Of the filmed middleweights, who do you think belongs CLEARLY above Hopkins h2h?

Roy Jones Jr. is an easy place to start.

 

Very intruiging question, probably the most interesting one for weeks on here!

For me.
Tiger
Giardello
Hagler
Jones
Toney
SRR
Valdez

I also think:
Steele
Monzon
Walker

Beat him.

Steele throws a bit wide but he carried real power, and speed.I cant comment on Apostoli but by all accounts he could do it all.
Walker's pressure and two fisted aggression take it for me.
Monzon underwhelms me on film but he is a master at controlling the pace and tempo, a functional genius.
Lamotta,Zale ,would be tough, all action come forward types , I think Hopkins might beat Zale but not Jake.
Luis Rodriguez would be trouble for Hopkins but ultimately not strong enough.
As you can tell I'm not that big on Hopkins his 160lbs record is not that inspiring to me.
Cabrera could make him look bad, as could Williams, Griffith , and Nunn.
Mike McCallum has a shot.

I think prime Turpin beats Hopkins!

Now you can have a good laugh !

 

Great thread. Is it coincidence that Hopkins came to dominance after Toney, Jones, McClellan and McCallum had all left 160? I don't think it is. Jones beat Hopkins pretty comfortably, and I'd have had small wagers on the other three beating him too.

Not many will seriously argue that Hopkins would have beaten Robinson or Hagler. Jake La Motta had the size and strength to harass him to a points loss. There's nothing Hopkins could have done against Carlos Monzon other than lose a decision. The Nigel Benn who demolished De Witt and Barkley would have had a hell of a shot too.

 

Bernard Hopkins can be beaten by some of the ATG's. But at his best, Hopkins would not be 'clearly beaten' by anyone. Hopkins is the best defensive middleweight on film..Imo. But it can be rightfully said that Hopkins didn't swim in the shark infested waters Robinson, Burley, LaMotta, Tiger, Giardello, et al did.
As far as stylistically and due to his talent...Roy Jones Jr is the one who might carry the fight with Hopkins wider than most would.

 

Leonard, Hagler, Hearns, Robinson... now, before you say anything about Robinson, understand that he won about 50 fights at MW before he ever fought Randy Turpin.

 

Roy Jones Jr. was pretty good too. I'm lot just saying that because he beat Hopkins at MW. I don't think either had peaked when they fought but Jones was close to prime than Hopkins. Jones won but Hopkins would improve.

 

I'm sure many will have a problem with Leonard and Hearns as well. Yes, Hearns got caught by Hagler and even Barkley but Hopkins didn't have that kind of power. I don't think he's catching Hearns like that... It's gonna come down to boxing. Hearns was a great boxer and he had speed and power. Leonard knew how to win. He came back after 3 years off and only 1 fight in 5 years... he moved up in weight with no tune ups and beat Marvin Hagler.

 

Perhaps Jones. But we saw so little of him at MW that it's only a perhaps. Otherwise I think Hopkins of the late 90's would be a handful for any MW ever. If matched with the best I think he'd win some and lose some, but they'd all be competitive fights.

 

True, but how many of those, except LaMotta and Graziano, were top MWs?

 

What shark infested waters did Robinson and LaMotta swim at MW? Apart from LaMotta's win over a shot Holman Williams neither of them touched the Black Murderers' row of Moore, Charles, Burley etc. If Hopkins, like LaMotta, had been active at MW at the same times as fighters like these but failed to meet ANY of them in their prime he'd be crucified.

Robinson is excused since he campaigned mainly at WW around that time, but when he moved up to MW full time the division wasn't as "shark infested" anymore.

So LaMotta didn't fight the sharks and when Robinson fully immersed himself in the water the scariest sharks were gone.

 

:bbb

 

*sigh* Your just simply nitpicking...and it really doesn't make sense. Hopkins fought in his era, and not the one Robinson and LaMotta fought in...If Hopkins had fought in that era, undoubtedly his overall resume would be better than it stands now. The overall level of middleweight competition Robinson and LaMotta fought is above the level of competition at 160 that Hopkins fought.
The simple fact that Robinson and LaMotta fought each other alone trumps any single victory Hopkins achieved at 160. But to Hopkins' credit, he was a long standing champion.

 

This... doesn't make much sense. So, LaMotta's advantage over Hopkins is that he managed to beat a WW once in six tries?

Which fantastic level of comp did LaMotta beat? Is an injured Cerdan and a shot Holmans better than any of Hopkins's wins? Or are you taken by his wins over WWs like Zivic (who he also lost to) and Bell?

Quite possibly the early 40's was a stronger era than the 90's and early 00's, but apart from a shot Williams, LaMotta didn't beat the MWs that made the era look so impressive. Neither did Robinson really. So actually what were these kind of shark infested waters that Hopkins didn't have? Hopkins who faced every MW of note over a 10 year period?