A lot of people say that Jones' victory over Hopkins means little because Hopkins wasn't in his prime yet. They say that Hopkins hit his prime many years later with the defeat of Trinidad and DLH. I wonder about that. Immediately after the Jones fight, Hopkins went undefeated for over a decade with nary a struggle in sight. It's not as though he lost a couple along the way. He was unbeaten from that point on until the Taylor fight. So the question is - if the primary evidence that Hopkin's prime didn't come until years later was his destruction of Tito, I'd like to get your thoughts on how you think the Hopkins who fought Jones would have done against: Trinidad De la Hoya Taylor How did the Hopkins of the early 90s compare to the Hopkins of 2000s physically in your estimation? Was he really in his prime against DLH/Trinidad and not against Jones?
Im not sure when Hopkins prime was or even if at his advanced age if hes still living it, he keeps himself in amazing condition. We all age differently and a man in his early forties tends to be stronger and more developed than a man in his early twenties. I think over the years Hopkins has become a much better skilled fighter due to experience as much as anything, I think the Hopkins of today is better than the Hopkins who drew with Mercado for instance. In answer to your question id say the results of the fights for the fighters you mentioned would all have been the same. De La Hoya and Trinidad both seemed naturally to small against Hopkins whos career started at LHW and I think the Taylor fights would have both been the same. Hopkins is a great HOF fighter but except for Tarver (who had already been outboxed before and beaten 3 times), most of his big wins were against naturally smaller fighters, when fighting good fast 2 handed fighters his own size he hasnt been as dominant with losses to Jones, Taylor twice and Calzaghe, but all the same a very good fighter
Alot of people thought that fight could have gone either way when Wright came up 2 divisions to challenge him
Mercado punched him through the ropes in '95. But then he improved, his best performance ever being in '97 against Glen Johnson where he was just immense, non-stop offense of pin-point punches and vicious and ruthless to boot with immaculate timing. He improved greatly between Mercado and Johnson fights. He was still good against William Joppy, with some skilful infighting (maybe his best ever infighting performance, even), just not as physically sharp as he looked against Trinidad. It was sad Hopkins was getting no recognition in the late 90s. Literally none.
Rather than rewrite a post to fit your specific question .. due to time limitations .. here's a prior post to the question of "Who fought the better version of Hopkins RJJ or Calzaghe?" which addresses BHOP ... IMHO ... http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?p=5726236#post5726236 In the aggregate, Roy definitely fought the better version. Bernard Hopkins was a complete fighter that would have been the IBF champ eighteen months earlier if he had not had Roy Jones Jr. across the ring from him (in '93). The 28 1/2 year old Hopkins was materially the same fighter that at almost 30 years of age first becomes the IBF middleweight champ (and then holds it for the next decade). Bernard was in his physical prime in the Jones fight and was the same fighter almost to his mid-30s. He brought the same ring generalship into ALL of the fights across the mid and late 90s (including the 1st Mercado fight as so many who didn't watch the fight seem to want to suggest this was some poor performance or he was a different (less accomplished) fighter at this point in time). Bernard was past his physical prime before he even got to Trinidad (when he was pushing 37 years). One shouldn't ignore a few things about the (this) ending run in Bernard's career. First, the natural tendency when we age is to add some weight sustaining power and compensating for comparatively reduced quickness, agility, and reflexes. Bernard remained at middleweight into old age for many fights (including Trinidad) when he was obviously WEAKER than in his physical prime. A physically strong Hopkins from several years earlier would have wrecked the ex-light welter & welter Trinidad with much more dispatch. Bernard fought two tough fights with a much less talented boxer/fighter in (prime) Jermain Taylor at 40. He struggled against a fighter he would have dominated in his prime. He deserves credit for taking that fight against a much younger man - in Jermain's prime - his legacy required it. Then, at 41 1/2, he moved up to LHW and caught an overweight/weight dropping 38 year old Tarver and got a credible win. There is no doubt he took that fight seriously as he was moving up a couple divisions for the first time to fight a solid (but also aging) champ and felt better finally being able to add pounds to his frame. Then, instead of putting a stamp upon his (long overdue) arrival to the LHW division by facing a young, prime LHW he took a path that is understandable - if you are middle aged - and not surprising - if you are old enough to have a career and/or an education. It is also consistent with the choices and business decisions he was making for ALL of these years post prime. Bernard chose to fight a worn, small, Winky Wright (a great 154-lb fighter but also a past peak 36 year old with nearly 60 fights on his odometer) - making Wright move up to face Bernard in his first fight above 160. Next, similarly, instead of facing a young legit prime LHW, he chose to meet the 36 year old SMW champ (conqueror of nobodies, struggled against many, who had only the domination of an overwhelmed muscle-bound Jeff Lacy