Higher ATG Ranking Mayweather or Hopkins

PBF and its a no brainer

 

Who's the best fighter Hopkins has beat at their natural weight?

 

Tough question when you think about it. I rate Hopkins higher, but looking at their resume, Floyd's is pretty close.

I favour underdog wins a lot more which is why I favour Hopkins for taking those big chances.

 

Who would PBF have to face to be an underdog? Maybe Zu and Hatton @LWW & Cotto, SSM, Margo, Pwill and Manny @ WW. I think he is favoured in all of these match-ups if they ever happened. He might be the underdog to Serg at MW but that is him moving up from WW. Bhop only won moving up against Tarver (when he was the underdog) but other than that it was Pavlik who was a MW and Tito who was a Naturally a WW.

 

Floyd. . . Hopkins is close, but Floyd being a 5-weight champ tops Hopkins. . .

Hopkins blotted out the MW belt like the persians blotted out the sun with their arrows and all, but really, 1/3 of those defenses were against the same 3 guys. . . 3 guys who are journeyman like.

 

There's already an exact same thread. Hopkins leading by over a hundred votes.:good

 

If it wasn't for his late, historic run at 175 (Tarver, Pavlik, Wright, Pasca), I wouldn't rate Hopkins as high. .

His two "biggest name" wins @ 160 were against guys who belonged NOWHERE NEAR the weight. . .

Arguably his best name at 170-175, Wright, also a guy who was fighting close to 20 pounds north of where he belonged. . .


He got beat by Roy when it counted. . And he got beat by Calzaghe, the best guy he fought at 175, who also happened to be around his natural weight.


His best win at 160 was the undefeated Glen Johnson, and his best win at 175 was Tarver (which was pretty epic). . .

That's my take. . Still a definite ATG, but doesn't quite belong with Mayweather.

 

You need to take into account the lack of brains here.

 

Hopkins ...Former undisputed middle weight champ ,record for title defenses at that weight as well as former lt heavy champ who alsdo did it in his 40's ..

 

Should have, would have, could have doesn't mean ****. Faking a retirement and watching all those guys battle each other, then coming out of said fake retirement to fight a couple of these guys after they've all went to war with each other does not command applause. It only creates "mights" and "maybes".

 

I rank Hopkins higher.

 

Hopkins without question. What he's done the latter part of his career while in his 40's is simply amazing.

 

Mayweather, he's undefeated and he's beaten better competition overall.

 

Mayweather. Better resume, better H2H, imo, better accomplishments, imo, and on top of that, the place where Hopkins would get the most points against PBF-Longevity-think about it this way:

BHOP's championship years: 1995-2012
Mayweather's championship years: 1998-2012

If you focus on success at the world level, Mayweather only has about three years less longevity. I know that doesn't account for the sheer awesomeness of becoming the oldest champion ever, and it's obviously not the whole story, in any fairness, but I think when you look at longevity, it's not just age, but number of fights and years at the world level, and the quality of your opponents.

And quality of opponents for Mayweather, well, his last ten opponents in a row have been former/future/reigning world champions, and nearly every one under the reigning category. 20 world title fights in five weight classes, with 18 fights against 17 different championship names-no losses. Now, if you want to say, hey, Floyd never faced any challenges tantamount to RJJ, and maybe not even Calzaghe, fine. I certainly agree about Roy. That's fair. But how about a challenge tantamount to a Taylor? I say yes, and not all that far from the same age either. And he came through with the W, and decisively.