To me, the late 90's early 00's MW division looks pretty weak. If you merged that one with today's, I think only B-Hop would make the top 5. He might be the top dog, though. Purely hypothetical, but that would be my guess.
Watching all of their fights closely and live does not mean your comments are true, or untrue. Roy was far flashier and visually more impressive from that perspective. He was more talented than basically anyone really. He had an absurd mix of power, speed and reflex that saw him completely overwhelm many a good fighter that other greats would have a harder time or less spectacular time with. This does not automatically mean he would beat these other greats or make him "significantly better". A good parallel would be Mike Tyson compared to guys like Holyfield and Holmes, He would almost certainly be far more impressive against the massive majority of common opponents and others, particularly non greats. This is a given. He would look more spectacular and devastate many guys comparatively to the other two. Does this make him "significantly better" than those two? They should be. Jones spent almost a decade of his prime above middleweight. Hopkins was declining before he even got there. He'd been middleweight champion for a decade before moving up. Of course Jones is going to have better wins over 160. Yes they had all sailed on but that's hardly Hopkins fault. There was no time machine to go back to 5 or so years earlier. Toney's last ever middleweight fight was in 92. His last ever fight at 168 was when he was schooled by Jones in 94. Hopkins didn't win the 160 title until 1995. You can only beat who they put in front of you, which is what Monzon, Hagler, Hopkins and so many others did. Many believe Jones missed some of his best competition above middleweight too.
I'm from Philadelphia and even I can honestly say Hopkins is one of the most overrated MW of all time H2H. He has longevity. That's about all I give him. A predictable dirty mugger.
1. Tito 2. Keith Holmes 3. De La Hoya 4. Joppy 5. Segundo Mercado 6. Echols I 7. Glen Johnson 8. Syd Vanderpool 9. Joe Lipsey 10. Carl Daniels
Same here, and to add, if he blitzes his mediocre field of contenders, I would rate him a bit higher.
Pretty weak crop, although Hagler, Monzon, and GGG didn't have the best stuff to work with either. In terms of accomplishments, opposition overcome a middleweight ranking might look something like this: Ray Robinson: LaMotta x5, Olson x4, Villemain, Mims, Turpin, Graziano, Castellani, Fullmer, Basilio, Moyer, Dupas Steele: Apostoli, Dundee, Jones x2, Lesnevich, Overlin, Kreiger, Risko x3 Hagler: Briscoe, Minter, Antuofermo, Hamsho x2, Hearns, Mugabi, Duran Tiger: Fernandez, Fullmer x2, D. Fullmer, Giardello, Carter, Benvenuti Monzon: Benvenuti x2, Griffith x2, Moyer, Briscoe, Napoles, Valdez x2 Fullmer: Pender, Castellani, Robinson x2, Basilio x2, Fernandez, Paret LaMotta: Robinson, Williams, Villemain, Cerdan, Dauthuille, Hopkins: Jackson, Johnson, Trinidad, Joppy, De La Hoya Golovkin: Alvarez x2, Jacobs, Murray, Brook, But if you rank them head to head, and include guys who just passed through the division without leaving a great legacy there it's more like: Jones Jr. Charles Greb Moore Hopkins Monzon Robinson Leonard Walker Hagler Toney Steele Tiger Golovkin Fullmer LaMotta And if you rank everyone who ever fought at middleweight p4p it's like: Robinson Armstrong Greb Langford Walker Charles Moore Fitzsimmons Leonard Toney Hopkins So it depends how you choose to rank them. A guy like Hopkins' p4p legacy will be higher than his all time middleweight ranking, and his H2H ranking will be high but not as high as say Jones Jr or Charles'.
Hopkins' Middleweight run is a good one, I'd say - with longevity and a few solid wins on his resume that together combine to make it worth discussing him, in terms of a relatively high all-time ranking. I, myself, find it difficult to keep him in my top-10 MWs - a division with such a deep history of talent. I also find his MW career, whilst lengthy, to be a bit pedestrian and, in the main, quite run of the mill; to the extent that a Top-10 of his wins at 160 would be a headache. I think most would agree that Trinidad was his best win there. It was also a significant win, due to this making him the undisputed Middleweight Champion of the World - the first since Hagler. After that I'd perhaps go for Glen Johnson; then Holmes; then Joppy; then maybe Vanderpool - I suppose one should include Oscar but the consensus seems to be that OdlH was no Middleweight and I tend to agree with that. Echols, Eastman and, once he could get to grips with Allen - these were solid wins, as well. Truth is, Hopkins' later career, as an aging Light Heavyweight, drew greater interest, from me. It's also where some of his best wins can be found.
It's interesting that B-hop doesn't get the stick from fighting smaller men like Monzon and Hagler do.
True, no doubt about that. His longevity is amazing and probably unmatched in the sport. But his lightheavy victims weren't anything special, and his record there isn't particularly overwhelming. I personally don't see Hagler and Monzon losing to Tavoris Cloud and Beibut Shumenov. But hey anything is possible, and Marv and Carlos never fought above 160. But none of that changes the fact that he gets a free pass where Hagler and Monzon don't.
