Hopkins v Trinidad: an underrated triumph??

The weight drained Toney thing is a BS excuse that Toney cooked up to justify getting spanked. That was a great win. Jones's haters try to talk down his resume and I won't get into that argument right now as that could have a whole other thread but I will mantain that hopkins could have seeked out greater challenges by moving up in weight than the opposition that he fought for most of his defenses. He could have fought Calzage a lot sooner, he could have fought Toney at a catch weight of 168 when that fight was discussed, he could have taken a career high payday and a chance at redemption against Jones instead of fighting Carl Daniels for 1/6th of the money that Jones offered him. The whole "he fought what was available" argument is BS

 

imo too !!

.

 

I´m not a hater of Jones, just dissapointed of him. He could have gone done as a Top10 or even Top5 atg if he would have fought and beat all the challenges there were for him. But he decided to go for the easy way, the money way, instead. Ando so he isn´t even Top25 and only arguable Top30.
Toney was weightdrained. That´s no excuse, just look at the fight. Its there to be seen, Toney clearly wasn´t even near his best. And i´m one of the guys who don´t think much of him. Jones could have beaten Toney at his best also - and he would have i think - but he didn´t prove it.
When should he have fought Calzaghe? Calzaghe cought the attention when he beat Lacy before that he wasn´t a worthy opponent because he wasn´t known enough. And at that time Hopkins had his way with Taylor an then stepped up to beat the man who beat him.
And a catch-weight fight at 168 with Toney? Toney fought at cw when Hopkins made himself a name. Get your facts straight.
And that the jones fight didn´t come of was as much Jones fault as Hopkins. Silly move from both.
So, yes Hopkins fought everyone available for him. Why should he have move up when there wasn´t any opponent for him who was a more worthy challenger than the guys in his weightclass or moving up? That´s a non-argument.

 

Which fights were available for Jones that he should have taken? Keep in mind that every single name that you are about to mention could have also been a potential opponent for hopkins as well had he chosen to move up instead of ruling a weak divsion. He limited his options by waiting so long to move up therefore my original point stands, hopkins could have faced greater challenges had he moved up in weight.

Also I disagre 1000000% that Roy was as much to blame for the ramatch not happening as hopkins. Roy gave him an ultimatum 60/40 and the fight is on. Hopkins priced himself out, 60/40 would have given him a career high payday 3 times anything he had ever earned. He turned that down and fought a meaningless fight in which he made only 1.2 million dollars. ROy had no reason to make any concessions in negotations. He already had a win over hopkins, he was the bigger draw by far, and had plenty of other options. Hopkins was such a **** draw that not only could he not sell tickets. He couldn't keep people in seats they had already paid for. Watch hopkins vs Joppy. The stands are completly full during Mayorga vs Spinks and at least 50% empty during hopkins vs Joppy. People paid for a seat and watched the fight they came to see and didn't stick aroun d to watch bhop despite already having paid for the seats.

 

Two days ago I may have agreed that it's an undrrated triumph, but yesterday I watched Trinidad vs. DLH for the first time and I was unimpressed with Tito's performance. He looked confused, did not punch with much authority, missed a lot, had low punch output, had poor footwork, and got nailed repeatedly by DLH. He didn't even impress me in rounds 11-12 when Oscar was ridiing his bike.

 

Larry Merchant called it one of the best performances he's ever seen inside a boxing ring. I have to agree.

 

Whatever the win does for his legacy, whatever significance you put on it, you have to acknowledge that the level of skill and ability that Hopkins showed in this fight is as high as it gets in boxing. The performance he gave that night (plus against Joppy, Johnson, etc, etc) showed that he has the kind of skill to allow him to hang with any fighter in the history of his division, and has at least a chance of beating all of them. Hopkins isn't the greatest middleweight of all-time (my man in the avatar), he must be called one of the overall best fighters to ever step in the ring at 160lbs. He fought a fighter who himself is a legit great, and looked perfect against him. He outclassed, dominated, and ran over a prime Trinidad more emphatically than either Winky Wright or Roy Jones did to an un-retired and clearly past his best Trinidad. So, whatever you think of the importance of this win, you can not deny the utter genious and purely masterclass performance Hopkins displayed on that night, it was a brilliant showing from a brilliant fighter.

 

I was 100% that Hopkins would stop Tito and posted so. Very few believed me.

 

Hopkins is overrated and FEARS James Toney.

 

It was definitely a good win, probably the best of Hop's MW reign to be honest, which says more about his lack of opposition than anything to be honest. Not a great win IMO, there have definitely been better ones, but definitely very solid.

 

Roid also had **** fights. Anyone ever seen his cocks fight?

 

Why? Hagler's MW resume is far greater than Hopkins's and his wins over smaller opposition are much better wins than Hopkins's wins over smaller opposition.

Not saying Hopkins wasn't great, just saying that comparison doesn't really work out.

 

Well, i don´t think Hagler´s mw opposition was better and if so only slightly. It´s like with the 30´s and Joe Louis who was so dominant that every one else looked mediocre even if they weren´t. But i doubt we will ever agree on this.

Hopkins wins over Tito and Oscar aren´t as big as Hagler´s over Hearns and Duran by name. But imo the Tito win of Hopkins is better than the Duran win of Hagler. Tito was a better mw than Duran - Duran was the greater fighter no doubt about that. But Hopkins did something what Hagler never did by moving up to face bigger guys and that when he was over 40. And not some random guys but top fighters and he beat them. That´s a great achievement and imo makes up for the difference between Hagler´s and Hopkins wins over smaller competition.

 

Nope. If Jones didn´t face them you can´t knock Hopkins for doing equal. Both made different decisions. Jones decided to move up and collect some belts in higher weightclasses and Hopkins decided to dominate one division. You can´t knock Hopkins for not facing opposition at the higher weights without knocking every single weight fighter for not doing so - like Pep, Hagler, Monzon for example.
He could have faced: Eubank, Benn, Collins, Calzaghe, Ottke, DM, Maske, Jirov, re-match Hopkins, re-macht Toney, fight some hw contenders like Rahman and so on.
If he would have want a real legacy he would have fought those guys no matter where and no matter when just like the fighters in the old time did. That´s why they have a great legacy and wha Jones is only a second tier great. Still one of the best fighters of his generation - personally i think Whitaker and Chavez are greater than him and Hopkins equals him.

It isn´t about beeing a bigger name, draw or money. It was all about pride and their egos. Jones and Hopkins both wanted the other to surrender to his will. That´s why it is the fault of both. And it´s just too human.