Has Hopkins exposed the present era of boxing?

Hopkins uses old school techniques. Lots of fighters have had success with old school techniques.

Kovalev and Golovkin use the old-school technique of shifting.

 

Shifting what?

 

It's just called shifting.

 

Shifting is nothing

 

most definitely because after the 80,s through the 90's how bad boxing is for your health and brain started to kick in so not many potentially gifted boxers went in to the sport.
much more awareness of brain damage parkinsons etc people have simply gone to other sports

 

What do you mean he wasn't that dominant? He had a nice run at middleweight, and only started sputtering once that 38-39 year old body could no longer make weight, and fight a full 12 rounds. That's the only reason he didn't do Taylor like he did every other middleweight opponent he fought in his prime. He beat guys prior to that who were more skilled than Taylor. At 175, he was good. The only fight he wasn't able to win rounds was against Kovalev, and that was when he was 49 years old. Kovalev's straight punching, and good feet, would give any 40 something year old opponent issues.

As far as exposing this era of boxers. At 175, the guys he beat, looking at them at the time they fought, Tarver, Pascal, and maybe Cloud could be top 10 guys in other eras. Guys that beat Hopkins at 175, like Kovalev, and Dawson, would be top 10 guys in other eras. Hopkins beat guys he wasn't supposed to beat being 40 something, but that did have a lot to do with some of the light heavyweights just not being that good. Murat and Shumenov just aren't that good, and wouldn't be top 10 guys in other eras. Jones Jr. was washed up. I don't consider Calzaghe, Pavlik, Wright, Ornealas etc. light heavyweights.

 

Potshot and clinch.with current rules you can be effective with that style to late 40's.

Like Hopkins,Mayweather etc say.it's like game of chess.it's not pretty or fighting.just to generate points in current style of scoring.

And if you master the potshot/clinch strategy it's almost impossible to get beat

 

"He wasn't that dominant in his era"

1 month ban

 

same thing goes for football and hockey.

 

ruiz mastered it and it took him pretty far.. farther than anyone would have thought of him.

boring style to watch.

 

How was Hopkins not dominant? He was middleweight champion for over a decade, with a record number of defences, was eventually undisputed champion and even beat 2 of the best welters of that generation. Sure during most of his reign he was underrated but with hindsight after beating Tito and unifying he was clearly the best middleweight of his time.

After losing to the faster Taylor he made a clever decision to jump up to light heavy. Everyone else thought he didn't have a hope against the bigger Tarver. But as he aged like any man he had slowed and against naturally bigger but slower men at light heavy the drop in his speed was less of a disadvantage. He had the chin and defensive skills to cope against the bigger men and while he had slowed he was now facing slower opponents who also threw less than middleweights. It was a great tactical choice that took account of his waning physical attributes.

Hopkins may have exposed the then current crop of light heavies as I don't think it's been a particularly deep division for a long time, it's probably deeper now than it has been for a very long time with Kovalev, Beterbiev and Stevenson. But to say this whole era of boxers is bad just because an older fighter came back and had success in one division is excessive.

When Foreman came back and won the heavyweight title does that mean the entire 90's era of fighters was weak? The fact Holmes beat contenders like McCall and Mercer mean that era as a whole was weak when most think the 90's era at heavy was actually a strong era.