Can a case be made for Hopkins as the best MW ever?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Bokaj, Jul 17, 2011.


Page 7 of 10
  1. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,145
    13,102
    Jan 4, 2008
    Yeah. Now we have Douglas ahead of Louis as well.

    Sure, technically speaking it is an argument. Just not a strong one. If it was, McCallum, Toney, Kalambay, Nunn should also be in the top 10 as well. Perhaps Monroe and Leonard also.
     
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    #91
  2. jaffay

    jaffay New Orleans Hornets Full Member

    3,980
    18
    Jun 24, 2007
    In short, if you fight with the best you should expect to lose some. How would Hopkins look fighting as active as Burley, Williams etc.? With the same level of rivals af they did off course.

    And yes, Burley lost to Charles at MW - future HW champ of the world and top 5 p4p fighter ever.
     
    jaffay, Jul 24, 2011
    jaffay, Jul 24, 2011
    #92
  3. the cobra

    the cobra Awesomeizationism! Full Member

    12,028
    106
    Jun 30, 2008
    There's a difference between having a single win better than someone else, and having, say, 10 or 15.


    It does bring up the issue of when is a mediocre resume enough that, combined with dominance, it can overcome a greater resume. Burley, Williams, and LaMotta all beat better fighters than Hagler and Monzon, as well.
     
    the cobra, Jul 24, 2011
    the cobra, Jul 24, 2011
    #93
  4. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,032
    48,146
    Mar 21, 2007
    That isn't really any kind of argument at all though...Burley is clearly great, Hopkins is clearly great. Louis is clearly great, Douglas is a journeyman with one amazing win.

    What you said was "there is absolutely no argument" for having these guys ahead of Hopkins. I think there is a very strong argument ahead of Holman Williams. Her it is:

    Charley Burley
    Bert Lytell
    Cocoa Kid
    Chase
    Marshall
    Tunero

    It's not really a "weak argument" to totally prioritise resume - lots of guys do it. I don't think it's unreasonable to have Burley and Williams above Hopkins.
     
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    #94
  5. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,145
    13,102
    Jan 4, 2008
    Who knows? Who knows how he would have fared in the era just preceeding his (Toney, Kalambay, McCallum etc)? But I still don't have those guys above him (and neither do you) based on them mixing wins and losses with each other. Even though I have more than enough film in this case to say that they really were fantastically skilled. Much more skilled than anyone Hopkins beat at MW. More skilled at MW than anyone Hagler beat for that matter and very possibly more skilled MWs than any of Monzon's opponent.

    That McCallum (in my reckoning) went 4-1-1 with Graham, Watson, Kalambay and Toney doesn't get him in the top 10 at MW for me, no matter how much I love the guy.
     
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    #95
  6. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,032
    48,146
    Mar 21, 2007
    Here is where I ranked them when Rumsfeld ran that top ten MW list:
    05 - Holman Williams
    06 - Bernard Hopkins
    07 - Charley Burley


    Here's my2sense's list:

    5. Tiger
    6. Burley
    7. Hopkins
    8. Fitzsimmons


    Ezzard:

    7 Burley
    8 Fitzsimmons
    9 Hopkins


    McVey:

    7 Burley
    8Tiger
    9 Hopkins



    That's just from the first page...you do see it a fair bit.
     
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    #96
  7. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,145
    13,102
    Jan 4, 2008
    If he hadn't lost to several of those guys and others I would agree with you. Resume for me is just not wins, but also losses.

    This whole "LaMotta is great because he beat Williams, and Williams is great because he beat Burley, who is great because he beat Williams" is not convincing enough IMO.

    And even if it was, it still begs the questiion why they aren't ahed of Hagler in that case, who just like Hopkins dominated a pretty non-descript era. The only logic I see on that ranking is that wins increase and losses decrease in significance the worse the quality the film of the fighters is.
     
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    #97
  8. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,145
    13,102
    Jan 4, 2008
    I know.
     
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    #98
  9. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,145
    13,102
    Jan 4, 2008
    Would you have them above them, though?
     
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    #99
  10. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,032
    48,146
    Mar 21, 2007
    Of course it is losses, you have to include all the facets. But for someone prioritising who a given fighter actually beat, clearly, Burley/Williams higher than Hopkins is the way to go.

    No, it's nonsense, LaMotta beat a pretty diminished Williams. But nobody would make that argument anyway.


    Hagler is greater than Hopkins, for almost everyone. Closing the gap on Hagler with their superior wins naturally is going to be more difficult because of this fact.

    Arguing that you can't rank Burley above Hopkins because you'd then have to rank him above Hagler won't fly, I don't think. Nor will the "it's about eras and bias" chestnut...I think you know better than that.
     
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    #100
  11. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,145
    13,102
    Jan 4, 2008
    But if the also lost to those same fighters, it losses a bit of its allure.

    We are still a lot down to Williams is great because he beat Burley and Burley is great because he beat Williams. I can by that to a certain extent if we have a good amount of film telling us that those guys were sickeningly skilled, but we don't.


    I know. Don't know why, though. In 10 years time or so, I think they're going to be quite neck to neck. As they should.

    Sorry to dissapoint you.:D

    Burley being among the 1-2, 2-3 or perhaps even 3-4 best fighters (whom we all have very little footage if) of that era is not better than Hopkins being the far and away best of his, in my eyes. And I mean best by a ridicolous margin (starting immediatly post Roy, of course, just to make it nice and comfy for my argument:smoke)
     
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    #101
  12. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    269
    Jul 22, 2004
    wrong thread
     
    PowerPuncher, Jul 24, 2011
    PowerPuncher, Jul 24, 2011
    #102
  13. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,032
    48,146
    Mar 21, 2007
    We have the people who saw them who say they were sickeningly skilled, footage of Burley looking sickeningly skilled, a wider resume that demonstrates his greatness. Burley is a great scalp for Williams because of his overall reputation, not because he beat Williams.




    And this is the sticking point. You rank Hopkins alongside Hagler. It's going to be much tougher to overhaul Hagler's "lead" in dominance as i've already said.


    You add it up any way you want. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. I see Burley, Williams and Hopkins as so close as to be interchangeable. But claiming vast and inarguable superiority for Hopkins is outrageous.
     
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    #103
  14. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,145
    13,102
    Jan 4, 2008
    Personally, I don't think that footage backs up the lofty opinion of him.

    Hopkin's dominance stretched over a longer period and it was probably more comprehensive as well (he rarely lost a round over 10 years), so I don't see why the argument should be that diffficult to make.

    Well...

    http://aestheticetiquette.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/sid-vicious.jpg
     
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    Bokaj, Jul 24, 2011
    #104
  15. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,032
    48,146
    Mar 21, 2007
    The footage shows him controlling, out-boxing, out-fighting, and at times muscling a ranked LHW contender who knocked out Harold Johnson with one punch. It's one of the best filmed performances in existence.


    The fighters he beat were less good, in my opinion, and the generally held opinion. It's always interesting to see the counter-argument.
     
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    McGrain, Jul 24, 2011
    #105
Page 7 of 10