Today I have started watching a number of B-Hops fights at 160. As I look over his record I only recognise a handful of names through his middleweight reign. He is more well known for his later career achievements. But just how highly do you rate his Middleweight resume? How good where his wins and how good was the division at the time. How good where the likes of Antwun Echols, John David Jackson and Howard Eastman? What are his top 10 Middleweight title wins and why?
This is why I don't rate him at 160 as high as some do, not saying he wouldn't give any middleweight a run but just too thin to rate
There weren't many big names at middle back then much like gggs era. Mw trinidad is underrated in my view but that's why the weight jumping is such a huge part of his resume.
Yes! He is totally overrated and only in the watered down no talent era could all these fighters fight in there late 30s much less 40s or 50s. 12 rds. Before day weighins PEDs weightlifting musclebound doops trying to fight. It's embarrassing.
I agree with the common premise that Hopkins' opponents were generally weaker than both Hagler's and Monzon's. Obviously Segundo Mercado is well below a guy like Alan Minter or Nino Benvenueti, while Hopkins' particularly weak 'filler' opponents like Morade Hakker, Steve Frank, and Andrew Council were worse than any of the title opponents faced by Monzon or Hagler. On the other hand, I think some of Hopkins' opponents are underrated. Joe Lipsey was a good fighter, who was unfortunately traumatized by what B-Hop did to him. Lipsey promptly retired. Hopkins also stopped the exceptionally tough Glen Johnson, and beat Keith Holmes and William Joppy very convincingly. I also think Fitz Vanderpool was underrated and both Howard Eastman and Antwun Echols saw their once formidable reputations tarnished by subsequent losing streaks. How do prime version of Eastman, Echols, Joppy, and Robert Allen stack up next to Tony Mundine, Wilford Sypion, Tom Bogs, or Fulgencio Obelmejias? Probably not quite as well, but I think the people who claim a guy like Mustafa Hamsho or Rodrigo Valdes would have cruised through Hopkins' era without a hiccup are totally mistaken.
Great fighter, old school and a top 5 Middleweight of all time for me. One can say what they like about his era but he totally dominated them once he won the title before running out of steam at the weight after a decade and a half which included 11 years of dominance. Often when a dominant champion like Hagler, Monzon or Hopkins rule they make the division look less than what it really was. I've seen the odd article bemoaning the state of the division when Monzon ruled and comments included Briscoe and Valdes and have also seen the same for Hagler's mob. You can only beat who is in front of you. I'd take Hopkins over plenty of ATG's and perhaps the only two i'd actually favor over him might be SRR at his 160 best and maybe RJJ with all that otherworldly talent at the time he moved to 168. In his first fight after moving up from 160 he made a mockery of James toney so it's safe to say as he left 160 he was already the complete package even at that 26 fight stage. Other guys that relied less on godly talent and more on fundamentals like Hopkins, Hagler and Monzon were a slower burners. Of course these guys were all talented but they had to work harder imo.
Hopkins came to the title shortly after a gloriously talented era of middleweights (which he caught the end of in his first title try against Roy Jones in 93). The rise of the supermiddleweight division really hurt the depth of the middleweights and Hopkins either benefitted or suffered from that exodus depending on your point of view. The name that stands out on his record is Trinidad although he has some solid if unspectacular names on his middleweight ledger (Holmes, Joppy, Echols). The Tito win was what tipped him into the conversation of great middleweights though, no question. I have him at no. 7 all time.
Hopkins' reign at MW was great in terms of its longevity, not so much in terms of its quality of opponent. He fought a few good fighters to spice up the pot but I rate Golovkin's run as better.
His best win is Titto. That was a great win. Other than that I agree his title reign was more about longevity than quality of opposition
Hopkins was fortunate enough to have top welters moving to face him ( De Lay Hoya and Tito. ), which makes his resume look a lot better. He was also fortunate to have Don King setting up a 4 man tourney that lacked talent besides him to create the champion at 160. The best middles he fought were Jones, and Taylor. He's 0-3 here, and was not close to Jones. A draw with Mercado makes you question the level of his greatness, and I say this because Hopkins was one of the top 20 greatest middleweight. I'd agree with you, his best win at 160 pounds is over Tito, who was much smaller and pretty much relied on his left hook. The win would have more value to it if Hopkins didn't dirty fight to slow Tito down with those kidney shots thrown to the opposite side of the referee where he couldn't see them My thoughts are Hopkins had the perfect body for 160, fought average competition for title defenses. The longevity of his reign is the most impressive thing.
SRR and MAYBE Roy Jones??? In one of Roy's worst performances, Jones easily handled Hopkins. There is no legitimate argument for picking Hopkins over Roy at middleweight. And, I think many other fighters such as Hagler would beat up even the best Middleweight version of Hopkins.
If you are seriously taking that version of Hopkins as the best of him give it up already. Jesus Christ mate. One of Roy's worst performances? Classic stuff. I'd take Roy over him at their 160 best tho Hopkins improved far far more than Jones did after their encounter. Jones was a surreal talent who i also take over both Hagler and Monzon. Be thankful i'm not taking the tired old common Classic line that the improved Hopkins would only have to hit him solidly once and his chin would cave in.
Hopkins title run is pathetic. He only makes it in my top 6 due to longevity. Griffith, a natural ATG 147 boxer fought better opponents in his middleweight campaign as a champion and contender than Hopkins.
I followed both Roy and Bernard closely from the beginning. Saw almost all of their fights. Saw many of their fights live. Bernard's longevity flatters him. When they were both at their best, Roy was significantly better. And, his wins above 160 are better then Bernard's as well. Bernard missed out on most of the biggest threats at middleweight (Toney, Jackson, McClellan, Benn, Eubank, Collins, Reggie Johnson, McCallum) for the better part of 10 years.
