I just don't get the whole Hopkins is a pure legend thing

I'm not sure anyone sees him as a 'pure legend'. He had flaws, many of them. He also had many great achievements and fought in four decades, during which he had some 'of-the-ages' wins and some deplorable antics. He's not a pure legend, he's a legend with an asterisk next to his name.

You don't understand because you've observed an opinion about Hopkins being this adored legend that not many people adhere to.

 

What I don't get is how he tries to act all hard and tough and talks about his time in prison then in a real fight he fakes low blows, quits in fights when the going gets tough, and makes up some of the most asinine excuses I have ever heard.

 

Id say most of Hopkins time in prison was spent in sick bay fiegning illness

 

Sorry but Roy Jones isn't close to the best ever.

 

I second that. SRL is.

 

Why don't you look up the word legend and then get back at us.

 

Hopkins had incredible longevity, and definitely knew when another fighter's style would suit him. He is clearly deserving of the Hall Of Fame based on his accomplishments in the ring. May be considered a legend by some. However, I don't personally rank him in the top 10 middleweights (or Light Heavyweight), so I would not consider him a legend. I think his skillset matched up well against many of today's fighters who haven't put the time in to properly learn their craft.

 

If you look at Hopkins with a more analytical eye instead of just looking at his record, you would know that he should have been given the second Taylor, fight, and the Calzaghe fight. He never ducked Toney, he was still an up and coming somewhat green guy when Toney was the champ. Toney moved up in weight, and Hopkins fought a better fighter in Jones Jr, for Toney's vacated strap. Had Toney stayed at 160, and beat Jones Jr. Hopkins would have fought him afterward more than likely.

Also to have the career that he had, while not being blessed with outstanding athletic ability, like a Jones Jr, Donaire, Mayweather, etc. is even more impressive. His technique, and style was so honed, that the totally unathletic 40+ year old Hopkins was beating top level guys in their 20s and 30s. Also, he was two different fighters. The Hopkins from the Mercado rematch, through to Trinidad was a bad man.

 

Nobody. We have all been imagining his entire career since 1988.

 

Try to look at it like this. Look at who he lost to and who Pacquiao lost to. You still think that Barrera could beat Floyd huh? Nobody cares about about your warped steril ass opinion. Boxing fans always prevail over shortminded clowns like you.

 

I call it realness. Forgive me. I despise rejects reject.

 

Looks like you're focusing on his negatives. Try looking at the glass half full, like you do with Pacquiao. Perspective is key.

 

Why not? Lesser fighters than Barrera have beat (Castillo) or taken Floyd very extremely close (Maidana I, Oscar).