Harold Johnson vs Hopkins

Hm, an atg lhw who although is a borderline atg at hw against an atg mw who did some decent work at lhw. You could apply the old a great big man beats a greas small man here. But I don´t think this would work here. Johnson´s biggest weakness was his lack of imagination, he couldn´t come up with knew ideas when he had a problem for which the textbook had no answer. I think Hopkins could give him a few of those.

 

I predict this thread will be a joke (no offense to the thread starter).

 

Good points.:good

Just as a side note, I think they're both about the same size, anyway. Hopkins was listed 5'10-5'11 earlier in his career.

 

I don't know, I can't see Hopkins doing much better than Charles or Moore. Even the great Moore was down on points in their competitive final meeting, his heavyweight power being the difference.

 

Its close but I think Johnson is a little too predictable for Hopkins who out thinks him

 

Still, if Moore was any less of a puncher.....and this was the 13th and 14th rounds.

 

He only did this when he grew older, in his prime he was very, very rarely offbalance. He is one of the best balanced fighters I´ve ever seen - in his prime at least.

 

good point, both are actually. the problem is that, as has been pointed out, neither made many mistakes (count on 1 hand the sloppy performances by both fighters) which could make calling this a chessmatch a huge understatement. i agree that hopkins has more creativity but it's often used negatively (for instance that lunging right hand that turns into a headbutt). i don't see johnson as vulnerable to his old school tricks as most. hopkins doesn't carry anywhere near the power of moore, so i don't see the overhand right being a big issue. given hopkins craftiness and johnson's reliance on the textbook, i might favour hopkins...maybe