Are these 4 the best in the last 20 yrs ????

fair call totally.

but i'm reacting to the post infront of me.

 

Let's try and not put to much stock in how each of the fighters performed in their respective fights. Hopkins style isn't all that pleasing on the eye, and it hurts him somewhat that he has Trinidad across the ring, whereas Mayweather has the human punching bag Gatti, and Boxing's worst front runner, Judah, for company. A stark contrast.

Bernard Hopkins had a lot of decisions go the opposite way. I think we can all make cases for him winning the second Taylor fight, and many have claimed he was the real winner of the Calzaghe fight. In any event, Hopkins lost to greater fighters and beat greater fighters than anybody on Mayweathers resume. I don't want to sound like I'm shitting all over Floyd's "record", because he has good wins over Castillo, Corrales, and Oscar, but it isn't as impressive as Nards.

When considering I put more stock in actual resumes rather than "coulda woulda", this debate can no longer serve a purpose.

 

You seemed to be insinuating that Floyd was the fighter who took all of the risks in his career. Simply not true.

 

not many people remember or even mention floydøs wins pre-castillo because it's mainstream floyd that people remember. simply because thats when he became a mainstream boxer.

if you put more stock in "actual resumes" then you should be able to fill in the blanks pre-castillo - because they were a legitimate part of floyd's career...and just because they couldn't make enough cash to be mainstream at that time doesn't change the relevance does it?

so if you "put more stock in actual resumes" - as you say - then you'll be able to fill us in. go.

 

What others wins besides Hernandez, Corrales, and Chavez were worthy of note at Super Featherweight? Augustus maybe?

Hopkins was unfortunate that he cleaned up in a relatively weak division, but in the last 5-6 years, B-Hop has more than made up for it.

Speaking signature wins, B Hop is more impressive, and then on the case of longevity, I think he is also more impressive.

 

trinidad win elevates him to top 50 ATG...but the tarver and pavlik wins make him comparable to roy jones

 

if hopkins was unfortunate for ruling a weak division (as jones was) then is floyd 'unfortunate' for being judged for jumping weights?

you make hopkins sound like a victim. but he sold longevity well against the likes of tarver - even though he was an easy target.

 

Why would I make Bernard sound like a victim? He's the one with stoppage wins over Johnson and Oscar, and dominating wins over Trinidad and Pavlik. I was trying to make the point that fighters have often been considered great by only dominating weak divisions, but Hopkins overcame that by chasing big fights against tough opposition. A lot of the time, he was the underdog.

Floyd is the soul reason why he doesn't have a Miguel Cotto or Paul Williams on his record. He is at the peak of his abilities as a professional prizefighter, he should have remained in the game and took on these big challenges, just as Hopkins has done recently against Kelly Pavlik. Floyd didn't just jump the weights, he jumped past fighters too. That is where I have the issue.

It doesn't even matter about the circumstances as to why those fights did not come off. The fact is, Hopkins took the actions neccesary to improve his legacy with legitimate dominating wins over P4P rated opposition. 147lb is stacked, and has been for a number of years, but Floyd has not capitalized on that.

 

hopkins skipped MW because he lost to taylor and he never showed any intention of doing anything else before then.

the circumstances 'matter' because if a fighter doesnt have an incentive to test himself and doesnt act on it then it says a lot about what his motivation is to fight.

i agree that hopkins has done a lot to sell himself over the last few years - but we both know floyd can eclipse that if he chooses to take that chance.

 

1. Whitaker
2. Jones Jr
3. Mayweather Jr.
That was the easy part.
4? There are plenty of good canadates for the 4 spot. Chavez is one of them but he did the bulk of his most outstanding work pre 89. Hopkins is in there as well to be as good as he has for as long as he has says a lot. Mosley should be consered as well for a short time he was the best in the sport. De La Hoya has a great resume but he did not always win. Tyson was good up to the time he was sent to prison and despite wining tittles afterwards his best days like Chavez were pre 89. I think regaurdless of what happens tomrow night Pacquiao should be consederd as well. Hatton if he wins. Also Barrera, Moraless and J.M. Marquez should be consered as well. Hamed had a nice run before Barrera beat him.
thats my 2 cents on this topic.

 

Hopkins "skipped" Middleweight to take on a fight with Tarver.

Who did you pick in that fight?

The circumstance don't mean ****. Mayweather never wanted to fight the best 147lb fighters in the world. He kept coming out after every fight saying "I have nothing left to prove". He would have been correct had he not said the day before, "I'm better than Sugar Ray Robinson". atsch

Floyd can eclipse the accomplishments of Bernard Hopkins, but that is merely speculation at the moment. The facts say, Bernard beat better opposition. Only thing that matters for me.

 

I respect your opinion, but Hamed, Barrera, Morales, J'M, or Tyson have no business here.

 

floyd's curse IS saying that he had nothing left to prove because it was naaive for anyone to buy into that.

circumstances matter for exactly the reason i said before....

i'm not defending floyd's philosophy because that's what raises all the criticism about him.

 

Fight Fans hate it when a fighter refuses to back up his big mouth.