense. Tucker was not very good in the 90's as many smaller men showed.

Ruiz himself has shown he cannot enforce his physical presence on a more skilled opponent.

Had the fight ever been made I do think Hopkins would have been the favourite.

 

The trick of fighting a lesser, sub par heavyweight "titilist", as Jones did with Ruiz, could conceivably been done by Hopkins....but a higher quality heavyweight would have crushed Hopkins...flat out...and the same would have happened to Jones if he had fought a heavy of more magnitude than Ruiz.

 

Edit: I'm butting in an existing discussion though. This may not be your complete view.

Would you call Panama Al Brown bigger than Lamotta if he were on a high calorie diet?
Would Arguello be?
Alvin Hayes then?
Willie Nelson then?

 

Bigger is something that I think changes.

For example Floyd Mayweather was a SFW prospect when Ricky Hatton was a LWW prospect.

Hatton fought his entire career at LWW or WW, yet when Hatton and Floyd fought, Mayweather was clearly the bigger man on the night.

Pavlik and Hopkins were both MW champions but when they fought Hopkins was clearly the bigger man.

Guillermo Jones was a former LMW and Lebedev was a career CW but when they fought Jones was clearly the bigger man.

Perceptions on size change, at one time Holyfield was considered much to small to fight Tyson but when they did fight Holyfield was the bigger stronger man.

Being bigger is a variable description and its down to more than just who fought at a higher division.

 

Holyfield was never the bigger man, he was smaller than Tyson in both bouts. So tell me again who is the bigger man in Brook and Golovkin?

 

Holyfield was the bigger man, he was able to push and bully Tyson about.

Thanks that last one proves my point again, despite being heavier Brook was quite clearly the smaller man that night.

 

Holyfield was the stronger man not the bigger man.

So who is the bigger man then of the pair?

 

Only question I have....and it's a reasonable one...is who would have the bigger
man-boobs at 220lbs, Toney or Bhop?

 

Toney

 

Watch the first fight and try telling me Holy is the smaller man.

The bigger of which pair?

 

But somebody can only be bigger if he has proven himself to be.

There's a reason why Willie Nelson probably will never go beyond 154, and Thomas Hearns has fought at 190.

Some fighters carry their power to higher weight divisions, some may even become more effective punchers.
But then you have a guy like Arthur Abraham who simply didn't carry his power against 168 pound fighters.
Meanwhile Roy kept his dynamite all the way to 175 and even cracked Virgil Hill and Griffin with a single shot.
Hopkins hasn't been able to get stoppages since moving up to 175.

James Toney's power has been roughly as effective in every weight class he's been.

Guillermo Jones is a bigger puncher at 190/200 than he ever was at 154.

I haven't seen Hopkins carry his power so I have very little to believe his hypothetical opponents in higher divisions will respect his power much.
And Hopkins could always go more negative, but at some point it'd just mean he'd be unable to get enough leather in to win rounds.
You'd just see Kovalev-Hopkins all over again, with Bernard throwing less than 200 punches in a fight.

Both Toney and Roy were able to make Ruiz think twice and hit him with very hurtful shots.
They had also proven their power through multiple weightclasses.
Hopkins power has degraded badly from 160 to 175, it would most likely degrade even further above 175.

Hopkins is more like Floyd who also had to become craftier as he moved up and his power became less effective. (not in style, but how they had to handle their move through weight)
At some point you need more than just craftiness and skill to get an opponent off you.

 

Bigger is a variable as I've said.

When Hearns moved up to fight Hagler he was the smaller man, yet he managed to beat Hearns two divisions above a weight Hagler ever competed at so did Hearns then become bigger? Toney moved up and fought Griffin as the smaller man but then quickly became bigger man .

Moving up is about much more than carrying your power, it's about whether or not you can gain strength and retain your skill advantage.

Tbh I don't really by the theory that Mayweather declined as be moved up in weight. His best performance a were at WW and above imo. He also had a big drop off in punching power.

Hopkins stung everyone with his shots, whether he got the ko or not is another issue but aside from Kovalev no one ever walked through him.

With his speed and accuracy he'd be able to tag Ruiz enough to earn his respect. With his footwork he'd be able to stay one step ahead all night.

 

He cant fight in heavyweight because he simply too small. Jones in his prime (the very last time) relied on his reflex, speed and footwork to outbox Ruiz. Hopkins style will not make him any good in HW no matter who he's fighting. Unless he's pressing his opponent non stop, it would be like Trinidad when he fought Jones.

 

You seem to be in clear minority with your view though. Fact is Hopkins did not move up to cruiserweight to face Toney nor Maskaev at heayvweight.He seemed to have some doubts himself whether he could compete at the elite level in the higher weight classes.