Hopkins resume at 160lbs average?

At 160lbs it's a bit average, but he makes up for it with a long consistent reign. A bit like Holmes' perhaps.

 

Fair play but for balance imo Hopkins/Monzon/Hagler need to be in the same bracket.

Now Burley's best big men where Charles, Lloyd Marshall, Archie Moore, Bivins. He only beat 1 of these. Most were 160, the heavyest was 168, Hops weighed 170 in the ring. Prime Hops is better than the pre-prime versions of Charles/Moore too, more mature and canny than the versions. Hops also was a master strategist, looking for his opponents biggest weaknesses and exploiting them. Needless to say Burley's size disadvantage would be exploited

 

Just a few things I want to say..
Pre-Hopkins Johnson did not look the fighter he would become. Ive seen a couple of his easy Ko wins when he was coming up and its very hard to base anything on them as his opposition was dismal at the time.
In a fight not long after Bernard against an african whose name escapes me, he looks very raw and quite unskilled actually.
It was no suprise he was no match for a technican the quality of Hopkins.

As I stated before Brown looked pretty awful against Lonnie Bradely in a title shot some while before he took on Bernard.
I never saw JDJ's fight previous to Hopkins where he lost to a journeyman but it was clear in the Hopkins fight he was not the fighter he was a few years earlier. He was semi-retired at that stage and just watching the fight he did not look at his best, it was pretty evident if you ask me.

Rob Allen was a good fighter, could definitely whack and he is a good name on Hopkins resume. He was a top amateur but I think he didnt quite have the ticker for the rough and tough of the pro world.
I didnt see the point in coming back for the 3rd fight but at that time he was a better option than a lot of the other names around at the time, considering Nard had just about cleaned the division out.
Perhaps thats evidence that the division wasnt the strongest, when a fighter who was already convincingly beaten by Hopkins can challenge him again.


To say that Bernards ers was average, meaning not terrible but not the best there has been..somewhere in the middle..is fair and correct IMO. I dont think its having a go at all, but just making the distinction there have been better and have been worse.

 

I always thought he had an ordinary rein at 160 as far as WHO he fought (weak opposition). However his transition to 175 was amazing at his age and because of him not having too many tough fights and his conditioning acually improved with time

 

No worse than Monzon's, whose best wins were against supposedly smaller guys.

Like Hagler, Hop always fought his mandatories. In terms of H2H effectiveness, Hopkins also ranks high.

There is no doubt in my mind that he's in the top five. Depending on how you look at it he could be third. Personally I have it

1. Hagler
2. Monzon
3. Robinson
4. B-Hop

But you could make a claim that B-Hop is the better MW than Robinson whereas Robinson's illustrious career at WW would place him no.1 on most people's all-time lists (mine included)

Hop's post-MW career looks to place him above Monzon in the all-time lists at the moment, and with a win over Adamek he could possibly break the top 10. Imagine if he went on to beat Valuev, he would almost certainly be an all-time top 10 fighter.

But, keeping on topic, Hop was a dominant MW in a fairly poor era. However, to take anything away from him is harsh as he always fought who was placed in front of him, just like Monzon and Hagler.

 

:good

 

I think Burley is a great fighter but yes I honestly think Hopkins would do quite allot better against the same opposition, although without tape we can never really know. Although by the looks of it Bivins a top gun of the era wasn't quite in Hopkins class

Holman Williams/Cocoa Kid were ex-lightweights, I don't give them much shot at BH on that basis. The other top top win is Chase who did very well in the era, how good is he? We can't really know.

Now Burley did take on everyone from his era but Hopkins has taken on everyone of significance from 154lbers-160lbers-168lbers-175lbers

I see Burley in the same light as Robinson, 1 of the greatest ever WWs who was excellent at MW. Hopkins is 1 of the greatest ever MWs who is excellent at LHW

 

1. I seriously don't see how Monzon/Hagler's were much better, I think they both laboured to wins that should have been much easier. They also get major props for beating LWs like Duran/Napoles

2. Yes and he faced every name of significance that were champs from 154-175 in his era, few can match that claim. What if Pavlik is a dominant champ for years, he will have dominated the next dominant MW at the age of 43

3. Its very conceivable the best MW he faced could beat any MW in history. I certainly see Jones beating Hagler and Monzon

4. Toney wasn't really in the BHOPs era. Toney could conceivably beat Hops, I'd pick Hops, but TOney could conceivably beat Hagler, Monzon, Greb because Toney was that good

5. BHOPs wins easily outstrip Giardillos wins, SRR was shot to pieces, Tiger was excellent but certainly had his limitations, Carter could bang but that was about it, aside from that theres no massive wins, Graham was a WW, ex-LW.

Your right about consistancy, but its more than that, sheer dominance. Arguably he hasn't lost in 15years since the Jones Jr defeat, those Taylor/Calzaghe fights could have gone either way. For me hes currenty P4P no1, despite being 43, which says allot

 

The problem is when you dominate a division it makes your opponents look bad, so less respect is accorded for beating them.