B hop talks about how he would fight the great mw

Hearns did not try to box Hagler.

 

Bernard was crying like a baby and cheating for a rest against joe C.
Hopkins is just getting cheap publicity for himself....

 

He made some good arguments there, especially about the old-timers.

 

Looks like the "Hopkins admitted he would lose to Monzon" myth is going down...

Interesting stuff.

 

It's not myth because he said it previously.

“Sugar Ray Robinson at 147 pounds was close to perfect,” Hopkins posits. “But at middleweight, he was beatable. I would have fought Ray Robinson in close and not given him room to do his thing. He’d make me pay a physical price. But at middleweight, I think I’d wear him down and win. Me and Marvin Hagler

This content is protected

would have been a war. We’d both be in the hospital afterward with straws in our mouth. We’d destroy each other. I wouldn’t run from Marvin. My game-plan would be, rough him up, box, rough him up, box. You wouldn’t use judges for that fight. You’d go by the doctors’ reports. Whichever one of us is damaged less gets the win. Carlos Monzon? I could lose that fight. Monzon was tall, rangy, did everything right. I see myself losing that fight more than winning it. I ain’t saying I’m number one, but I’m one of the best middleweights of all time. My legacy is what it is. If you want to be great, then beat Bernard Hopkins.”

http://www.secondsout.com/columns/thomas-hauser/bernard-hopkins-history-in-the-making

As is usual, people change their mind over time though and don't always keep the same opinion.

I can't see Hopkins breaking down Monzon to the body, Monzon seemed to withstand Briscoe's body assault very well.

 

That's the first thing I thought when I read it.

 

I'm not saying he didn't say it; it came up recently in this thread:

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=207809

But it certainly undermines that - people were basically using that as a basis to pick Monzon over Hopkins (!) with little other support. He was obviously in two minds.

 

MOst fighters just say what they want the journos to hear.

Duran would change who was his toughest opponent in nearly interview depending on the nationality of the interviewer.

 

I agree I wouldn't base my pick strictly on a fighter saying that he could or could not win. I can't see Hopkins breaking down Monzon to the body but Hopkins is actually taller than Monzon, so I disagree with both of his picks.

 

Hopkins fans in here too...buddy. Good interview.
Peace.

 

Watch the fight again. He did. After he broke his right hand in the first he tried to box Hagler but wasn´t able to, Hagler kept it a war and knocked him out. True story.

 

In the 2nd round he did.He just couldn't keep MMH off of him.

 

But apparently he tried to box because he broke his right hand in the first stanza, Emmanuel Steward said this on a vid i have called 'the 12 greatest rounds of boxing', apparently Hearns didn't want to discredit Hagler and kept it quiet. He says you can see it's true because as the bout progressed Hearns was clubbing the right instead of shooting it down the pipe.

Not making an excuse for Tommy here, i think Hagler would win anyway. Just throwing that in there.

My laptops about to die of no battery, goodnight.

 

Hopkins would box Hagler. A war? I honestly can't think of Hopkins being in a war. The first Echols fight is the closest I can think of. If boxing Hagler failed, he'd try to frustrate him with the righthand, headbutt, clutch combination. I'd go with Hagler but could see Hopkins possibly getting in Hagler's head and squeeking it out.
Hopkins stating he'd break Monzon down to the body (like he did against Oscar) is laughable.