Hopkins vs Monzon

Yeah, that's my view as well. I think personally that Hagler is just that bit better at most things. Hopkins is of course a very good fighter and smart tactician, however against Hagler he will frequently find himself out of his comfort zone, Haglers urelenting workrate, stamina, adaptibilty, power and ability inside all stand him in very good stead here. I also think he's that bit more badass as well and would win the battle of wills. It's close, very close approaching the championship rounds, but I reckon Marv would up the ante and outhussle Hopkins to take a close UD. 8-6-1 or thereabouts over 15.

 

Hagler comes out worse in a shallow comparison such as this. One guy, a guy who MIGHT beat any 160 ever, beats him when he's clearly well below what he later became (certainly to anyone with any balance) and his perceived heir apparent wins two fights by a whisker (both of which were and still are heavily debated) when he's WAY past his 160 best and this is his epitaph? Certainly not for me.

 

Pavlik, Winky Wright, Prime Trinidad all have good cases for being better than jermaine Taylor and those losses were disputed at 39yo

 

He didn't beat Pavlik at 160, Trinidad had one good win at 160, he fought Wright way above 160. What's your point?

 

You think wrong, Hopkins has a far far far superior defense, far superior boxer, better countery, and the natural advantages of rangyness meaning he can pick Hagler off from the outside, outjab him and counter him with more ease.

Hagler would need to break Hopkins down, because no way in hell hes outboxing him and Hopkins breaking isnt going to happen

 

Maybe Hopkins' found his niche at 175 who knows, all's I know is the best two he fought during his reign at 160, beat him. And no I never picked Trinidad to win, I was amazed that people did. They were obviously fooled by one fight.

 

You said best 160lbers, you didn't specify weight. Men naturally add weight as they age, weight is irrelevant because BHOPs isnt as good as he was.

Don't you think a 33yo BHOPs is better than a 43yo BHOPs even with the greater weight? If so he beats Pavlik/Winky more emphatically at 160, its common sense

And Trinidad beat Prime Joppy more emphatically than Taylor beat a past prime Joppy. So the 'he only had 1 win at 160' argument is weak

 

There was a helluva lot of people, and experts, "fooled" then. Trinidad had a lot of fanfare. Who did you pick out of Trinidad and Joppy?

One interesting theory i saw ages ago was that the years of fighting at 160 were taking their toll and moving up in weight at that stage of his career actually helped put some life and youth back into Hopkins. It's an interesting one, because the fight vs Tarver was most impressive and he's fought quite well at times to say the least. He's since beat 3 of the P4P elite in the sport and gave another a great contest no matter which way any hater or naysayer could lay it.

 

Can't remember, probably Joppy based on Trinidad's shaky chin at welterweight. Remember loads of experts picked Hearns over Hagler, but funnily enough, fighters who fought them both all picked Hagler. Wonder why?

This could be most viable. He's certainly been more impressive than he was vs Taylor in both fights.

 

Well I meant weight and I guess that most people on here thought I meant that too.

It's not a competition. Kirkland Laing beat Duran more emphatically than Hagler did, so what?

 

Hagler is going to win the fight on workrate and punch output, there won't be a stopage either way in my book, but Hagler just applies too much pressure, too often for Hopkins to handle with any sort of comfort at all. Hagler takes the decision based on effective pressure and by being the busier, more offensive fighter.

 

Hopkins 'far superior' LMAO. I think Hagler's the better fighter, but anyway whatever your opinion is there sure as hell ain't huge gulfs between 'em.

 

Plenty picked Hagler too, and regardless Hagler started the fave. By contrast Tito was a solid fave over Hopkins.

Agreed.

 

I'd say you actually know what you're talking about maybe 10% of the time.

 

Agreed... I also remember Minter saying that Hearns fighting great fighters at 160 was a lot different than at 147...