Bernard Hopkins is badly overrated

Wow,only three defenses in his own country? Puts many fighters to shame....
Why do you think he fought so many title fights away from home conteh?

 

Many of Hagler's and Monzon's leftovers would have rolled over Hopkins. No one was better than using smoke and mirror's to cultivate the generally positive perception Hopkins enjoys from most. Don't get me wrong, I respect Nard as a fighter, he become beyond proficient in the ring, but he has done his best work out of the ring. He's got people believing him to be a top 5 middleweight when I could name 25 fighters that could beat him from 1970 to the present day.:smoke :smoke :smoke

 

Trinidad was unbeaten as a welterweight. Knocked down often, but always got the last laugh. He was the favourite against Hopkins. Rightly so, as his debut at 160lbs was devastating. Joppy was a fine middleweight who had never previously been knocked out, until Trinidad bombed him.

Hagler never beat a dangerous natural middleweight in his prime while champion. Vito, nope. Minter was an average champion. Hamsho mediocre. Hearns' best days were at 147/154. Duran, a natural lightweight. Caveman Lee, journeyman. Sibson, European level at his very best.

Hagler's era was stronger, but not much stronger.

 

Hops isn´t overrated - he´s one the true greats of recent times.

 

So what? My point was that he wasn't difficult to knock down at 147 and Trinidad being favourite isn't particularly complimentary to a bloke that was a world titlist for 5 years. Do you think he'd have been the betting favourite against Hagler or Monzon? As if.

So Minter was an average champion, while Joppy was a fine middleweight, eh? Well, Minter was a fine middleweight and Joppy was an average champion then. Works both ways. But Minter was superior in reality. Eastman nearly beat Joppy and he was never much cop.

I said that myself. Try and read next time.

 

He could earn more cash abroad, like many fighters can, especially South Americans. Let's face it, a lot of fighters are **** scared to leave their home most of the time. They should take a leaf out of 'Shotgun's' book. :good

 

Hopkins resume may not be great, but head to head I would pick him over just about any middleweight, end even with the rest.

 

Because I quoted you, doesn't automatically mean I disagreed with you. I just followed up with my thoughts. Yeah, I understand you were only stating Trinidad was knocked down a few times at welterweight. Me stating he wasn't beaten or knocked out at welterweight was just a bit "extra". I wasn't trying to prove you wrong.

Hopkins was the underdog, not because he wasn't technically inferior, but because Trinidad's power out-weighed everything Hopkins had over him. Many observers choose power over skills.

If you said that yourself, and I followed up stating the same. Then I agreed with you. I can read perfectly well thanks.

 

He was overrated as a MW, the only good MWs he fought were Jones and Taylor and he got beaten. But he somehow redeemed himself by moving up to LHW and beat Tarver. I was also impressed at how he handled Winky Wright - a fighter whose style I thought nobody can figure out.

 

It seems that the good MW BHop lost to are good because he lost to them. If he had beaten them, you wouldn't consider them to be good middleweights. So its damned if you do, damned if you don't.

The proof is that you are saying the only good middleweight he fought were Jones and Taylor, but are not even mentioning Glen Johnson.

Glen Johnson was 32-0 at MW before he was beaten by Hopkins.

 

NOt sure how long have you been here but I have had discussions with Scar (when he was still not a mdoerator :hey ). I have been a critic of Hopkins and I always maintained that Hopkins hasn't beaten anybody good at MW. And I specifically told Scar that Taylor is good and is a legit MW (unlike Tito and DLH) and if Hopkins beats Taylor, I will have absolutely no problem admitting I was wrong about Hopkins. Ask Scar.

And no, Glen Johnson is not a good fighter. He lost to virtually all decent fighters he fought from 160 to 175, except for Jones (who wasn't exactly prime). And yes, at MW, Glen Johson is Hopkins biggest win - that alone says a lot about his level of opposition.

Anyway back in the early to mid 90s, the 160 to 168 division were full of talents. Mcclellan, Jackson, Toney, Mccallum, Nunn, Benn, Sosa, Hill, Littles, Eubank, etc.

Hopkins did not fight any of them. He only reigned supreme when top contenders in the division were Allen, Hakkar, Joppy, Allen, Daniels, Allen.

 

well then you will agree that although Taylor beat Hopkins, a prime Hopkins would've whopped his ass silly. I mean just look at the last 5 rounds of their fights. At 40 years old Hopkins can't keep fighting that agressively for 12 rounds, but at 33-34 he would have.

btw i've been on this forum since 2003-2004

 

:goodCould not have said it better myself.

 

agreed

 

I don't know about overrated, all I know is I can't stand to watch him fight.