What's the score for Hopkins after fighting Hagler? Leonard? Hearns? Duran? All at their best possible version s at Middleweight?
I'm confident he'd beat Duran and SRL, could see Hearns and Hagler either way. Hopkins was a nightmare for smaller fighters. Ironically, given Hearns fought over 15-rounds and Hopkins didn't, that distance would increase Bernard's chances of getting the win.
Hopkins had issues vs speedy athletic fighters I think despite Leonard being better at the lower weightclasses. He's no ODLH at Middleweight who was flabby at the weight and only got a shot at Hopkins due to a robbery decision vs Sturm. I think Leonard stylistically with his movement/handspeed still gives Hopkins alot of issues. I'm not saying Hopkins shouldn't be favoured based on the size difference. But I wouldn't say Hopkins is a big favourite not in my view anyway. Taylor outpointed Hopkins twice he had identical attributes in height/reach to Hearns. Except Hearns had a better jab and a better right hand than Taylor. And whilst Hopkins may not of been at his absolute best vs Taylor. He still had alot left as evident of his future fights at Light Heavyweight. And I still think those fights did show some stylistic issues that Hopkins had vs Taylor. I think Hearns could pull it off against Hopkins over 12 rounds.
Fair enough mate. I'd still pick Hopkins with confidence over SRL, though he probably wouldn't look great. Agree Hearns would pose problems and likely take an early lead on the cards. Gun to my head and Hearns hangs on to take a narrow decision over 12, but losses over 15.
Yeah I just think H2H wise Leonard is considerably better than ODLH at Middleweight. I think despite Hopkins having a good record against smaller fighters moving up in weight. Leonard's movement/handspeed would cause Hopkins stylistic issues. Hopkins should be the favourite but I wouldn't be surprised if Leonard got a controversial decision on the cards. As for Hearns I think his right hand power would keep Hopkins honest as did Taylor's right hand. I don't see that Taylor is more durable than Hearns and his stamina issues were even more of an issue. So if he can find a way to outpoint Hopkins twice I think Hearns could do it aswell. Again people will argue Hopkins wasn't at his peak in those fights which is a fair comment. But I still think Hopkins had alot left in the Taylor fights and I think it was simply a stylistic issue for Hopkins.
Similarly, I think a 6ft 1ins, 168-170lbs fight night, prime Hopkins would present different problems than a faded, 5ft 9ins, 162-164 (?) fight night Hagler, who had a very even fight with SRL. I'd also have prime Hearns favourite over Hopkins from the Taylor fights. It wasn't so much he was past prime, as it was struggling at the weight, by then. I'd make Hopkins from the Glenn Johnson fight 50/50, even a narrow favourite over 15-rounds. Hearns is a bad style much up, so a Tommy win wouldn't surprise me.
At his best (around 2001'ish) before he tightened at the weight I'd take him to run the table. Hagler is the hardest, it's a close fight either could win. He'd grind Ray down with pressure to take a decision and after some early difficulties when Tommy is fresh, he'd smother him (Hopkins ain't no dummy, he knows how to win fights) and grind him down to a stoppage. Duran gets comfortably outpointed.
Bernard was just absolute poison to a smaller fighter, he gave them no outs he really knew how to use his size and couple that with his impeccable skills and knowledge of the dark arts, hes beating at least half in my opinion
well, he's bigger than all of them except Hearns and had they met during one another's time frame, they would not have been 'middleweights' together. BHop, will have Height advantages, and while 2 of the 4 might be tougher harder fighters, though would probably be pointed out from a distance fighting Hopkins... the best even possibility, would be SRL and Hearns who could well do it, but equally Hopkins might employ one of his oh too common 'spoiling' victories. I was never a big fan of Hopkins and his only visible 1st Class 'boxing' display that I ever seen was against Pavlik, who was not a great in the light that is being assumed here. Anyway, 3 of the 4 could, but probably wouldn't, due to Stature, he, BHop is just the bigger, stronger, spoiling man.
I don't really consider Hopkins as being on the same tier as any of the Fab Four. But since, in this scenario, he'd be fighting three of them outside their respective divisions of acclaim, while in his own career weight class, the playing field is leveled up a fair bit and with his size, he carries the advantage. However, I don't think any middleweight, bar Monzón, beats the best version of Hagler. Hagler '83 was the near-perfect middleweight. By then, he was resisting the application of reckless pressure and not getting stuck in the trenches. That version of Hagler forces Hopkins to manage distance under pressure rather than on his own terms. He uses his jab to advance, moving off-center and shifting the angle before Hopkins can set his traps, so that Hopkins is defending while still trying to find his feet. Hagler is half a step faster, which means he can get to Hopkins before Hopkins has time to adjust, and that is when he lands the kind of combinations that hurt. Hopkins' craft keeps it competitive. His timing and survival instincts afford him opportunities to spoil on occasion, and he is never just being run over. However, it will not be sustainable or enough to disrupt peak Marvin and, beyond spoiling, his tactics will be limited. He probably does take away some elements of Hagler's game, suppressing some of his clean combinations and deterring him from prolonged inside exchanges. Hagler will probably reset often, but that won't stop him from consistently finding the positions he wants. In short, Hopkins will have some answers. It's just that Hagler will be asking different and better questions.
