Is Bernard Hopkins the best technical defensive fighter in middleweight history?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by dpw417, Sep 17, 2008.


Page 1 of 3
  1. dpw417

    dpw417 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,461
    347
    Jul 13, 2007
    What do you think?
     
    dpw417, Sep 17, 2008
    dpw417, Sep 17, 2008
    #1
  2. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,827
    47,730
    Mar 21, 2007
    Yes.
     
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2008
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2008
    #2
  3. Ted Spoon

    Ted Spoon Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,262
    1,053
    Sep 10, 2005
    Yes.
     
    Ted Spoon, Sep 17, 2008
    Ted Spoon, Sep 17, 2008
    #3
  4. jyuza

    jyuza Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,394
    8
    Sep 12, 2005
    Yeah he is.
     
    jyuza, Sep 17, 2008
    jyuza, Sep 17, 2008
    #4
  5. dpw417

    dpw417 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,461
    347
    Jul 13, 2007
    Well...hmmmm...
    Everyone is in agreement...(Can't have that in here of all places. haha)

    How about Hopkins being tops in middleweight history in overall defensive ability (not exactly technical expertise) and counter punching?
     
    dpw417, Sep 17, 2008
    dpw417, Sep 17, 2008
    #5
  6. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    264
    Jul 22, 2004
    Well hes up against:

    Toney
    RJJ
    Moore
    Charles
    Burley
    Holman WIlliams
    Lloyd Marshall
    and others
     
    PowerPuncher, Sep 17, 2008
    PowerPuncher, Sep 17, 2008
    #6
  7. Ted Spoon

    Ted Spoon Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,262
    1,053
    Sep 10, 2005
    In terms of a technical package, there is not another middleweight who can stand up to Hopkins' rendition of so many styles.

    Hagler was fundamentally brilliant, if lacking a little in cunning, and it was vice versa with Monzon, who made looking sloppy a weapon. Hopkins though had the superb posture and the 'cutie' shots, the text-book punches and the jack-in-the-box movement, the possum tactics and the work rate (a handful of years ago for the last one).
     
    Ted Spoon, Sep 17, 2008
    Ted Spoon, Sep 17, 2008
    #7
  8. Sweet Pea

    Sweet Pea Obsessed with Boxing banned

    27,199
    93
    Dec 26, 2007
    Jones
    Kalambay
    Burley

    I'd rate them all above or on par. I thought Kalambay was the better pure boxer.
     
    Sweet Pea, Sep 17, 2008
    Sweet Pea, Sep 17, 2008
    #8
  9. Robbi

    Robbi Marvelous Full Member

    15,217
    169
    Jul 23, 2004
    Jones' defense may well have been as equally effective, but it wasn't as varied as Hopkins'. If you consider a great defensive fighter someone who seldom takes punches, like Ali in the 60's, then both are around evens for avoiding blows. But Hopkins' defense was technically sounder. Afterall, the thread title is "best defensive technical fighter in middleweight history" and if Jones stayed at middleweight for as long as Hopkins did, I'm not sure down the stretch of his career his defense would have held together like Hopkins'.

    The reason I mentioned Ali in the 60's was because while he never mastered the fundementals, eg; held his hands low and pulled out of range with his chin up in the air, although he was tough to hit. Superb defense when it came to making opponents miss, but technically poor at the same time.
     
    Robbi, Sep 17, 2008
    Robbi, Sep 17, 2008
    #9
  10. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,774
    310
    Dec 12, 2005
    Many attest that this man:

    This content is protected


    --had a Ph.D in defense... particularly after his hands got bad and was forced to box more.
     
    Stonehands89, Sep 17, 2008
    Stonehands89, Sep 17, 2008
    #10
  11. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,827
    47,730
    Mar 21, 2007
    Holman Williams is the first fighter who came to my mind, too.

    But it's difficult to argue the point with no film.
     
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2008
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2008
    #11
  12. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,774
    310
    Dec 12, 2005
    yes indeed.

    Toney looks extremely impressive, when sharp. A shade better than Jones or Hopkins by my estimation.
     
    Stonehands89, Sep 17, 2008
    Stonehands89, Sep 17, 2008
    #12
  13. Sweet Pea

    Sweet Pea Obsessed with Boxing banned

    27,199
    93
    Dec 26, 2007
    That's a negative.
     
    Sweet Pea, Sep 17, 2008
    Sweet Pea, Sep 17, 2008
    #13
  14. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,827
    47,730
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ah, the trouble is Toney gets hit in his best performances (Nunn for example) wheres Jones does not (...Toney for example). So I tend to disagree that he is at the extreme sharp end, though I watched him fight Nunn yesterdy, and in my opinion nothing like as many punches are hitting Toney as Dumb and Dumber seem to think.
     
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2008
    McGrain, Sep 17, 2008
    #14
  15. dpw417

    dpw417 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,461
    347
    Jul 13, 2007
    Good shout on Kalambay. I think that he was very underated and it's great to see him mentioned. His mobility was superb. But I feel that he is not on par with Hopkins, myself.

    Jones? I feel that Roy was a fantastic defensive fighter...primarily on those incredible reflexes (and smarts) but tactically I'll take Hopkins.

    Burley? wish there was more film!
     
    dpw417, Sep 17, 2008
    dpw417, Sep 17, 2008
    #15
Page 1 of 3