Having watched most of his fights, I think he reached his prime when he demolished mercado in their 1995 rematch and imo his real prime was until he beat trinidad in 2001, after which his activity level and overall speed started gradually but clearly slowing down. He got more cautious and obviously kept learning tricks and refining his skills which helped extend his ability to compete at the top level until he was 50 which is truly remarkable even for todays standards.
Almost impossible to answer this question. Tarver and Pavlik were genuinely awesome performances and he was old as ****. I think that Hopkins' style, the things that made him great, were things that tended to get better with experience. So he mastered the use of angles, he mastered pacing a fight, he read a man very well, he understood his own body and limitations completely and he recognised those of the opponent. SO the best version of Hopkins might have appeared somewhere down the road. But how to measure that against activity, aggression, strength, engine? It's very very difficult.
I think he was closer to his prime then than some people will admit. The whole experienced crafty veteran boxer /spoiler style came as compensation for him getting older and slowing down. Bernard in his prime was an agressive boxer puncher with high activity, inside fighting skills and a strong right hand. The version that fought jones might have been slightly green but he was already a complete solid fighter then
I think the style you're describing(which is what most people associate with hopkins because he got the spotlight and the big fights relatively late in his career) was a symptom or compensation of him aging. I would say his prime was until right before he started compemsating for his age by becoming less agressive and throwing less punches and spoiling more
As with most fighters especially one with longevity it's hard to pinpoint the beginning but the first title fight is a good starting point. The end was clearly after Pavlik when he took the year off. So 93 to 08
Well it's a process. It's a journey, A to B. So is his declining physicality. At some point what's "best for boxing" will be realised - the combination of physicality x plus experience, y. The likelihood of this being in his biggest fight (Tito) is also a given value. Still, it could be that fight, although some here have argued Johnson, for example.
His prime started with the Mercado rematch and lasted forever. You could say his performances were still worthy of a "prime" all the way up to Pavlik at least. That's about a 13 year prime for mine. I think you could even stretch his peak from 95 to about 2003. That's an insane peak and prime, insane.
A fifteen year prime is something that is hard for me to fathom. Not saying you're wrong, but it certainly wouldn't be my guess.
Havent seen these fights in forever but at the time, I thought he was visibly showing signs of slowing down by 04-05 (even in his victories over Eastman and Oscar).
Well that was his most impressive performance for me, like i said i feel like his prime was from mercado 2 in 95 until trinidad in 2001 or maybe joppy in 2003. I remember being very unimpressed by some of his later defenses against howard eastman and allen, although he was good in both taylor fights i think his declining physicality contributed to him losing those 2. I dont think late 90s hopkins would have lost those fights
Agree 100% i remember seeing those later defenses and recognizing the decline in activity, speed and punch output