In 1956 Archie Moore lost to Floyd Patterson for the vacant HW World Title, LKOby5. Thirteen days after the fight he turned 40 years old. About 14 months before the fight with Patterson he had lost to Rocky Marciano for the HW World Title, LKOby9. He did drop Marciano in the 2nd. Between these two fights he went 11-0 (8KO) overall and 1-0 (1) in LHW World Title Fights. He beat Howard King x2 and Yolande Pompey among others. Let's see what he did post 40. Moore went 26-2-2 (16) in his last 30 fights and retired at age 46. During this stretch he went 4-0 (3) in LHW World Title fights. He faced- Eddie Cotton, Bert Whitehurst, Willi Besmanoff x2, Howard King (x4 more times, 1 draw), Yvonne Durelle x2, Giulio Rinaldi x2 (1 loss), Pete Rademacher, Willie Pastrano (draw), and Muhammad Ali LKOby4 (still going by Cassius Clay at that time). He was a month shy of 46 when he lost to Ali. Bernard Hopkins has had 12 fights past the age of 40. He is 7-4-1 in these 12 fights with no KO wins. At age 39 he beat Oscar DeLaHoya, KO9. Post 40 he faced- Howard Eastman, Jermain Taylor (2 close losses, a case can be made that Hopkins won both, 1 was a SD), Antonio Tarver, Winky Wright, Joe Calzaghe (another close loss, SD), Kelly Pavlik, Roy Jones Jr. (avenging an earlier defeat), Enrique Ornelas, Jean Pascal x2 (first fight was a draw that many felt Hopkins won), Chad Dawson (they need to fight again). So, who was the better post 40 fighter? Who would win in a post 40 LHW fight?
You people have to get off the page about Hopkins, he doesn't rate with these past greats!!! alphabet titles, paper champions, a great in THIS Era and calling youself a throw back, does not equate too one. the BETTER Era IS proven for All-time, the fighters, the longeivity and fighting UP against other Top men from that same Great Era can't be surpassed by todays men. especially by the over exagerated Bernard Hopkins.
:nono You forgot one of Archie Moore's biggest wins. Top 5 Heavyweight Contender: Alejandro Lavorante Lavorante was a young 6'4" 211 lb power puncher coming off a KO over a prime Zora Folley. Moore totally schooled him and put him in the hospital, effectively ending his career as a serious contender. Has Bernard Hopkins stopped any top 200+ lb HW contenders recently? Let alone a much younger top ranked KO puncher? Hell, Lavorante would be an impressive top win for Wlad or Vitali today. Case closed.
Whilst I agree with some of the sentiment here, the alphabet argument doesn't really have any bearing. Whilst these things are always difficult to decipher, even with one "world" title in each weight class Hopkins still would've been the MW and then LHW champ prior to Taylor/after beating Tarver....of that there can be no argument. You can also safely say that he would've regained the LMW title by beating Pascal at age 46. You're underating what Hopkins has acheived, even if I agree that this is a weak era.
yes understood, But Achievements DON'T suddenly mean he could compete with Moore or any other of the Top Men from that Era, the Gap is wide... and all this achievement stats is being replaced with equality or better, it is the biggest mistake of the last 25 years in Boxing, some Era's just Don't compare. That's pedigree, not statistics!
when presented like this, hopkins doesn't look that spectacular compared to the mongoose. anyone up for a comparison of top 10 fights to make it interesting?
If you go with Moore having been born in 1916, which is probably correct, then it's close. Hopkins had some close decisions go against him but I believe Moore was jobbed against Pastrano and potentially Rinaldi as well (a loss he avenged). The referee certainly seemed to be on his case from the film footage. I don't see Hopkins getting the KO's that Moore did against his opposition, while Moore should beat the guys Hopkins faced. I guess I would give him the edge.
i think moore would have accomplished what hopkins did vs bhop's post-40 opponents but i think bhop had the better wins past 40.
While Archie Wright is ( at least was until about 14 months ago , when it was acceptable putting him in top 10 p4p ) overrated , he must rank much higher than Hopkins and d comparison is stupid . 1) Hopkins was a Ring Magazine & "lineal" champion which is a status that can b maintained by selective protective matchmaking as well , which is what he did . 2) In addition to that , 3 of his title defenses were at a 170 lbs catchweight vs naturally lighter men and still managed 2 lose 2 1 of these men . 3) Also he achieved this status by outpointing a severely drained champion . 4) Still he needed 2 cheat vs Wright (early headbutt 2 cut Wright and put him in survival mode) 5) Hopkins actually deserves 2 have his outcome vs Roid Jones 2 a LKOby10 instead of W12 . 6) Now finally some1 got rid of him after not allowing him 2 foul . That was a summary of Hopkins' legacy @ 175 / 170 , but if some1 tries 2 summarize his legacy @ 160 , it will b quite similar and not much more impressing . I think that if some1 tries 2 defend Archie Wright's legacy against d above he will not find it 2 hard . Yet people compare them out of serious curiosity as 2 who is/was d better man . I will summarize it by Wright >> Hopkins .
