historicallly rate Hopkins

I dont' know. Hopkins is a tough one to rank. He is a natural lt heavy, that due to great discipline and work ethic was able to keep his body weight down at the middleweight level. He lost to a prime Jones, but who wouldn't lose to a prime Jones??? His biggest wins are against Delahoya (Prime at WW), Tito (Prime at WW or LM), Winky @ 170lbs (Prime at LM) and Tarver....but Glencoffe Johnson beat Tarver, and much more focused and in shape tarver. There's no denying the guys skills and accomplishments but......

 

He doesn't deserve to be put up where Hagler/Leonard are... If he had beaten RJJ, never lost to Taylor - we could have a talk.

Being the bigger man in most of his biggest fights, have really not helped at all.

 

I agree - very difficult guy to rate. He cleaned up a very weak middleweight division, and yes, beat several legends but not at their ideal weights. Probably near the bottom of the top fifty ever.

 

A very solid middleweight, with an unbelievable work ethic, but not on the level of Hagler. Not even close.

 

A very good middleweight, i wouldnt rate him top 5 all time at middleweight.

Top 75 ever

Tito was a Welter
DLH was a Welter
Tarver was a good win but not great

 

I'd rate him in the top 5 at middleweight. Prime Hopkins spent most of his time below the radar due to his lack of a good promoter but I'd put him at even money against just about anyone at middleweight. By the time he started being recognized, in the Tito win, he was past his prime yet still good enough to pick up some very impressive victories the rest of the way.

Criticism of his wins over Trinidad and Oscar as wins over smaller guys is unfounded. Trinidad proved against Joppy that he was a heavy puncher at 160 and he never fought below that weight again. Oscar was not impressive at middle, but won a title at six pounds south at 154 and was recognized as one of the top pound for pound boxers around when Hops KO'd him. Besides, Hopkins was beating them when he was at an age when most boxers are retired, or struggling to beat B class opposition. Twenty straight defenses is impressive, also.

 

I think he is a great fighter but comes up short resume-wise....similar to how I rank Aaron Pryor.At middleweight he is lower Top 10 in the all-time standings. Losing to his best opponents,(Jones and Taylor) and fighting in a weak era doesnt help. I give him credit for being the champion at both middleweight and lightheavyweight.

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

right now its hard to judge him, his style so ****ing boaring i feel sick listning to his name i hope he calls it a day and goes into retirement, he'll be doing boxing a huge favour

 

The best ever that came out of Graterford prison.

 

I agree that he's not on Hagler's level, but regarding your last sentence, can the same not be said for Hagler?

He's easilly one of the best (top 10, even 5) middleweights of all time, IMO.

And only just behind RJJ and Floyd of the past decade on an all-time scale.

 

Hagler beat some good middleweights on the road to the title, and Hamsho was a very good middleweight as well.

You can argue all you want about who is better head to head (I think it's close, both are terrific versatile fighters), but Hagler has the better MW resume.

However, if Hagler often gets a pass for losing a controversial decision at 32 to a smaller guy who hadn't fought in 3 years, then Hopkins should be afforded that same pass for controversially losing to a prime, active, no detached retina or coming off of coke addiction, real middleweight.

 

I WOULD probably agree with you on that,
i would go as far back as glen johnson, joppy, jones as his fights as his best performances.

 

he could never get the big fights i remember seeing a clip where he mentioned he'd drop down to 154 just in search of big fights. He's hurt by the fact that his best wins are against smaller opponents but at the time he was in search of recognition and stardom so to speak so who can blame him plus de la hoya and trinidad held belts at the time...his performances against those two were pretty emphatic and he's the only person to stop either of them.
I do also consider the winky wright win really underrated considering how hard it is to beat a guy of winkys style and that winky was unbeaten for 8 years (and top 5 p4p) so it was a good scalp on his record.

 

Only thing you can rate people on in separate eras is achievements in my view

Undisputed Middleweight Champion, 20 odd title defenses rings bells as a great fighter and a legacy that not many do.

Combined with stepping up two weight classes and pitching a near shutout against the then renowned LHW champ, it's a great career.

But in similar circumstance, Joe Calzaghe has to be considered an equal to Hopkins for similar achievements

Held every belt in his weight class, undisputed, 20+ defenses, never been beaten (unlike Hopkins) and won the Ring belt at LHW in his first fight there against the guy who beat the guy who beat the guy.