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

IntentionalButt · Feb 9, 2015

Hookie said: ↑

You don't get extra credit for not looking the part. You don't get extra points on the scorecards because you're old, or fat, or slow, or ugly, or small, or whatever... just ask Foreman, Holyfield, Arreola, Hopkins, and others.

I'm not saying Monzon wasn't great, I'm just saying he's overrated by a lot of people... plus he was a 1st rate piece of shlt!
Click to expand...

All true enough. :yep

Russell · Feb 9, 2015

impacted said: ↑

The Nigel Benn who demolished De Witt and Barkley would have had a hell of a shot too.
Click to expand...

:dead

Foxy 01 · Feb 10, 2015

Hookie said: ↑

You don't get extra credit for not looking the part. You don't get extra points on the scorecards because you're old, or fat, or slow, or ugly, or small, or whatever... just ask Foreman, Holyfield, Arreola, Hopkins, and others.

I'm not saying Monzon wasn't great, I'm just saying he's overrated by a lot of people... plus he was a 1st rate piece of shlt[/SIZE
Click to expand...

So was SRR and Duran, so is Mayweather, but it doesn't alter what they did when they went to work. It is obvious you have an agenda when you criticise Monzon for " struggling " in fights he won. Unless they are completely mismatched who doesn't struggle to win some fights?

That is the whole idea. Only fan boys want to see their heroes in with someone who couldn't win a raffle even if they bought all the tickets.

Bulldog24 · Feb 10, 2015

"The Nigel Benn that beat Doug DeWitt would have beaten any middleweight in the world. And I mean any middleweight, then, now or any time." - Emanuel Steward

Bulldog24 · Feb 10, 2015

That was a '97 quote, speaking to the British press when he was with Lennox.

In '93 at the big New York press conference for Eubank-Benn II attended by everyone who was anyone in boxing, Steward said regarding a Eubank-McClellan match: "This guy Chris Eubank has the best stiff left jab I've seen, so a fight with him will totally depend on whether you can read it to avoid and counter, or you will be grinded down."

red cobra · Feb 11, 2015

Bulldog24 said: ↑

"The Nigel Benn that beat Doug DeWitt would have beaten any middleweight in the world. And I mean any middleweight, then, now or any time." - Emanuel Steward
Click to expand...

Bull**** Emanuel...sure hope he was just tired when he said that.

Flea Man · Feb 11, 2015

Bokaj said: ↑

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.
Click to expand...

You've said many times you don't know a huge amount about earlier eras, which is why I assume you've omitted the many quality fighters Lamotta faced.

As it stands I have Hopkins very high H2H. Certainly above Giardello, Tiger, Valdez and a load of others.

Not Steele though.

Flea Man · Feb 11, 2015

Bokaj said: ↑

"Beat most of the top guys of his era"? I can't really agree with that when besides Lytell there's hard to find top MWs he got the better of. Cerdan and Williams are good names, but Cerdan was injured and Williams washed up. He mixed wins and losses with Villemain and Bashora.

Most of the Black Murderers' row he didn't face at all, nor Zale or Graziano. I'm not saying this was his fault (if anything Zale ducked him and Graziano probably wasn't overly keen either- as to why he didn't face Burley, or Williams earlier, I don't know if there were any particular reasons), but the fact is that these are important scalps of the period that he doesn't have, no matter whose fault it is that the fights didn't come off.

A win over Robinson is obviously very impressive, but it gets tempered by being mixed with five losses and that Robinson was still no more than a WW who wouldn't figure in the Ring rankings at MW until six years later.

I just can't see how this is better than Hopkins, who after his loss to Jones beat all comers for the next decade, often in dominating fashion, until he came unstuck at the age of 40 in two close fights with a much younger fighter.
Click to expand...

You do know Graziano was a heavy handed sham, right? Him winning the title says more about Zale's decline than Graziano's quality.

Bokaj · Feb 11, 2015

Flea Man said: ↑

You've said many times you don't know a huge amount about earlier eras, which is why I assume you've omitted the many quality fighters Lamotta faced.

