Assuming all these fighters fought each other at 160lbs, where would each of them rank, head to head? Thomas Hearns Roberto Duran Sugar Ray Leonard Oscar De La Hoya Tito Trinidad Emile Griffith Jose Napoles This is related to Hopkins legacy, which is largely founded on him being guys who were unproven at the weight he fought them at. Personally, I think Tito and De La Hoya, who are a big part of his resume, were not exceptional fighters at 160lbs, and you could say the same for Winky and Pavlik. The argument which comes back from his fans is that Monzon and Hagler also fought smaller fighters, but I believe that those were head and shoulders above the smaller guys Hopkins fought, so I'm just wondering what you all think. Anyone disagree that De La Hoya and Trinidad are the least formidable at middleweight?
Wow i know, i rate Trinidad high in head to head terms, but all of these fighters have the stuff that is bad for him, movement. He just never learned how to cut the ring off at the highest level. But if Griffith got too involved you never know, as it is though i'd take Griffith. Also if Leonard wanted to employ the Hagler fight strategy i feel he could potentially beat Griffith. Hearns is a good one at 160, more so than the others in my opinion, he would beat Oscar De La Hoya outright here, and so would Duran, Napoles is on another level to Oscar, Oscar only has natural size, but i still think if Napoles come in light he would just let the ability make the difference. I've always said that at welterweight i think Trinidad's chances against the hitman are so much better than the rest of the board feels, Tommy fights rather than boxes so much there, and even if he boxes he is no defensive wizard, either man can win, but i do think Trinidad can hit him and then finish him. At 160 though i feel stylistically Hearns is not 100% complete but far more so than at 147 and he would outbox Trinidad in all likelihood here. Hearns, Leonard, and Griffith are the top three dogs here for me as well, not totally sure on my ranking though. Good list though GP, can't fault it.
1.Emile Griffith 2.Thomas Hearns 3.Sugar Ray Leonard 4.Roberto Duran 5.Jose Napoles 6.Tito Trinidad 7.Oscar De La Hoya No Benvenuti? Mugabi?
In terms of ability: Leonard Thomas Hearns Emile Griffith Roberto Duran Tito Trinidad DLH Napoles Leonard and Hearns were a level above Griffith for me and Leonard has the best win at the weight by far. Napoles beats Tito/Griffith/DLH at WW and maybe Duran/Hearns but at MW he was 33, past it and an ex-LW. Napoles and DLH may well beat Tito at the weight who in turn maybe has a shot at Griffith
I think Leonard would have Griffith's number down pretty much wherever they fought, though Griffith was the far more accomplished Middle.
Do you agree that the strategy employed in the Hagler fight would pretty much be very bad for Griffith? That's how i see it, not too far removed from a LMR type gameplan, he can do that.
Well not only were both Griffith and Napoles smaller, but both were 33 and past prime (Griffith was 35 in the rematch), Tito was at least in his prime 'undefeated' and considered P4P no1 by many. Hopkins was also 38 against DLH and forced to come in at a 157lb catch weight. Prime for prime I don't see much between DLH/Tito and Griffith but obviously Griffith is the more proven at the weight
Napoles fought a few times at "over the weight" welter......even when he fought Monzon he was "small". He was not a Middleweight. I could see Hurricane Carter knocking out Napoles, like Carter did to Griffith.....early and real quick.
He was inconsistant all right, but on any given night I'd give Emile Griffith a shot at any of them..at middleweight. Napoles wouldn't even be as effective against Griffith at middle. Griff could just as easily LOSE to any of them, but he wouldn't have been stopped and like I said, could concievably won a decision in a rematch. I really think Griffith would have beaten De la Hoya and Trinidad but like I said he could have lost/won against the others.
Oh, and as far as rating them.. 1. Emile Griffith 2. Ray Leonard 3. Thomas Hearns 4. Roberto Duran 5. Felix Trinidad 6. Oscar de la Hoya 7. Jose Napoles I rate, in terms of sheer ability, the guy in last place to be 1st..Napoles..but had to rate him last as a middleweight simply because he had no success at all as a middle.