does B-Hop belong to top 20 ATG?

No.

 

Well first let me say that Bernard Hopkins IS an all-time great, and I personally rank him just barely behind Manny Pacquiao and Floyd Mayweather; he's just outside my top fifty.


But what he's not, is a ten year reigning Middleweight. Not at all. He's a ten-year strapholder. That's not the same thing, at all. He picked up lineage in 2001, and he held for a respectable four years. While he has some good defences in the years prior to that, it is worth noting that at no time did he meet the #1 contender in that period. That's significant too. The REAL #1 contender (or #2 contender when he was the #1 contender), not the WeBeCrooks or some ****. When he lost his title, it was to Jermain Taylor, but nobody minded because a) he was old, b) he was losing it to a fighter that we figured would be the next gen guy. But Taylor wasn't the next gen guy.

Similarily, Hopkins at no time has been a legitimate LHW champion. That's never happened. He's been a strap-holder. Not the same thing. I'm going on about this a bit, but let me explain. It's important to determine who the REAL champion is in a modern era, because those are the guys you are comparing him to in the previous era. To become a definitive fighter for a given generation without the title you need to beat up considerably more contenders than that champion. Hopkins hasn't done that either. Disgustingly, he won't become the champ if he beats Kovalev, because Stevenson has it. But even the Kovalev fight, we have to be careful. When Hopkins beat Pavlik, he described it has his "best ever performance." That kind of made sense, because Pavlik seemed to be the guy Jermaine Taylor had appeared to be. But he wasn't. He fell by the wayside. Probably Hopkins did Execute him to a degree but these thing still win in ascribing value. Imagine Kovalev goes on to dominate LHW for ten years after Hopkins beats him - you'll certainly rank that win higher than if he goes 1-2 at the weight after Hopkins before going up to cruiserweight for a middling career. These things matter.

Head to head, I do give him the benefit of the doubt. His longevity is astounding. But let's take a look at some of the guys he's competing with for the top 20:



#18 Terry McGovern (59-5-4; Newspaper Decisions 6-1-4)

The destructive prowess of heavyweight upon heavyweight champion has been lauded and fetishized in the past one-hundred years of boxing, but it is very probable that none of them—not Tyson, not Dempsey nor Marciano—had the sheer and destructive prowess of “Terrible” Terry McGovern.

Between turning professional in 1897 and the end of 1901, McGovern boxed sixty times and lost just twice on disqualifications. Pedlar Palmer was the poor soul caught holding the bantamweight title when McGovern bludgeoned his way to number one contendership, knocking out ten of twelve, chopping down made men like so much wheat. It is likely Palmer was not intimidated for he was a most excellent champion, victorious in six title fights and unbeaten since turning professional.

“McGovern simply battered his opponent into partial sensibility,” reported The San Francisco Call. After just 144 seconds, Palmer was “laying helpless but semi-conscious on the floor of the ring.” The brutal prototype for every swarming power-puncher to follow had been born.

He immediately relinquished his title and moved up to featherweight in search of bigger game, specifically the great featherweight champion, George Dixon. Terry wiped out nine consecutive featherweights in making his case, most impressively Harry Forbes, a bantamweight champion of the future who had only been stopped once before—also by McGovern in 1898. It had taken him fifteen rounds on that occasion, but on this occasion he shortened matters to two, punishing Forbes brutally for the crime of attacking him. Bigger or smaller, nobody extended him further than three rounds between title shots. By the time George Dixon gave him the nod, he was boxing with the apocalyptic savagery of a butcher turned trained killer.

A narrow favorite, Dixon started brightly, feinting and leading for the head, but McGovern unleashed upon him the most terrible body attack of the era, two-handed, each thudding blow bound inevitably for the champion’s kidneys. This pattern repeated itself through the early rounds, Dixon coming closest to saving himself with a left hook that sent McGovern into and nearly through the ropes in the second, and a huge right hand that staggered the challenger in the third; but that was all. Wearing him down with an incessant, autonomous offense, McGovern dropped Dixon as many as seven times in the eighth round. He was retired on his stool by his corner.

“Veteran followers of the prize ring,” commented the New York Tribune, “will look upon the result much as they did upon the downfall of [John] Sullivan or Jack Dempsey.”

McGovern was the first man to knock the legendary Dixon out. Six months later he met lightweight champion Frank Erne in a non-title match. Erne was coming off a stoppage victory over Joe Gans. Terry smashed him to pieces in three. In those twelve months, he became the first man to knock out the reigning bantamweight, featherweight and lightweight champions of the world. As intimidating in his short prime as Mike Tyson or Sonny Liston, he also brutalized the best fighters in the world in three different weights. Relative to his peers, perhaps only Henry Armstrong and Harry Greb can lay claim to twelve month periods as impressive. More likely, no one can.


#16 Ray Leonard (36-3-1)

For some, Ray Leonard has only one peer in all of boxing, Sugar Ray Robinson, perhaps the greatest fighter ever to have lived. I believe there are other fighters that share this class, but I have some sympathy with those that think otherwise—both Rays had literally everything.

Leonard held a brutal shot, as he proved in fights with Tommy Hearns, against whom he also proved his power and heart. Against Hagler, whatever your own opinion of that decision, he demonstrated a maxed out boxing IQ and once in a generation type generalship. He was fast, fit, and technically brilliant but riffed with the best of them; he was close to perfect.

But, compared to most of the men on this list, he hardly boxed a career. Most of his fellow greats hadn’t even fought for a title when Leonard hung them up. Leonard is fascinating in that he crammed enough great wins into those few fights to find himself firmly ensconced in the top twenty regardless. Between 1979 and 1987 he defeated Wilfred Benitez, Roberto Duran and Thomas Hearns, then after a short retirement came back past-prime to shade Marvin Hagler. Few of the men ranked above him have four better wins, never mind the men ranked below. He also defeated Randy Shields, Floyd Mayweather Sr., Dave Green, Ayub Kalule and Donny Lalonde. His one prime loss is to the all-time great Roberto Duran but it was a fight the naturally smaller man should not really have been winning. In tandem with a relatively short career arch, it keeps him from the top fifteen.


SO a guy who KTFO three legitimate world champions in a few months at three different old-school weights (SO after knocking out Trinidad he would need to KO the 175lb champ and then the HW champ to create some form of equality) and a ****ing guy who beat Duran, Hagler, Hearns and Benitez (so Hopkins would need to beat 4 ATG fighters). He's just not quite up there.

 

:good