Has Hopkins ever fought a decent fighter at their own weight class?

Hopkins has beaten 'decent' fighters at the appropriate weight. Hopkins has even beaten good boxers at their correct weight. But, all of his signature wins are against smaller guys moving-up, with the exception of Tarver (who had to lose 50lbs of muscle to make weight).

 

Calzaghe fangirls making it painfully obvious that they know Hopkins beat Calzaghe, and that Calzaghe is DUCKING Hopkins in a rematch. This is how lame ****s operate. Apparently. I wouldn't even bring Hopkins up if I were them, it's a constant reminder of Calzaghe's worst moments.

 

Yeah I can think of one, and he lost that one.

 

Fairly objective description.

 

Pavlik was moving up, but he was not a smaller guy.

and Hopkins weighed in at 157 against Tito

 

Glen is really a journey man, not an impressive fighter

 

It's not about cheapening Glen Johnson's legacy, it's about accuracy. The reason Johnson's earned everyone's respect is that he started his career as a overhyped prospect who, after he was exposed on the world level on Hopkins, didn't quit...but instead started to take the tougher fights, losing alot of them on the way up but steadily improving. It wasn't until the latter part of his career that he was world class, and that's why Johnson-Hopkins wasn't looked at as a big deal at the time it happened.

Glen Johnson is a perfect (and rare) example of both schools of how to promote a fighter- in the beginning, he was pure new school, inflating his record vs terrible fighters to eventually get a title shot because he had a pretty record. This attracted the attention of Hopkins (as well as European champions following it) because Glen had a good record by wins and losses- thus making it an easier sell.

Post Hopkins, however, Glen became pure old school- fighting people in their own back yards, taking on any good opponent he could find, and improving his own game win or lose. This means that the Glen Johnson that fought at LHW would've slaughtered the Glen Johnson that Hopkins fought because he finally had the proper seasoning and experience. He went from having an inflated 32-0 record to having an uglier record, but one littered with champions and top contenders that he learned from. I wasn't exaggerating- Glen didn't fight one top 40 contender to get to 32-0. He fought plenty after Hopkins and that's when he really improved.

I have a massive amount of respect for Johnson for that. What that doesn't mean, however, is that Glen was any kind of special before he went "old school" in his matchmaking. Alot of fighters would've quit after getting blown out by Hopkins and then getting beat by the next few decent contenders they faced. Glen didn't. He should get a ton of credit for that, but that also wouldn't have happened if Glen was anywhere near the fighter at 32-0 that the record suggested.

 

And 154 against Oscar.

 

First thing and biggest thing wrong with this post is that Johnson didnt LOSE alot of fights along the way...he had alot of clear wins taken away from him along the way. BIG DIFFERENCE!

And because of this, people generally look at the number of losses and think, oh he wasnt a very good fighter when Hopkins beat him...which is ANYTHING but the truth. Johnson was a highly touted MW at the time because, 1- he was very talented, 2- he was insanely strong for that weight class and 3- because up to that point, he had seemed unbeatable.

Hopkins beat him...badly. Won every round and is STILL the only man to stop Johnson. Johnson contends that he is BY FAR (again, his words not mine) the best fighter he has ever faced. And tho he did improve over time, he was not a dramitcally different fighter.

Again, dont be fooled by the number of losses you see on boxrec. Most werent losses at all.

:thumbsup

 

I know Glen had some dodgy decisions go against him; the major point I was trying to make was that despite the record, Glen never got the proper seasoning going into the Hopkins fight and it was akin to an untested fighter getting led to slaughter. Thus, the "ugly record" Glen Johnson is actually a far more proven and better fighter.

Also, most of his fights subsequent to losing to Hopkins were, to my knowledge, clean losses - even if they were close fights. While Glen didn't dramatically change anything, he adjusted enough as time went on to win the kinds of fights he was losing.

None of this means that any Glen Johnson would beat Hopkins- I think Bernard would take him 10 times out of 10 and it doesn't surprise me that Glen thinks so highly of Hops. I just think his management team did him no favors by allowing an absolutely green, untested fighter to go against Hopkins.

I was probably too hard on Johnson, who was still a top 25 MW despite not having any quality wins at that point. Too much unnecessary backlash on my end because I personally don't see how what Johnson accomplishes 5- 10 years afterwards has any relevance on the version Hopkins dismantled. :good

 

Glen Johnson

 

Everyone around that weight would have lost that one to Roy Jones.

 

Fair enough...

But I challenge ya to go take a look at some of Johnson's "losses"...in all honesty, most are very, VERY debatable to say the least. I mean, yes, he does have a few that are legit (Ottke, Hopkins, Tarver, etc.), but this man has been JOBBED more times than any other fighter I can think of. Because of this, even tho I felt he lost to Dawson, with it being so close, I just felt for the guy.

Just go watch some of the fights...your gonna be suprised and disgusted all in the same way.

 

I felt terrible for him against Dawson as well, even though I'd scored it a very close 7-5 to Chad...particularly in his post fight interview. He deserves another chance to settle the score before he can't overcome his age. I'd love to see him fight Calzaghe as well, even though I favor Joe over him. It'd be nice to tie up loose ends, and Glen would get another payday in the process.

As far as total career robberies go, I haven't tracked down Kiwanuka, Branco, or Sheika...those are ones I hear alot about, but am unsure how many people have seen them to know for sure or just bought into Glen's PR about it. One of these days I'll see for myself. I did have him winning the trilogy against Woods and Gonzalez was the other main one. I thought Vanderpool, Ottke, and Sosa were all legit L's from around that time period. Sosa's the kind of fighter Glen should've fought before Hopkins to help season him for it, and losing that fight was indicative to me that Glen wasn't ready for a title fight at that point.

Here's an excerpt from an interview that I think is telling, and backs my point up about the green factor and Johnson improving dramatically as he upped his competition level, even if he got screwed some along the way. It's no coincidence that Hops and Sosa were the first genuinely decent opponents he'd faced, even though Sosa was past his best at the time.

BOXING HERALD – As tough as you are, can you tell me who was the toughest boxer you ever fought in the ring?


GLEN JOHNSON – I would say Bernard Hopkins is the toughest guy I’ve fought. At the time that I fought him I was lacking experience so that’s the toughest that set in my mind. Since that I’ve never been through anything like that because I had gotten experience because of that fight and made me a lot better since that fight. That would be my toughest experience and the second I would say would be Merqui Sosa