Manny Pacquiao has never been as good at any weight class as Bernard Hopkins at middleweight?

What do you think of the statement in the title? I'm not arguing anything and certainly not arguing about whose career has been greater. But would this be a justifiable statement to you or not? This is nothing to do with accomplishment lists or weight jumping, it's just who was best at any single weight class at their best. I edited the title and am amending the post because, partly with me at fault, partly because people just don't like to read what they comment on, my premise was being overlooked, making the thread pointless.

 

Pacquiao's name wins at 130 are better than anything Hopkins did at 160. Hopkins greatness largely comes from his dominance and consistency at this weight. Morales, Barrera, prime Marquez, were better wins than Hoya, Trinidad and Joppy - two of these moving up to face the bigger Bernard, though Morales and Barrera obviously weren't peak at 130 either.

This isn't even counting Pac's Welterweight run...

Pac is definitely better H2H and I don't really see it as arguable to be honest. Hopkins was no slouch though, obviously.

 

In terms of ranking in a single weight class...?

B-Hops middleweight run was better due to longevity.

Pac has excellent wins, but there are asterisks attached to many of them. Morales was past his peak both times Pac defeated him, coming off definitive loss to Raheem in the second fight. MAB was on the slide, and coming off a loss to JMM before the rematch at 130lbs. And, the JMM win was hotly disputed.

In contrast, Trinidad was at his peak, coming off a definitive win over a legit middleweight titleholder in Joppy, and heavily favored to beat X going into the fight. That makes Hop's dismantling as impressive as anything Pac did at 130....Probably more so, imo.

 

Pac at 130 was better than Bernard at 160. In spite of the incredible longevity, Bernard's scalps at 160 are mediocre at best.

 

Hard to say. He moved up and down so much his whole career is better than Bernard's to be honest. He fought a more honest career than Bernard who handpicked guys he thought he could beat. Manny fought everyone regardless of bad styles and came out with a great career.

 

It is pretty irrelevant. Pac is the greater fighter and has the better resume

 

Sure. But was he as dominant in any one weight class as a guy like Hopkins?

 

both beat the heck out of delahoya

 

I WOULD RATHER CUT OFF MY FOOT WITH A HACKSAW THAN HAVE TO EVER WATCH EVEN 1 RD OF BERNARD HOPKINS BORING ASS CAREER. LIFE IS TOO SHORT TO WASTE IT ON SLEEP INDUCING STYLES.

 

It’s not really that hard to dominate a weak division....most of the respect I have for Bernard Hopkins comes from what he accomplished after losing to Jermain Taylor .......Antonio Tarver , Kelly Pavlik ,Winky Wright , Jean Pascal .

 

I'm going to bump this and hope with an edit no one will overlook my question and talk about greatness and resume instead.

 

Yeah, and I probably overrate Hopkins. At 160, I have him beating Monzon AND Hagler, but I have him losing to a fair few guys those two would not have lost to. I haven't got a complete number of who I'd favour over him, but there's at least 7.

Pacquiao peaked, imo, between 130 and 140. There's only 4 people if pick to beat the best Pacquiao at 130, and those are Mayweather, Armstrong, Saddler and Arguello. At 140, there's only 3: Napoles, Mayweather and Armstrong.

There's probably more than 7 guys if pick to beat him at LW but I haven't got round to thinking about all of them. But since it says at 1 weight class, I'll say yeah there was. In fact, he was better at 2: 130 and 140.

 

I think it's clear tbh who was better H2H.

 

Just struck me that Pac beat DLH in more dominant fashion than Hopkins did. That's pretty crazy.

 

Yeah, but they didn't fight the same guy did they.