on his gaudy ledger and a clear but competitive win over the rigid, stiff, one-dimensional Dane) figuring he would be an easy pushover. But, like any middle-aged athlete can attest, one problem with being past peak is you occasionally have poor performances though it remains possible (for a while) to "turn back the clock" on a given night as well. After an embarrassingly poor performance against an often amateurish looking Calzaghe - who Bernard clearly overlooked - he had little choice but to seek redemption (or retire). After that performance he surely wasn't going to finally decide to step up and face a young, prime legit LHW (when he hadn't done it before). So, he gets the current middleweight champ to move up (like Winky did) ten pounds for his first fight at the higher weight. Bernard did finally choose a young man in his prime. However, it is a slow-footed, limited, one dimensional athlete along the lines of a Kessler. There is some risk of the unknown but it is tempered with KP's middle-America following which generates some reward/remuneration as a necessary cushion if the old man again turns up old on the night. Bernard makes sure his conditioning is better (than against Joe) and is ready to move from the get go. Fortunately, he gets off well, builds momentum and confidence, and closes Pavlik out schooling him in the process. Fast forward and Bernard is talking about young prime fighters (Adamek, Dawson, etc., etc.) with talent but angling to re-meet an old worn nemesis of 40 years. A fighter who was left twitching and unconscious by two aging but solid LHWs (Johnson & Tarver) in 2004/2005 - before being chosen as an opponent by brave Joe THREE years after that. The point is that Bernard has been doing a bit of a smoke and mirrors routine because the man is now ANCIENT in boxing terms. There is no denying that these decision are necessary not merely financially sensible/understandable. If Bernard was throwing himself in the ring with young, prime active athletes he would be taking punishment. The same way he used to deal out punishment in his prime. It is absurd to believe that the version of BHOP that fought Joe at past 43 years of age is somehow comparable to a physically prime version due to some "mental evolution" to ring wizard. Time catches up to everyone. It is the great equalizer. It just comes at different times and/or can be hastened by not taking care of oneself or meeting the wrong opponent (facing top-notch comp repeatedly from one's youth will do you in as well). Fighters can't get to middle age or old age in pristine condition by facing the toughest comp repeatedly or regularly (and Bernard picked his opponents carefully once he got to middle age - Calz has been doing it since being unable to avoid getting caught by clean right hands to his grill from tired and faded Chris Eubank) - no one is that far above everyone else. Bernard is a conditioning marvel. [Joe is pretty good too.] As OLD Bernard ends his career he has been sticking to old fighters and/or slow handed/footed fighters (as well as not chasing after any prime legit LHWs) - to avoid problems. This isn't "ring generalship". This is wise matchmaking. Joe could corroborate the effectiveness of that approach as well. It is a fallacy and a myth that Bernard was some green fighter in '93 and materially different in anything other than his physical quickness, reflexive capabilities, and stamina by '08 (A-G-E). Bernard was at Graterford where he learned well how to fight and his ring maturity is evident early - though he started as a pro only late-ish - not late - he just didn't have the typical amateur career - he got his fighting in prison for nearly five years. He was no ring novice against RJJ. He just faced a superb talent. Eighteen months later he was IBF champ and remained so for the next decade. He was far, far, far past prime for Calz in 2008. The optimal combination of relative youth, maturity, athleticism, and ring experience was passed before the Trinidad fight (that balance between fighting peak and physical prime). He has remained at a high enough level that some remain confused by what they see - some of that is because the great young athletes have abandoned any interest in boxing for a few generations now. That said, in a time machine, Bernard breaks Joe down and finishes him prime for prime. Add eight pounds of muscle to prime Bernard and you can pick your version of Joe. Bernard is too tough and gets there first with the punches that matter. Same thing for James Toney and Joe. Same thing for RJJ. Same thing for another dozen guys (dozens).
Hey, i was gonna bring up the Johnson fight damn you!! lolol but anyway you're right, i've felt for a long time that that was his most impressive fight, and i would have to pinpoint his 'prime' or 'peak' to one fight, it would be that one. Ofcourse he's looked brilliant subsequently in several fights, (Echols 2, Trinidad, Tarver, Pavlik) but i feel that in none of those fights he combined his brilliance with as much physical and athletic prowess as he did in the Johnson fight. His speed, reflexes and punch-output were never more impressive. So to get to the point of the thread, no, he was not in his absolute prime in '93 against Jones, nor in '01 against Trinidad, he was at his absolute peak in the lat 90's when few people took notice.
I completely agree his hand speed, footspeed and his unorthodox style is all wrong for a counter puncher like Bhop.
Hopkins' absolute peak was the peroid leading upto the middleweight unification fight, and ended sometime before DLH. As for the other question, prime Roy Jones would beat any other fighter in our around his weight class. Doesn't matter which names you nominate.
