Hopkins Overated?

He is overrated as a light heavyweight.

He is an ATG middleweight who would be a great fighter in any era.

 

there's NO Doubt he IS Overated...

first off, in the 1940's he would have been fighting as a L-HW (which IS what he really is, and always has been!), secondly the Top men then would have blown him out and also the Top Contender's and fringe contenders who fought dozens & hundreds of fights against TOP and Tough and Durable fighters wouldn't have let him "Spoil & Steal", like he's made a career out of.

he would have been a fringe contender & journeyman fighter, of this I'm sure!

 

He beats all those MWs (providing he isn't drained by the same day weigh ins) and beats everyone at LHW bar Charles and perhaps Moore, Conn and Marshall, although he's certainly a live body against those 3

Hopkins MW opposition is a little underrated because he knocked them off before they could be anything. I'm sure a prime Vanderpool beats plenty of men on your MW list

 

Bhop is a great fighter today because he is an old school fighter! it is an interesting prospect how he would actual fight back in the day when old school was the norm.

I think he is a great fighter but a tad overrated in an historical sense. some people rank him as the best at MW which is plain crazy talk! I think I would rank in at the very tail end of the top ten atg at mw if at all.

 

he destroyed Felix Trinidad, that was a funny fight to watch... Trinidad looked like a ****** in that fight

 

Trinidad was never much more than a strong welterweight. Hopkins was really good at beating up smaller men like ODLH, Trinidad, Daniels, Brown etc. In fact he seems to think those are his defining fights. Hopkins is a bit overated in my opinion. I dont know how old school he is either. Is it because he cheats and grapples and hits guys on their thighs? Hes a good outside fighter, a fair inside fighter. So many guys dont know how to fight inside and he took advantage of it, but we saw that a lot with the last of the well schooled 90's fighters. Hopkins was a great fighter but I wouldnt put him in the class of one of the best ever in the sport.

 

Laugh all you want displaying you're ignorance about boxing, Vanderpool would be too quick and tricky for several of those MWs. He's a small middleweight who outboxed Hopkins for 4 rounds before being bodyslammed. He doesn't have a great legacy of those boxers because modern boxing didn't give him the round robin contests, it doesn't mean he wouldn't hold his own

 

Hopkins 6'1, Trinidad 5'11 only 2 inch advantage, 5'10 only 3 inch advantage... and being taller doesn't mean you got more power and he destroyed them... but Oscar was soft in the mid section, Trinidad was the favourite to win

 

So why are you using height for your arguement? Trinidad was never a good middleweight, he was a great welterweight with one dimensional skills and what made him great was his strength advantage over normal welterweights. He had middleweight strength so when he faced middleweights who could expose his one dimensional style, he was beaten easily. Trinidad might have been favored over Hopkins but it was more of a popularity contest than a realistic situation. Most fighters in the know, felt Trinidad would be outclassed by Hopkins.
Kind of reminds me of the Lennox Lewis Mike Grant fight. Everyone including the commentators at HBO felt Grant would be an equal match for Lewis. It was a total joke and all the active heavyweights knew it. In the immortal words of Flavor Flav, Dont believe the hype.

 

oh and btw, he gave Dawson and Jean Pascal good fights at 46 years old lol

 

He got beaten soundly by Dawson. And Pascal is a barometer for what?