boxers that were successful in 3 decades

FMJ. If you are talking lineal then Pac shouldnt be in the list either

 

Archie Moore

 

Yea you got to put Floyd on this one!

 

3 decades is 30 years.atsch Not sombody won a title in 1999 and 2011. That's just 12 years.

 

Chavez!

 

Duran is my vote.

 

This content is protected

 

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=306752

 

Jmm

 

Agreed, and Bernard Hopkins is the only boxer in history to be successful and relevant for 2 consecutive FULL decades: the 1990's (1990-1999) and the 2000's (2000-2009). Of course, he has remained relevant so far in the 2010's decade. If Hopkins keeps this up for 8 more years, he will have remained successful and relevant for 3 FULL decades!

 

Jack Johnson inconsistently from 1900, 1910, 1920, and still managed to knock out 2 poor *******s at age 53 in the early 1930's.

 

I appreciate your support of Hopkins, but please don't rewrite history.

Bernard Hopkins was not a significant factor in the middleweight division for half the decade of the 90s.

From 1990-1995, the middleweight division was loaded.

There were at least a half dozen fighters competing for belts. At the beginning of the decade, there was Chris Eubank, Nigel Benn, Michael Nunn, Sumbu Kalambay ... and then Mike McCallum, Steve Collins, Julian Jackson, James Toney, Gerald McClellan, Roy Jones, Reggie Johnson, Jorge Castro ... all those top guys fighting for belts.

Bernard Hopkins somehow, in a totally loaded division, managed to fight ONE name guy in the first half of the decade -- Roy Jones -- and Hopkins lost handily over 12 rounds.

Only after EVERYONE in the division ... and I mean everyone ... left and moved up ... Hopkins fought for a vacant belt in 1995 against Journeyman Segundo Mercado ... and it took Hopkins TWO fights to beat Mercado before finally getting a vacant strap. And hell it would take him six more years before he even was considered the real champ at 160.

This content is protected

This content is protected

But Hopkins in no way has been at the top for nearly 30 years. Not even close. More like half of that.

And if Hopkins would've squared off with guys like Gerald McClellan and Julian Jackson and Jones and Nunn and Toney, etc., and won their titles, people wouldn't have anything negative to say about the man.

But he always seems to win belts against lesser guys. He wins middleweight belts against Mercado and Keith Holmes and light heavyweight belts against Jean Pascal ... he always seems to slide in when the pickings are slim.