Is Hopkins currently one of the best 15 fighters in the world? If so, why?

Shaky chin or proven chin means nothing, because Calzgahe hasn't proven LHW power like Adamek has(he could punch) and Adamek couldn't do anything but drop him.

Dawson's a hard style for Calzaghe, so it would be an amazing feat in any respect, because unless he moves up and hits better, the chin is of no equation with Dawson's defence!:good

 

Marquez did win!

115-112 all day long, 8 rounds to 4 with a KD counted against him. ****ing ridiculous going to Pac, the best you can do for Pac is have him LOSING by a point, there's no way he ****ing won that fight.

But Marquez is past his prime too, not like Hopkins, but he's aging no doubt.

These ****s who rank Hopkins so well will have to make Joe P4P #1 if he obliterates Hopkins, as HOPKINS has never been obliterated and generally, P4P top 10's don't get obliterated, unless they are wrongfully palced in the top 10 P4P.... like Hopkins now!!!

This reminds me of 2007 last year, fighting the same battles against overrated fighters.

 

Well, your attempted P4P list was supposed to be who's the best at their weight range, I use the same for my 'P4P H2H' list.

In that respect, I count wins over the top 10 of that list extremely serious, and Kessler is and is still in that list, around 8 or so, Dawson is 9.

In this list, Hopkins isn't top 25, no way in hell, not even top 40 on P4P H2H.

So Calzaghe's got a good win over Kessler in his last, Hopkins has two losses to Taylor of all people and Tarver and Wright in those bad conditions, it's utterly ABSURD to rank Hopkins over Calzaghe at this point and time P4P.

 

No it couldn't have gone the other way, it was a clear Marquez victory, close and clear.

Calzaghe's going to annihilate Hoppy, believe it Scumsfeld.:yep

 

Actually I am getting tired of using the same arguments again and again, and nobody cares... There is a huge dissonance in the rhetoric used before the Kessler fight and after beating Kessler, Joe Calzaghe said that Kessler was a very good fighter, that he was technically above Lacy but that he was not a Great fighter, not an Exceptional fighter before the fight ( Check Calzaghe's interview on the Setanta Show for Calzaghe-Kessler) and I don't think Kessler's unseccessful performance was that good to earn him a good rating afterwards... Nobody can say that The Ring and most of the Press, Media were biased towards Winky and Nard even if you don't like them. Bernard beat Winky and therefore...

 

We've already established that Hopkins isn't a top 15 and that Hopkins fans are acting like a bunch of sour, nostalgic clowns due to the subconcious realisation that he's about to be annihilated by a God like fighter.

 

Nobody cares because your arguments are standard, well stated, I'll give you that, you know boxing well, but you attempt to be way too impartial to the point where you are actually biased towards any type of aggressive analysis.

**** Ring Magazine for example and the mainstream media, they're wrong all the time, they don't know how to rate fighters correctly, look at their P4P.

For supposed boxing experts, they suck and they are stuck in the old world ways of going about rating and analysis, this is 2008, think about that.

Hopkins is old, he's not a top fighter anymore and he's going to get annihilated, simple enough.