Is Hopkins the greatest fighter in terms of longevity?

Archie Moore. George Foreman. Duran, kinda.

 

Maybe Moore. Hopkins was so damned consistent though it's hard to place anyone above him. He's gonna be 50 atsch

 

I think Hopkins accomplished more in the latter part of his career and did not have a deep resume as a middleweight (his biggest wins over welterweights) and a weak division and then he lost to Jermaine Taylor. I think he moved up to light-heavyweight very impressively and actually put it all together as an older experienced man but this has also been the case of many fighters today that have been fighting near and past there 40's.

Hopkins did not burn out early and his spartan lifestyle or monk like lifestyle, no drugs alcohol, or woman helped him maintain a youthful body to go along with his vast boxing experience

 

Noone else has been consistently at the top level as long as he has. Others have had success at an old age but noone matches his consistency.

 

It´s Archie.
But Hopkins is the second IMO, he has a better longevity than Foreman. If he beats Cloud tonight I think he is a very clsoe second and arguibly the number 1 for some......

 

Yes Jofre has great longevity vic.

 

imo hopkins is very close, and unless he loses badly in the next year or so he could/will pass moore.
not that i wanna watch his fights much anymore but i love hopkins profesionalism.

 

he is a good fighter, but he has handpicked for years now. I rate him at middleweight and then beating Tito, Wright, Tarver and Pavlik. But losing to Taylor,Calzaghe and Dawson. Regardless of age since the guys now he handpicks when he sees a style he can beat. We have to look at the losses he had as well as the wins if he is to get credit for the wins later in his career. Greatest fighter as far as longevity? I will give him the title that he fought the best at 48 when most guys would be diminished. Somehow he didn't take much punishment which helped preserve his skills. The real test is Ward.

 

Hopkins > Moore in terms of longevity

 

If Cloud wants to win he has to fight a busy fight and every minute of every round and Bernard will not be able to win. But Bernard is experienced and knows how to beat Cloud. Cherrypicking is an art. Floyd and Bernard are experts at it, but Bernard has fought better guys in his career. He took chances. He might have more loses, but his career is complete.

 

well SRR fought for 25 years and fought in the greatest era of all, and had over 200 fights during it.

In that period of longeviety you could make a top 25 list of his opponents that would boogle the mind from WW - L-HW. and even his lesser known opponents were great fighters in that they were top men in a rediculous period where exceptional skill and toughness was the norm otherwise you just were'nt in the mix!

so I say no, but kudos to him none-the-less.

 

No, not by a long-shot. Methuselah who died at the ripe old age of 969 , was fighting
with his wife about having children or not just before he passed away.

 

It's easy to have longevity when you fight once per year (maybe!). Hopkins is skilled, yes. But his longevity, imho, is based mostly on NOT fighting (keeping those miles off the odometer) and the atrocious state of pro boxing over the past several years. His opposition, in comparison to other eras, has been easy.

I'd rather not compare him to Archie Moore, who kept up a MUCH more rapid clip against MUCH better opposition. Put Hopkins in another era and I don't believe he would have the same longevity that he has now.

I could never consider Hopkins the "greatest" anything. Not even close.

 

Kid Azteca of Mexico: 1929-1961, 33 straight calendar years. More than anybody else in history.