Rate Hopkins best middleweight title opponents. Who would be your top 5?

This guy has been trying to rubbish the career of Hopkins since he got knocked out at 51 years of age. Here , in the general , everywhere.

 

Agreed. Hopkins actually beat a lot of quality opponents and I think his opposition is underrated. Plenty of guys with talent, toughness, experience and credentials. Lot's of current, former or future champs on that record. He doesn't get a much credit for beating them because few had charisma or high level popularity. Such is the sport. And the very notion that he was able to remain focused, conditioned and consistent for more than a decade was an ATG achievement in and of itself. I have no problem with Bernard's middleweight record.

 

Yeah, looking at it it's hard to understand why they are so lowly ranked. Some solid natural MWs in the bunch and some highly skilled guys coming from lower divisions. Is it really that different from Monzon's and Hagler's reigns?

 

If Wlad loses to Joshua we are probably going to look back in ten years time and say something very similar about him.

With the exception, of course, that Wlad hasn't fought any HW as good as Jones was a MW.

 

No it isn't. And while I'll probably get beheaded for saying this here, there are some instances in which I actually think Bernard's opposition was better or at least comparable. Tito was a more formidable challenge for Hopkins in 2001 than Duran was for Hagler in 1983. Sure Roberto ranks higher all time and for obvious reasons but the timing and circumstances of those fights tell a different story. Monzon was also guilty of beating ascending fighters from other weight classes and might even have gotten some gift decisions. Men who Marvin fought like Hamsho, Roldan, Scypion, Lee, or Sibson weren't exactly leagues better than Joppy, Johnson, Holmes, Oscar, etc.. Thing is the 90's were loaded with star studed guys fighting anywhere between Jr. Middle and light heavy like Toney, Nunn, Jones, McCallum, Tito, Oscar, etc, and Hopkins just got lost in the midst of things.

 

Glen Johnson was in no way one of Hopkins' top 5 defenses, and nobody ranked him like that until the last few years. That's pure revisionism. Glen was brought in because he had a shiny unbeaten, inflated record. He wasn't viewed as a threat to Bernard.

He never achieved a top 10 Ring rating at middleweight and never beat a ranked contender there. Afterwards, he moved up and went through the ringer for years getting beat by guys until he improved himself enough to become a champion.

I give Glen a huge amount of credit for that, but that credit stems from developing past being viewed as record fodder to making people pay for being treated as "just an opponent". He wasn't the fighter he'd grow to become when he fought Bernard.

 

Monzon and Hagler didn't fight until they were 40 years of age and nor were neither of them carrying the weight of a 10 year title reign. And if you're going to dock him for losing to Roy Jones ( arguably the best fighter of the 90's ) when he was still green, then you might as well penalize Hagler for losing to guys like Sugar Ray seales when HE was green. Furthermore, the best fighters who stepped up in weight to fight Monzon were Benvenutti, Griffith and Napoles. All of whom were well past prime. The ones who ascended to fight Hagler were Leonard, Duran and Hearns. I'll give him ample credit for beating the last one, but the first two were past their best, both gave him problems and one even beat him. Tito and Oscar were both still somewhat young when facing Hopkins and both had just won middleweight belts in their last fights right before meeting him. If you want to rate Monzon's and Hagler's opponents higher than Bernard's on an all time overall scale that's fine. So do I.. But the timing and circumstances of B-Hops fights with THOSE guys made them better at the TIME than the men who Hagler and Monzon fought at THEIR respective times. Get what I'm saying?

 

Leonard was quite possibly the best MW Hagler met. And neither Hagler nor Monzon met anyone on Jones level IMO.

Also, it's debatable that Taylor was Hopkins's second best opponent. Without his narrow wins over Hopkins his argument isn't all that strong. So it becomes a bit of a circular argument "Taylor is one of Hopkin's best opponents since he beat Hopkins, and Hopkins isn't that good since he lost to one of his best opponents".

You're still going to go by that logic if Joshua beats Wlad? Do you use when it comes to Fury?

And otherwise are Minter, Hamsho, Vito, Roldan etc really that much better than Joppy, Johnson, Holmes and Echols?

The MW versions of Tito and DLH that Hagler met are quite comparable to the MW versions of Hearns and Duran Hagler met, I'd say.

 

As for my top 5....

1) Trinidad
2) Oscar
3) Joppy
4) Holmes
5) JDJ

 

I have trouble with Tito being in there. He had little by way of resume at MW and his power was questioned after he was made to wrap his hands properly (By Bernard).

And as for Oscar, absolutely not.

He boxed at 130 near the start of his career, and Bernard at 175.

Additionally, Oscar has NO (ZERO) wins at 160. (Despite getting a decision over Sturm.)

 

Both of those of those guys had captured middle weight titles in there very last fights before facing Hopkins.

 

Tito, yes.

Oscar ?

NO.

That was a gift among gifts.

 

Very well. If we're going to dock Hopkins for any wins he had over fighters who rose in weight to meet him then we might as well do the same for most of the great middleweights in history.