If you haven't got the quality of opposition, there's two alternative paths to greatness - longevity and dominance. The first is a given, but I think it gets overlooked just how dominant Hopkins was during his 160 reign. In the majority of his defences he barely lost a round. If you have the fortune/misfortune to be in a relatively weak era and have aspirations to be a great champion, the least you can do is lord it over your peers and prove you are a class apart. Hopkins did that, won a unification tournament, and cleaned out the division. It's all good stuff and worthy of place amongst the middleweight greats. Comparing him to Robinson, Hagler and Monzon though, his resumé is lacking. There is also the lingering doubt about how well he would have done in a division populated by Toney, McCallum, Nunn, Jackson, Kalambay etc just a few years earlier.
Hagler and Monzon were both 10 years into retirement at the career stage Hopkins fought those guys at so who knows how they would have went. Hagler and Monzon only really get criticized for fighting smaller men because they didn't have a go up higher themselves. Hopkins did. I don't think it's overly heavy criticism either. Hagler cops a bit as many believe his best challengers were the smaller guys.
The above is the fairest way of putting it, I think. It speaks to the less than auspicious timing of Hopkins' career at 160; having to do what he had to with what he had in front of him, but keeping the timeframe and the manner in which he went about his business, in mind.
1. 1988 Loses debut, doesn't fight again until a year 1/2. 0-1 He moved up to 168, then down again. 2. 1992 wins minor belt USBA 3. Loses 1st major bid in a fight so dull, commentators were cracking jokes, talking other bouts during this match. "It's unfair to expect for a world class fighter like Roy to look like Mr. America everytime out. Hopkins made sure of that." Larry Merchant. Last 10 seconds of this fight Lamply "Here's the good news this bout did not dilute the excitement for the main event. The scores won't be remembered nor the action or lack of." I took that to mean it wasn't a great fight. And it has never made Roy's high light reels KOs or UDs. 4. Fight again for IBF, again vacant, because Roy moved up within a year 5. Ducked no fighter @ MW & ruled it for the next 11 years. Are we saying this whole decade was the worst ever of MWs? 6. Robert Allen, especially Antwon echols were solid fighters. Antwon was heavy handed stopping all but 2 going into Hop fight. 7. Unlike Hagler who lost to WW Ray and former LW Duran took him hard 12 rounds, Hopkins stomped out his foe of Tito & DLH. Just like Hearns, Leonard & Duran, we give all the credit to Hagler for fighting guys who began at 147 or lower, then we poo-poo when Hop did it. But he stopped the best of his era: Tito & DLH. 8. Taylor didn't beat him as much as he waited too long to turn it on as when he did it was a clinic, offense & defense. 9. How or why would I denigrate any figher who holds WBC, WBA, IBF, & WBO close to a decade? Flip the script- Jones wins MW title in 1993 vacant over Hop. After he wins, he fights Malinga Cherino & Garcia. 2 questions 1. Who are they and 2. Why would anyone here respect any champ who takes on 3 non-title fights in a row? He beats Tate for a defense whose biggest win was Tyrone Trice? Tate was a solid boxer, but no champ, darn sure no ATG. Erase Jones name and look at what he did at MW. And he is better at MW than Hop was in 10 years of winning? There are just too many fighters Hagler, before him Monzon had against reputable guys who aren't known outside those who were old enough to recount. But all Monzon & Hagler's competition was better than Hop only to those who witnessed it real time. at least IMO. I've stated this before: Jake Lamotta said Hagler's era was as weak as we say about Hop's tenure. Asked the question how does he struggle to beat Duran a former LW, out smarted by Ray and went toe to toe with Mugabi who never won a title at MW? Personally I rate Mugabi higher and give credit to Marvin for ruining him, but I understand Lamotta's point: His era was better. He ripped Ray Leonard. he's no sugar. Robinson was Sugar. Sugar don't lose in their 2nd defense, then gets outboxed by a slugger with no chin. Had Tommy had a set of whiskers Leonard retires in 5 instead o7 years. Oh yeah! Jake lit up the MW's of 1970s-1980s Just like we are doing with Hopkins. Wonder is GGG really average who fought a below division for a decade? Or like Hop, Hagler, Monzon, they did what Roy said? They made them look bad! Hopkins fought aggressive 1st 1/2 of his career. Highlight KO against Lipsey as stated above. Great action in both Echols fights. Offense, defense, mauling, bodyslamming!!! Get knocked out of the ring, man both fights were great! His performance over Tito was just sensational. Then stops the cash-cow of boxing DLH with a bodyshot. Set the blueprint on how to beat the next star (Taylor) take him into deep waters, thats how he lost his fights with Froch & Pavlik, otherwise Bad Intentions showed some nice stuff during his brief reign, but got nod over Hop due to Bhop's slow start. At 160 he was one of the best ever. Not since Hagler & those before, have we witnessed a guy who literally could change his style in order to win. He proved it all the more at LHW. Thought on Hop at 160? Terrific reign!
