Hopkins Best Performance ?

So you are saying that this description...

...also applies to Marvin Hagler then? :huh

Well then why do you have a Hagler avatar then, and why do you continually whine on about Hopkins's comp?

Bit hypocritical, no?

 

Tarver and Pavlik.

 

IMO Hopkins was so far ahead of Tito he beat him handily without even needing to flash all of his skills. Allen II and Simon Brown were easily as good performances as that from a more athletic Bernard, and he pulled more tricks against Pavlik that he ever did vs. Trinidad.

 

hagler beat plenty of good competition at his own weight.

hearns went on to win world titles at weights above what he fought hagler at.

hopkins feasted on lighter fighters and everytime he fought a top fighter at a fair weight he lost

i whine about hopkins because gullable americans get brainwashed into thinking he's way better than what he actually is because they swallow everything that hbo and ring magazine threw at them.

hagler never ducked anyone, yet hopkins ran from calzaghe in april 2002 and rejected a $3m pay day to fight calzaghe in america and instead fought hakkar 8 months later for $750'000

i got into boxing during the hagler, leonard, duran, hearns era, i love those 4 fighters. hagler is my avatar because of that, because of his boxing ability and also because i liked him as a man and what he stood for. could you seriously ever imagine hagler feigning low blows or ever being bent over and dry humped by a white man?

 

So did Hopkins. Both men beat the cream of their divisions. Both men beat what was available at the time. Hagler reigned in a stronger era, but he didn't do anything that Hopkins didn't. Both did their best with what they had.

He also went on to lose twice to Iran Barkley. Hearns was not close to being the same fighter above middleweight that he was below middleweight.

No he didn't. He did what Monzon and Hagler did before him, he beat the best available in his division, and then he took big money/high profile fights against big name fighters moving up. Monzon did it with Griffith, Napoles and Benvenuti, Hagler did it with Hearns, Duran and Mugabi, Hopkins did it with Trinidad, De La Hoya, Wright and Pavlik.

In Hopkins's defence, he then did what neither Monzon nor Hagler even attempted - moved up to lightheavy, and won the lhw title by dominating a naturally larger man, Antonio Tarver.

Also false.

Antonio Tarver was dominated not at a fair weight, but at his weight.

Glen Johnson was dominated at a fair weight.

Felix Trinidad had already proven his potency at middleweight by becoming a world champion there, and crucially Tito did not move back down after being beaten by Hopkins, which proves he was comfortable at middleweight.

Kelly Pavlik had already fought above middleweight many times before he fought Hopkins, and he had already beaten a top fighter (Taylor) at a 166lbs catchweight. Pavlik has now given up draining to make 160, because he lost his last fight despite weighing 178lbs on fightnight. 170lbs was undoubtedly a fair weight for him, as he will now be competing at 168.


Aside from that, many many people scored one, two or all three of the Taylor and Calzaghe for Hopkins. He was not convincingly beaten in any of them, and was clearly hindered by a lack of stamina in all, seeing as he was 40+ ffs!

Yawn.

Hagler never moved up to lightheavyweight, he fought guys from his weight class and lower weight classes, then retired.

Hopkins fought guys from his weight class and lower weight classes, then moved up to lightheavy.

And Hopkins fought a higher calibre of fighter than Joe Calzaghe did, that much is indisputable.

You're being silly. Hagler never fought until he was over 40, he would have had to change his style and mentality too if he was fighting with a fraction of the stamina and endurance he once had. Hopkins became more cynical with age, he had to in order to survive.

 

TRINIDAD:smoke PAVLIK WAS A CLOSE 2ND....

 

Trinidad because that fight put him on the map and he was overlooked going into that fight. I love his performances against Trinidad, Pavlik, Tarver, Wright and Johnson equally. They didn't have a chance against Hopkins and he won in a one-sided fashion against them all. Other lesser known, not as great wins but still good wins are against Echols in both fights, Mercado 2, and Allen 2. I haven't seen the Mercado or Allen fights but will do so soon I love watching Hopkins at his best.

