Is Golovkin's reign better than Hopkins?

Do you know what happens to test level when you get old? Not everyone lets themselves get fat after they retire.

 

I'm aware of the effects of age related muscle loss otherwise known as sarcopenia but a fit an active person like Hopkins won't see the effects of that until much older, were not talking about a guy who sits on his ass all day, watching day time television lol.

 

No

 

Hell no. If he had won his last two fights convincingly you might make a case.

 

Most of the boxing world thinks he did.

 

Roy added more muscle and Bernard had a lot more discipline.

They were both completely different.

We're not just talking about in-ring weight.

 

Great post.

You've made some great points.

Personally, I've always rated his win over Tito.

 

Brighton bomber,

Of course nobody thinks that Hearns was naturally bigger than Hagler. But the circumstances are obviously different.

Yes, I take on board what you've said about his debut.

We went at this hard in my thread titled:

"The curious case of Bernard Hopkins"

I never referred to him as a CW.

You can't use examples of Roy and Oscar, because they didn't live the life and train like Bernard did.

Again, all of this has been addressed already in the other thread.


I'm not saying that what he did was unfair and not legit.

I'm simply saying that he went to extraordinary lengths to remain at MW, where he held natural size advantages over many of his opponents.


What is your opinion on the transcript that I posted, where he spoke of fighting at his real weight?

What is your opinion on him wanting JMW's to move up into uncharted territory where he knew there'd be at a disadvantage?


Below is an interview with Mackie Shilstone, regarding preparations for the Tarver fight:

"I was amazed that Bernard literally, physiologically survived making MW"

"And what I found so interesting was, how hard he had to work to make MW. And then all I had to do, was to let him grow into the real Bernard Hopkins.

"We constantly trained Bernard at 183 pounds..."

http://www.boxingtalk.com/pag/article.php?aid=21645


Here's another excerpt:

"I rate people in three categories,” New Orleans-based fitness guru Mackie Shilstone, who has worked with over 3,000 professional athletes and helped bulk up longtime middleweight champion Hopkins* to 175 pounds for his winning light heavyweight debut against Antonio Tarver, said in 2011. “One is their chronological age, which you can’t do anything about. You are as old chronologically as it says on your birth certificate.

“There’s your `health’ age, which relates to your internal chemistry, such as percentage of body fat, triglycerides and other measurables. And there’s `performance’ age. There’s no question Bernard Hopkins is as close to a perfectionist with nutrition as anyone I’ve ever dealt with. Bernard’s body does not know what age it’s supposed to be. In theory, for him to be doing what he does at his age (then 46), his heart should explode. But Bernard has taken such good care of himself over such a long period, you can throw all the formulas out the window. Bernard Hopkins can out-condition anyone.”

http://www.thesweetscience.com/feature-articles/30360-ageless-wonder-bernard-hopkins-saga

No. There's a difference between missing out on certain fights and overall ambition.

Roy was always more ambitious than Bernard. Roy moved up from MW to fight Toney at SMW. And when he couldn't fight Liles and Benn to unify, he moved up to LHW. And when he couldn't fight Dariusz or Bernard, he moved up again for Ruiz. Roy could have stayed at SMW with his IBF belt and equaled or surpassed Bernard's reign at MW. But he didn't.

Nobody made Bernard stay at MW for 7 years before King's tournament. He was more than happy to stay there.

Bernard flatly refused $6m to avenge his loss, and demanded $10m or no fight, before then calling out the likes of Winky.

Regarding Toney, I was referring to if Bernard had been in the mix at SMW in the early 90's.

Regarding plans to fight in 2003, I never believed for a second that it would come off.

As above.

Nobody can guarantee anything. But if Bernard had moved up in weight before Tito, there's no reason why he couldn't have been in the mix somewhere. He'd have been highly rated.

Why wouldn't it have made sense?

Please explain.

Again, I was referring to being in the mix at SMW in the early 90's. If we're looking at the late 90's, then his best move would have been to target the recognisable names at LHW.

I agree that in the early 00's, other than a rematch with Roy, those fights were the most lucrative. But again, I'm referring to the time where he held the IBF title, before King's tournament. Before King's tournament, he knew the chances of obtaining the other belts were slim, and he wasn't being paid huge money. But he seemed perfectly content to just keep racking up title defences until something did occur. And of course that was his prerogative. But look at who he fought at MW, and look at who fought at LHW. There's no reason at all why he couldn't have targeted those guys.

 

You mentioned something about a reach advantage, something that just isn't true. Hopkins was at a reach disadvantage most fights of his career. At middleweight, he didn't rehydrate much either, so what advantage was there physically besides height? He was often the lighter man in the ring at 160.

 

No he wasn't.

He had a reach advantage over almost all of his MW opponents.

There's arm length and reach. Reach obviously incorporates the shoulders as well. (full wingspan)

What about natural strength?

You don't think a guy of that size who trained himself down, wasn't physically stronger than some of the guys who moved up in weight to face him?

Go and read the excerpts in my earlier posts, featuring Mackie Shilstone.

Bernard set roots in a weaker division than SMW and LHW, where he faced naturally smaller opponents.

He said himself he could have moved up years earlier, but he didn't want to give up his advantages.

Read the transcript with Larry Merchant.

He wouldn't fight Roy at a 168 C-W for $6m, yet he was happy to take guys like Winky to a 170 C-W which was obviously a weight he'd never fought at before.

Bernard didn't have a legendary career at MW. He just seized on an opportunity where the deck was stacked in his favour.

 

Echols & Lemeiux are about the same for what its worth.

 

Disagree. Echols that Hopkins fought would have KO'd Lemieux. Lemieux isn't very good. Echols would have never lost to Rubio or Alcine. The Echols that fought Hopkins wouldn't have lost to Saunders either.

 

Yes, really.

I have great respect for his longevity, but not for shrinking himself down to MW, when there were better opponents at the higher weights.

I can't respect him for not being willing to rematch Roy at a 168 C-W, but then going on to fight a guy like Winky at 170 pounds.

He only moved up from MW when he had nowhere else to go.

Read the transcript that I posted with Larry Merchant.

Whilst I respect him for fighting guys like Tarver, Dawson, Calzaghe and Sergey etc, between 40-50, I know that he had no intentions of fighting those kind of guys whilst he was prime. He proved that.

Trying to mix it with the best SMW's and LHW's of the 90's/00's, would have been better than beating a guy like Oscar who had no business at the weight.

Whilst he did beat some good fighters at MW, I don't think it was a great reign. I think many other MW's could have followed that same timeline and replicated those results had they have had the same opportunity.

 

No, it's not.