Click to expand...

They've been gone through in other posts in this thread.

Bokaj · Feb 11, 2015

Flea Man said: ↑

You do know Graziano was a heavy handed sham, right? Him winning the title says more about Zale's decline than Graziano's quality.
Click to expand...

Also been answered earlier in this thread.

Bokaj · Feb 11, 2015

Flea Man said: ↑

You do know Graziano was a heavy handed sham, right? Him winning the title says more about Zale's decline than Graziano's quality.
Click to expand...

Also been answered earlier in this thread.

Bokaj · Feb 11, 2015

lora said: ↑

When i imagine Hopkins for these fights i'm thinking of the late 90s one, up to and just after the Tito fight.say 96\97-2002\03.

That's the Hopkins you want fighting other elite fighters and though certainly capable of being a conservative or dirty fighter as seen against Tito and at times against Echols, is not going to be setting out to spoil like hell and play defence for long stretches of fights.I'm not sure he's even truly developed that junk fighting side of his game yet.

If he's doing that i think it'll be because he's fighting to survive and no longer to win.
Click to expand...

True.

I count his prime more or less from Mercado rematch, In '95, if I remember correctly. I think that was a terrific performance.

Halfordscream · Feb 12, 2015

Hopkins was unquestionably past his physical best at the 160 lb limit years prior to facing Trinidad.

Flea Man · Feb 12, 2015

Bokaj said: ↑

Also been answered earlier in this thread.
Click to expand...

Sorry.

Flea Man · Feb 12, 2015

lora said: ↑

Another point where Hopkins ability is concerned is i see a lot of putting together how he fought over the years and putting it into one combined fighter with all those traits...whereas in fact there were several distinct stages of evolution imo.

You had the early Hopkins that fought as if he were almost a slugger, an aggressive all-offense boxer-puncher that wasn't too concerned with being hit(though defensively solid enough even then) and not looking to win on points.

This version was basically a prospect\young contender and very promising, but after the Jones fight it was an approach he moved away from rather than honed to greatness.

Then we have the steady development of a complete boxerpuncher, that added greater caution and better pacing to his game.This was the best Hopkins imo...the prime and peak one.

Then you have an aging fighter that learns to spoil and fight ugly in order to keep winning, realising he can't do the same things physically and generally isn't as sharp a boxer-puncher anymore.

This is the final version and one that started to emerge from the early-mid 2000s.The output dropped considerably, he no longer had the balance to be offensively active on the front foot and was far more concerned with not getting it, slowing fights down through legal and illegal means, general frustrating and spoiling.

This version is ideal to keep winning against lesser, poorly schooled opposition of this recent era and minimise punishment taken and it has allowed for remarkable longevity...but is not really a GREAT fighter any more-certainly in the H2H sense-and would do well to beat any excellent\great fighters imo.

When i imagine Hopkins for these fights i'm thinking of the late 90s one, up to and just after the Tito fight.say 96\97-2002\03.

That's the Hopkins you want fighting other elite fighters and though certainly capable of being a conservative or dirty fighter as seen against Tito and at times against Echols, is not going to be setting out to spoil like hell and play defence for long stretches of fights.I'm not sure he's even truly developed that junk fighting side of his game yet.

If he's doing that i think it'll be because he's fighting to survive and no longer to win.
Click to expand...

Similar to Holyfield--there is no one prime version.

Log in or Sign up

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

IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me

Russell Loyal Member Full Member

Foxy 01 Boxing Junkie banned

Bulldog24 Boxing Junkie Full Member

Bulldog24 Boxing Junkie Full Member

red cobra Loyal Member Full Member

Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

Halfordscream Global Full Member

Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

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

IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me

Russell Loyal Member Full Member

Foxy 01 Boxing Junkie banned

Bulldog24 Boxing Junkie Full Member

Bulldog24 Boxing Junkie Full Member

red cobra Loyal Member Full Member

Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

Halfordscream Global Full Member

Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member