 

- we agree hagler fought in a stronger middleweight era

- if we did a poll on here - hearns v trinidad at middleweight, who do you think would win?

- we know hopkins was a huge middleweight, boiled down from light heavy. de la hoya had no business fighting at middleweight just like duran didn't. i don't give hagler too much credit for the duran win, though i think it was a better win than beating de la hoya at middlewight.

- i've said tarver was a good win because of the weight factor though in truth he is an over-rated american hype job.

- glen johnson is arguably the most over-rated fighter in esb history, losing to shite like woods, sheika, ottke etc etc etc

- trinidad has 1 half decent win at middleweight, tell me what he has done in this division since?

- pavlik fought hopkins at 169, tell me the other top fighters pavlik has beat at that weight?

- any neutral would score the calzaghe, taylor and jones defeats as losses. if hopkins is so good, why did he lose to them. everyone has the age excuse line up for hopkins, yet why is it not mentioned when he beats tarver, wright, or pavlik.

why was bernard ranked number 4 p4p when he fought calzaghe and why do you get no credit for beating the number 4 p4p fighter, its just excuses excuses excuses.

which elite fighters at a fair fighting weight was hopkins beating in his so called prime?

what the **** was winky wright doing jumping up to 170 to fight hopkins, just another joke of a fight. what has wright ever done at 170lbs.

you've not answered me why hopkins rejected £3m to fight calzaghe in america in april 2002 only to fight the world renound hakkar for $750'000 9 months later? why did hopkins refuse that fight?

 

Trinidad but the others are close.

However Hopkins-Tito is one of the most masterful performances you'll ever see in boxing. He took away every weapon Tito had, stole his heart in the ring and ended it in the 12th in style. A truly awesome ass-whooping if there ever was one.

 

Fine.

Hearns. But as we have just agreed, Hagler fought in a stronger era. It's not B-Hop's fault that there wasn't a Tommy Hearns around when he was.

This is a myth which people think is true because Hopkins fought at lightheavy early in his career when he was not in proper fighting condition at all.

Hopkins often comfortably weighed in under 160 voluntarily during his title reign - which he clearly wouldn't have been able to do if he was a natural lightheavy.

If you watch the first Taylor fight, Jim Lampley says in the commentary that Hopkins is 169lbs in the ring vs Taylor, and this is unusually heavy for B-Hop, and that he believes this is because Hopkins is trying to match the size of Taylor.

I agree. Neither was a particularly stellar win because of the size difference, but Duran is a better win because he was brilliant vs Barkley at that weight, Oscar was not effective vs Sturm. Yet again though, this is a question of eras. Hopkins couldn't conjure up a Duran to fight, he had to fight who was available, and he did that. He unified the titles, and defended the unified titles as undisputed champion for a number of years. You can't ask much more than that.

C'mon. He wasn't

This content is protected

. Tarver held wins over Jones, Johnson, Harding, Griffin, etc. He was proven at 175, without question.

Johnson was 33-0 when he fought Hopkins, and he got dominated. I'm not saying the version of Johnson that Hopkins beat was the best version of Johnson, it wasn't. Johnson peaked late in his career, he was a damn good lightheavy by the age of 35, but he was not the same fighter at mw and smw earlier in his career. Still, he was a big, strong, undefeated challenger, and Hopkins dominated him, and is still the only man to stop him. Not a stellar win, but definitely a good one.

Became the 1st man to knock out Ricardo Mayorga since Mayorga's pro debut. Then he ran into one of the best fighters of the era, Winky Wright, got outboxed, and retired. Tito was never quite the same as Hopkins dominated him, but the facts remain that when Hopkins faced him he was p4p#2, 40-0(34), a 3-weight world champ, and coming off dominant KO wins over Vargas and Joppy. And Tito was undoubtedly big enough for middleweight, he was naturally a big guy, his height, reach and weight were perfectly solid for a middleweight fighter. He weighed in heavier than Hopkins FFS!!

