I want an insite into the mind of those rating Bernard Hopkins amongst the top 5 P4P

I would love to see resume examined, but more emphasis placed on both the dominace of the victory and the ability of the opponent as well. For instance, the way Calzaghe demolished Manfredo cemented the fact that JC is a top level fighter, and a level above most guys at SMW. Manfredo being in the Ring top 10 for that division at the time. Now i don't think Manfredo is a great fighter by any stretch, but the way he was beaten was still impressive. This is purely an example. The same could be said for how Cotto beat fighter like Quintana or Judah. Neither are top p4p fighters, whoever emphasis should be placed on the way the victory occured, especially in the case of Quintana.

 

Why? Cause of Charles darn Brewer? Or Richie bloody Woodhall? Or Omar ****in' Sheika?

Only reason Calzaghe was superior to Trinidad at THAT time, was because of size... But we're talking about POUND FOR POUND lists, aren't we?

Pound for Pound, at the time Trinidad fought Hopkins, he was FAR suprior to Calzaghe.

And for a WHAT IF:

Calzaghe beats Kessler Nov 3rd, then loses to Hopkins March 08'? What then?

 

I agree, but the problem can be that anybody can look better than they are vs lesser fighters, and thats where resume comes in. But basing it all on resume is ridiculous also. Furthermore and more importantly - for some reason people continue to rate elites as elites no matter what happens and how old they are, or whom they meet(guess thats where your no arms comes in). Peoples' views should be more dynamic, instead of static.

 

Solid list. I agree with yours, DanePugilist's, MSTR's, and China's overall take on this.

 

You're on the right track here, I agree. The way the fight was won needs to become a large part of rankings, not just a win itself.

This would reduce legacy points off of gift wins.

 

Head 2 head or pound 4 pound? With recent wins over Vargas and Oscar, and dominating victories over contenders like Thiam and Joppy then IMO Trinidad was AT THE TIME, the better fighter p4p before the Hop fight. Head 2 Head is a different story. I think Joe should get more credit then he does though for the WAY he beats the guys put in front of him though. Looking at it this way, p4p it was actually much closer between the two then boxing "experts" would have liked to admit at the time.

 

Wright was top 10 P4P when Hopkins beat and also hasn't been beaten in like 8 years.

What exactly did Calzaghe do except beat Lacy, who was nowhere near top 30 P4P.

I can't believe people actually compare them.
Hopkins>Wright>Taylor>Calzaghe

 

:good

Okay, I see...

And for my what if?

 

Tito was NOT ranked P$P simply BECAUSE of William Joppy. His prior fights were taken into consideration. Did you not realize that? And the Joppy Tito beat was much more accomplished, and a better skillwise then Jeff Lacy, who happens to be one of Joe's best opponents to date. Tito earned his spot atop the P4P ranking and stayed there till Hopkins TKO's him.

atsch What the hell kind of question is this? Are you asking if a WW (or MW) Tito would beat a 168 Joe C? There are different divisions for a reason.

That said, that Tito was WAAAAAY superior to Joe C in terms of accomplishments AS WELL AS resume. You cannot dispute that no matter what bull**** criteria you make up or whatever hypotheticals you ask.

 

Exactly. IMO head 2 head based on p4p match ups, Roy Jones JR is hands down the best of all time.

 

I don't really understand the point you are making here. Can you elaborate further?