HEARNS. HOLYFIELD. M SPINKS. HOPKINS. Who was most effective at their peak?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by DINAMITA, Jan 7, 2009.


  1. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    Just exactly what it says on the tin here.

    Thomas Hearns. Evander Holyfield. Michael Spinks. Bernard Hopkins.

    Who was the most effective/impressive fighter h2h in their prime?

    Please explain your choice, the more detailed the better :good
     
  2. TommyV

    TommyV Loyal Member banned

    32,127
    41
    Nov 2, 2007
    I'd say probably Tommy Hearns. While the other's are all superb fighters, Hearns at his peak was almost impossible to outbox due to his jab, range and speed. He also had the power to take you out in an instant. The only way to really beat him was to knock him out, but it's no easy feat getting inside the reach and avoiding his quick hands and big punchers for long enough to be able to do so.

    A point on Hopkins, I can't actually pinpoint when his peak was. He seems to be getting better and better with age. Obviously he isn't at his physical peak, but arguably in terms of his intelligence, execution in the ring and technical ability, he's as good as he's ever been if not better than he's ever been.
     
  3. Trendkiller

    Trendkiller 420 Full Member

    684
    0
    Apr 20, 2008
    Hearns went from welter to cruiser.... and nearly killed Duran. Cant argue with that.
     
  4. booradley

    booradley Mean People Kick Ass! Full Member

    39,848
    16
    Aug 29, 2006
    Your poll is rather like a poll that asks, "Which is better, chocolate cake or apple pie?"

    I voted for Hearns, but I am biased as hell when it comes to "The Motor City Cobra!"
     
  5. EL-MATADOR

    EL-MATADOR Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,760
    2
    Sep 25, 2008
    Hearns of these four, but TommyV makes an excellent point in that it's hard to determine when exactly Hopkins peak was.
     
  6. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    I disagree. For me, it's clear-cut. The time he beat your boy.
     
  7. EL-MATADOR

    EL-MATADOR Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,760
    2
    Sep 25, 2008
    I agree with you, but he doesn't make it easy when he puts on a performance like he did in his last fight or in his fight with Tarver :D
    It's hard to tell someone thats not a "prime" Hopkins.
     
  8. rickx1

    rickx1 Legend Full Member

    3,183
    0
    Sep 16, 2008
    Stupid topic coming from a stupid person,
    Clown:good
     
  9. EL-MATADOR

    EL-MATADOR Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,760
    2
    Sep 25, 2008
    Why because there's no Calzaghe option? :lol:
     
  10. EL-MATADOR

    EL-MATADOR Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,760
    2
    Sep 25, 2008
    Agreed he was "prime" when he beat Tito, but where exactly would you say he was past prime? The Taylor fights? This is one thing that I find hard to determine.
     
  11. Stinky gloves

    Stinky gloves Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    17,255
    14
    May 31, 2007
    The real question is when was Hopkins peak ... I think its still ahead of him
     
  12. Sweet Pea

    Sweet Pea Obsessed with Boxing banned

    27,199
    93
    Dec 26, 2007
    Shouldn't you be having the daily train ran on you by your cousins right about now?
     
  13. sthomas

    sthomas Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,002
    6
    Jul 14, 2007
    I voted Spinks. The shadow cast over him by the Tyson nightmare really clouds peoples judgement of how good he was @ LHW. Never beaten, a good long reign including v's over: Qawi, Mustafa Muhammad, Marvin Johnson, and good old Yaqui Lopez. Although he had good success mainly because of his skills, his heavyweight forray was pushin' it a bit too far for his natural body size, would have been a great cruiserweight though.
     
  14. EL-MATADOR

    EL-MATADOR Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,760
    2
    Sep 25, 2008
    Good post :good Unfortunately when people think of Spinks they simply look at his career like it was only 91 seconds long. :verysad
     
  15. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    Every single time I have seen your lame username in the past few months I have asked, and every single time you have neglected to answer or have replied with a crude insult instead, but I am asking now and I will continue to ask every single time I see a post of yours, you stated that Joe Calzaghe is one of the greatest twenty fighters in the history of this sport pound-for-pound. To make a statement with such certainty, you must have a list. Will you produce it to back up your claim, or will you continue to run like a frightened rabbit every time I confront you??