Former undisputed middleweight champ Bernard Hopkins had successfully defended his title an incredible 20 consecutive times ! I think he had beat Taylor the 1st time and he had beat Winky but at a higher weight.So nuthuggers or die hard bhop fans think he actually should have been credited with 22 consecutive wins, but on paper its 20. In an era of alphabet titles, Hopkins’ previous defense before the Taylor fight (a typically methodical unanimous decision over Howard Eastman) also represented the first time a fighter had ever defended the WBC, WBA, IBF and WBO titles simultaneously. For many years, Bernard Hopkins resented what he felt was a lack of appreciation by the boxing public. After stopping both Felix Trinidad and Oscar De La Hoya for the first times in their respective careers,then moving up in weight after a few setbacks to fight Winky and Tarver and beating both those guys with little to no trouble.Then he fights Joe Calzaghe and losses a split decsion in a some what lack luster fight.After that fight, he takes on the current MW champ undefeated KO artist Kelly The Ghost Pavlik and demonates him in away nobody even thought would be possilbe! Damn i still can believe that fight :admin A lack of respect is no longer an issue. Hopkins is considered one the best pound-for-pound fighters in the world today – unprecedented for a 43-year-old. In fact, the discussion surrounding Hopkins now centers on just where he belongs among the greatest middleweights of all-time. So, just where does he belong? The middleweight division has been home to some of the greatest fighters in history, including Sugar Ray Robinson, Harry Greb, Carlos Monzon and Marvin Hagler. Other great middleweights include Mickey Walker, Charley Burley, Jake LaMotta, Stanley Ketchel, Marcel Cerdan and Tony Zale. Sugar Ray Leonard and Roy Jones Jr. were also champs at 160, though they enjoyed the majority of their success in other weight classes. While critics cite a lack of quality opposition as a knock on Hopkins, it’s not his fault that the division was less than stellar for much of his career. Also, much like Roy Jones in the light heavyweight division, Hopkins played a large role in creating the impression that his fellow middleweights were a mediocre bunch. Here are the victims of Hopkins middleweight reign: 01/27/96 - Steve Frank - KO1 03/16/96 - Joe Lipsey - KO4 – Lipsey was 25-0 at the time. 07/16/96 - Bo James - KO11 04/19/97 - John David Jackson - KO7 07/20/97 - Glencoffe Johnson - KO11 – Johnson was 32-0 at the time and defeated both Roy Jones and Antonio Tarver in 2004. 11/18/97 - Andrew Council - W12 01/31/98 - Simon Brown - KO6 – Brown was a former champ at 147 and 154. 08/28/98 - Robert Allen - NC4 02/06/99 - Robert Allen - KO7 12/12/99 - Antwun Echols - W12 05/13/00 - Syd Vanderpool - W12 12/01/00 - Antwun Echols - KO10 04/14/01 - Keith Holmes - W12 – Holmes was WBC champ at the time. 09/29/01 - Felix Trinidad - KO12 – Trinidad was 40-0 at the time. 02/02/02 - Carl Daniels - KO11 – Daniels was a former champ at 154. 03/29/03 - Morrade Hakkar - KO9 12/13/03 - William Joppy - W12 – Joppy was WBA champ at the time. 06/05/04 - Robert Allen - W12 09/18/04 - Oscar De La Hoya - KO9 02/19/05 - Howard Eastman - W12 Not exactly the level of competition that Sugar Ray Robinson or Marvin Hagler faced, but not exactly a bunch of stiffs either. Hopkins’ style also has something to do with the perception that his opposition has been weak. Similar again to Roy Jones, Hopkins’ goal in each and every fight is to inflict punishment on his opponent while absorbing as little return fire as possible. A great formula for longevity. Not so great if your goal is to be a fan favorite. A typical Hopkins fights is a one-sided clinic -- tactically brilliant but lacking in drama. So, back to the question of where Bernard Hopkins ranks among the all-time greats. Hopkins is a consummate professional with no real weaknesses in the ring. He’s a strong middleweight who – except for a few fights at the very beginning of his career – has never fought at any other weight. There’s every reason to believe that Hopkins would have been very competitive with any middleweight who has ever lived. Hopkins has never been knocked out so, while he may have stopped several of the great middleweights of the past inside the distance, he would make it to the final bell (12 or 15 rounds) against all of them – even Sugar Ray Robinson. Hopkins would be considered a favorite against Mickey Walker, Charley Burley, Jake LaMotta, Stanley Ketchel, Marcel Cerdan and Tony Zale. It’s also not hard to imagine Hopkins using his superior defensive skills to outpoint Monzon and Hagler – maybe not every time, but more often than not. Harry Greb was the dominant middleweight of his era and was Hopkins’ equal in terms of knowing every trick in the book – even resorting to “dirty” tactics if necessary. But Greb was only 5’8”. Hopkins is 6’1”. Hopkins would be able to use his physical advantages to outpoint Greb in what might very likely have been a foul-filled brawl. Which brings us to the greatest pound-for-pound fighter of all-time -- Sugar Ray Robinson. Many consider it heresy to suggest that any of today’s fighters could even compete with the legendary Sugar Ray, but that is simply not the case. No question, Robinson was a great middleweight. But he started his career at 135 and welterweight was probably his best weight. Robinson also lost 19 times (against 173 victories!) so it was possible - incredibly difficult, but possible - to outpoint Robinson. Hopkins is definitely as good or better than some of the fighters that beat Robinson, so why is it inconceivable to think that Hopkins could have done the same? Robinson was unquestionably the better pound-for-pound fighter and fought more quality opponents than any fighter in history. However, at middleweight, Bernard Hopkins would have held his own against the greatest fighter in history. I think B - Hop is in the top 3 best MW's of all time, right under Hagler and Monzon.Sometimes I want to say he is the best because he is 43 but top 3 seems fair, what do you guys think ? :huh
Yes! I liked your assessment a lot. He MUST be in the top 5 and I could easily see him top 3 of all time. Before the fight with Pavlik, everyone pointed out he was 3 and 3 for his last 6 fights. That is just on paper, and while paper counts, when you are trying to determine who fits where historically, you have to look at everything. 2 of those 3 loses were SD and the 3rd could have been, and all three have been argued to be wins by many. It is not the place of the judges who gave BHop the loses to determine his place in history. It is the people who can look closely at his whole career. Bernard Hopkins is one of the greatest fighters of my generation (80s, 90s, 00s).
I have him at #5 behind Monzon, Greb, Robinson, and Hagler. As for P4P Hopkins is above Hagler now on my list. I think Burley could be argued over Hopkins (and Hagler) at 160.
I agree with your post, and have been saying these same things "On The Grind." The way I see it, is that he is a top 5...I may or may have him in my personal top 3, but there isn't even a consensus yet of him being top 5. That will change.
I rank Hagler higher than Hopkins at middleweight due to his superior opposition level. Greb is 1st, because of his ridiculous resume, even though he looks shitty on film while training. Monzon 2nd, Hagler 3rd. Hopkins probably 4th. Robinson wasn't the most consistent guy at middleweight, but still scored his share of big wins. I'll say he goes in 5th. That's a tenative list. As said above, Burley has a claim as well.
top 3 middleweight (SRR/Hagler) People who don't have b-hop and RJJ in their top 25 atg's are nutcasses IMO.
