I watched Hopkins vs Mercado I&II earlier and it got me thinking about resumes. Back in the day, a win over "a Mercado" would have been seen as good; the highest ranking contender, solid fighter - excellent. Nowadays, people only rate the wins against elite competition that will stand up to scrutiny after a period of time. Has the average fan descended so far? It appears every win is now examined far more than beforehand and merely "good" wins are quickly dismissed if the opponent is not at least a HOFer. Thoughts?
I think it depends on the quality of the fighter and his overall resume. The Mercado win isn't viewed as good now because he has better wins and people will pay more attention to those. I also believe that fans, especially casual fans will only really notice the wins against named opponents. Roy Jones' wins over Virgil Hill and Montel Griffin were good wins but no one really cares.
True, but they should be - that was my point. The win over Mercado might not be as significant as others, but he was still a solid fighter than is now overlooked. A resume should include more than just "names" that the casual fan will recognise
Well Irate the ercardo wins as they were-good. But Hopkins is an ATG MW more so for his great abilities and H2H ability than his resume which isn't very strong. The fact that Mercardo didn't do much of anything after didn't help. IMO Hopkins was also robbed in Ecuador,I thought he won clearly winning the last 4 rounds.
