Bernard Hopkins is badly overrated

hopkins should still be champ now he never should have lost the belts he may not be exciting knock out fighter but he is one of the best at what he does
he tried to fight jones again and agian but nothing and i dont care what you say about the fighters he fought look at the recent resume with wins he is an all time great and your a ****in idiot

 

Pavlik will put his career in prospective.:bbb

 

This post proves you don't need any actual boxing knowledge to post on this site

 

I agree, hes abit overrated...I wanted to love Bhop..when he came up his personality was fresh...his act got tired though and his in ring performance didnt excite either...Again lack of serious competition..

 

I'm going to pretend you didn't write this.

 

Tarver :!:

 

name me a guy thats the same size as him. Tarver ??please
Joppy never though much of and Tito proved that
DLH???hahahaha

I'll give you Taylor and Winky(whos alot smaller) What was the result again??

I really wanted to love BHOP...just never liked his fighting style...and he wasnt a dynamic fighter. What it is with Hop is that he is a good story..a guy who made it w/o being flashy..a lunchpail fighter...but as far as RJJ level?? nah..And yes I put toney above him...but Calzaghe is definitely below

 

you want me to stick a johnson in hopkins' accomplishments? no thanks....

 

I didnt say hes not good..People just overrate him...puttinghim in SRL, Hagler class

 

That's where he belongs. You say he never beat anyone his size, but two of Hagler's best wins were against guys who at least two divisions below him. Hopkins was the first and only super unifiied champ(WBO,WBC,WBA,IBF champ at the same time), he made 21 title defenses, KO'd or TKO'd DLH, Trinidad and Glen Johnson. He went up two divsions and took out the recognized LHW champ, and he totally dominated Wright, stopping his 8 year non losing streak in the process. The only blimishes on his record since 1994 were two disputed loses to Taylor.

 

Bro like I say Hes a notch above Calzaghe. I know his credentials ...I am just not that impressed. DLH and Tito?? that shouldnt even count..You know what winky did to Tito..albeit 3 years later...I take Hagler above him mostly because of Hagler style..hes dynamic..I cant explain it

 

Its true Bhop is boring, dirty, mediocre fighter. He lost to Jones at the top of his peak and lost to Taylor at the end. Big deal. Anyone can go into a fight leading with their head hoping to cut their opponent. Sometimes it happens sometimes it doesnt. Winky is a good recent example. After he cut him he continued to fight "scared" only really punching Winky while in a clinch. Bhop is the most overated boxer of our time. It's possible if he would've beaten the people he lost to that he might've achieved true greatness instead you have fans of his that a trapped in their own wishful and diluted reality. Pavlik would destroy Bhop. But that doesnt matter to him because he is and has shown us what a true ***** he really is. Can anyone imagine the outcome of Kessler-Hopkins or Diaconu-Hopkins or maybe even Jones-Hopkins2?? I know and so does Bhop which is why you'll see him fight "safe" fighters for big money=*****

 

I wouldnt go and say he is mediocre...:huh But I think he beats Kelly but I think ..even though I like his accomplishment more...I think J Cal beats him

 

DLH and Tito shouldn't count? Why not? Hopkins was acutally the underdog against Tito. Winky certainly beat Tito convincingly, but that was after Hoplins brutalized him. When Winky tried to step up to the plate, you saw what Hopkins did to him(Hopkins was the underdog in that fight as well as late as 3 weeks before the fight). No doubt Hagler was more explosive than B-Hop, that doesn't mean he's better head to head.