If You Knock Bernard Hopkins For His Biggest Wins at 160lbs being Against Welters..

If he beat Calzaghe at this point, after Calzaghe comes off of annihilating his "heir to the throne" at SMW in Kessler, then Hopkins is a top 5 ATG without a doubt, that would be absolutley phenominal.

 

some of monzon big wins came vs. welters like napoles and griffith.

 

Well, it would be one of the finest careers ever ACB, Calzaghe will blow Kessler out of the water, which will cement him as the undefeated, greatest SMW fighter of all time...

Even though Joe's 35, he'd still be ranked as the best current and the best all time at 168, so a Bernard win there makes him a top 5 ATG in my opinion, it'd be really hard to top a crazy resume like that.

Though, I think he'd struggle to win even a few rounds against Joe at this point, but prime/prime it'd be a real toss up in 12 rounder, but Hopkins would clearly win or stop Joe late in a 15...

 

Exactly. If people criticize Hopkins for getting wins against fighters moving up, they HAVE to apply that same critique to Hagler, and particularly Monzon - who not only beat guys moving up, but beat them when they were past their best.

 

I'll give him credit for being bigger than both. It was also primarily his physical strengh that awarded him the victory in last nights wrestling match. :bbb

 

All haglers smaller fighter were true p4p atgs and all of them won the middle title and two won titles at lt heavy....oscar was past his prime and crap at middle.....Tito was ok but technically limited at middle......Hearns,leonard and duran were all relatively young and live contendors at middle.....
Monzon oppposition against smaller guys were once again both true atgs,one who won the middle title and the other who was a much better welter than oscar or tito and a p4p atg.....(napoles and griffith.)
Also b-hop is/was genuinely bigger than de la hoya and trinidad as we have the day before weigh in and the fact bernard is big enough to be a lt heavy.....We cant say that about hagler nor monzon really....
Duran,hearns and leonard fought at higher weights than marvins 160 ,de la hoya and trinidad will never be successful above 160,and in fact were not that successful at 160,especially de la hoya...

 

Oh, I penalize Hagler for it as well....to a certain degree, same as Hopkins. Especially for Duran, who was no where near his prime fighting weight.

The difference is this....Hopkins started his first fight at 175. Hagler did not. No big deal, but I think Hopkins was a bigger MW than even Hagler.

Trinidad started at 140 (briefly I believe) and came up to as far as 160. DLH started at 135, went down to 130, came up to 160 for 2 fights at his highest, and to most people lost both fights.

With Haglers opponents, Duran fits the DLH pattern. He is simply a better fighter than DLH and therefore Haglers win rates higher.

Hearns started closer to Trinidad's weight. He is also a better fighter than Trinidad. On top of this, Hearns went all the way to LHW to win titles. He was a huge WW. He was bigger than Trinidad. More credit there as well.

I don't judge them differently....they both have big wins over smaller fighters. But my arguments have been in judging Hopkins vs Jones. And Jones beat men BIGGER than himself for most of his big wins.

 

Don't forget Hopkins lost to the two best middlewight he fought Jones and
Taylor. He clearly lost to Taylor get over it

 

Agree.

Hagler....Hearns(147, 154), Duran(135, 147, 154), Mugabi(154)

Monzon....Napoles(147)

Hopkins....Trinidad(147, 154, 160), Brown(147, 154), Oscar(130, 135, 140, 147, 154), Wright(154)

Part of becoming a great champion is taking on all challengers, no matter were they come from.