He beat Jermain Taylor in a fight with a 166 catchweight limit, and he is now campaigning at 168. Beating him in a fight with a 170 limit is not like beating Duran or Oscar at mw, Pavlik is very comfortable at that weight. He was 178 on fightnight vs Martinez - that's not a middleweight.

But they don't. Irrespective of your opinion on the subject, you cannot deny the existence of scoring controversies regarding the Taylor and Calzaghe fights. Check the web, check the media from the time, there was widespread controversy. That cannot be denied.

Many don't think he did. And many of the people who did score the fights for Taylor and Calzaghe still do not feel they were convincing or clear wins.

Tarver, Wright and Pavlik allowed Hopkins to fight at his own pace. That was their mistake. When you allow Hopkins to fight at his own pace, he can conserve enough energy to be active for the 12 rounds, and he'll outskill you.

Against Taylor, Hopkins tried to conserve energy early in the fight, then come on stronger down the stretch, and he did this, but B-Hop's mistake was that he believed that winning a couple of rounds very clearly would trump long periods of the fight where neither he nor Taylor achieved much. He gambled and lost, because the judges went for Taylor on the basis he was more active, despite the fact Taylor was landing virtually nothing.

Against Calzaghe, Hopkins did the opposite, he worked hard for the first 5 rounds, then took his foot off the gas, believing the knockdown would give him a cushion on the cards. Calzaghe forced the fight down the stretch, and B-Hop faded badly, as a man of 43 obviously would do. And again, the judges went for the higher activity levels of the younger, fresher man.

How anyone can watch those fights and not see that Hopkins is continually concerned with conserving energy is beyond me. Watch his fights in the late 90s/early 00s, then watch the Taylor and Calzaghe fights. It is patently obvious that Hopkins no longer has the stamina to produce a similar effort in every round. He fights like himself for 1 round, then focuses on making sure that neither he nor his opponent does anything in the next round.

Many do not believe Joe beat Hopkins though. It's hard to give credit for something you don't believe is deserved. Hopkins was 43 years old, how is that an excuse? It's just a fact. It is not possible for a 43 year old man, any 43 year old man, to be in prime physical condition for boxing. And that's just human physiology.

Hopkins beat everyone in his division in his prime. That's why he had a reign as undisputed champion, holding every major belt in his weight class. He thrashed Trinidad in a middleweight fight when Tito was WBA middleweight champion. Later in his career, he jumped 2 weight classes and took The Ring lhw strap off Antonio Tarver.

Hopkins was at 175, Wright was at 160, they wanted to fight each other, and Hopkins is the draw, so why would he shift more weight than Wright? Realistically, that was the only way that fight would happen.

Because he wanted $6m for that fight, and they couldn't afford his demands. Calzaghe is a more difficult fight than Hakkar, obviously. Hopkins wanted duly compensated for jumping a weight class for a fight, and he demanded serious money. Warren couldn't afford it. **** happens. Hopkins has more than made up for it in his career by the number of quality fighters he did fight all in. He fought more top quality fighters than Calzaghe did, easily.

 

pavlik
tarver
trinidad
simon brown
winky
delahoya
something like that

 

I love Dawson too but even he didn't dominate Tarver the way Hopkins did.

 

I gained respect for Hopkins when he beat Pavlic but that went out of the window after the Jones fight------>His best acting performance.

 

One shitty performance shouldn't erase what he has done throughout his career though. No one knows for sure whether he was hurt or not but it wouldn't be out of character for him to act in order to get breathers. He did that against Calzaghe so it's nothing new.

 

Pretending to be fouled is cheating, real fighters don't do that.

I don't like cheats. It also gives other fighters ideas, we already seen it in the AA Dirrell fight.