I gotta think it was the Tito fight because thats when most casual fans were first introduced to B-Hop. The build up to the fight was widely publicized and he was able to win via ko which is always important when casual fans are watching.
Who cares. (****ing with you) Pavlik because he is a natural 160 pound fighter not a welterweight coming up in weight.
B-Hop handed both guys their first loss. But the Tito ass-whippin' put Hopkins in a position for better fights to fortify that legacy.
I'd say Tito because of the KO and the odds against Hopkins, but I wouldn't argue with someone who said Pavlik, simply because of the seventeen year age difference and how high Palik was ranked. Seventeen years? That's unheard of.
Tito had a better career than Pavlik when they fought Hopkins. Tito made a ton of welterweight defenses and won some major fights while Pavlik won a couple signifigant fights at middleweight. Tito also rolled over a good William Joppy at middleweight to atleast prove he belonged in the division. Pavlik never fought at light heavy before the Hopkins fight. So Tito was the better opponent. The thing that gets the Pavlik win more credibility is the age factor, which is signifigant. But I think I'd give a close nod to Tito as being the better win. He was simply more of a proven fighter at all levels than Pavlik.
I don't think he fought anyone of note at that weight. I'd say Tito belonged at middleweight more than Pavlik at lightheavy. The Joppy win would trump the work Pavlik has done.