Thoughts on this top 5 @ 160

His top 5 MW wins are probably Tito, Joppy, Holmes and then two out of Eastman, DLH, Echols and Allen.

Since Tito destroyed Joppy he probably deserves the top spot.

If he only had had close, controversial wins over this lot it would hurt his standing, but he generally dominated them despite being past his prime for several of the fights.

EDIT: You probably meant my top 5 at MW. Hopkins, Hagler and Monzon definitely, but not necessarily in that order, and Robinson also, I'd say. Greb sounds like a sound choice as well.

 

I would take out Jones as he just was not there long enough. Burley is a tough one to take off, but i would probably replace those two with , Freddie Steele and Ketchel.

Greb
Monzon
Hagler
Freddie Steele
Ketchel

 

Greb
Monzon/Hagler
Hopkins
SRR

 

Hopkins was a bit green vs Jones. Roy was the better man but Bernard won about 4 rounds of a slow tactical fight. Roy Jones didn't pepper BHOP. Roy Jones never lost rounds. That shows Hopkins level as a boxer. Then he just got better. Not a spectacular performer but a boxer who knew how to win. He had a complete tool bag.
Whenever a champion has a long reign there is gonna be some overmatched challengers.

He didn't lose to Mercado. He got a draw in that man's home country. Anyway the rematch settled that issue.
Hopkins came into his own in the late 90s. Adjusted his style. He was still a good puncher but he just kept adding to his game. Let's remember out of the 3 belt holders at 160 Hopkins was the one they feared. He couldn't get Joppy or Holmes to fight him. Don King made sure of that. He went on a run of solid, tough challengers. Robert Allen, Antwan Echols 2x, Echols was like a ******ed middleweight version of Ernie Shavers. Ever hear of a middleweight named Joe Lipsy? Thank Bernard Hopkins for that. I think Lipsy was undefeated all knockouts going in.

 

This content is protected

Whoever hasn't seen this enjoy

 

Bingo Ingo.

 

I admittedly was a fan of Bernard Hopkins and followed his career pretty closely. His brain was his most powerful muscle by far. He had talent, not exceptional talent. He did everything well, and he always had a plan.
He could have held his own in any era. Even the old timers way back wouldn't be able to maul him and they sure as hell would out gut him.

Middleweight is probably the deepest division of them all. Depending on the criteria he certainly belongs.

 

I would be confident Hopkins would beat Monzon. Carlos wouldn't enjoy his usual advantage on the outside. Old Sugar Ray loses to Hopkins by clear decision. He was still great fighter. Young Sugar Ray was too speedy and edges Hopkins. Golovkin? Hopkins would be virtual lock.
There's some greats that X would handle himself with.

 

#05. Bernard Hopkins
#04. Marvin Hagler
#03. Carlos Monzon
#02. Sugar Ray Robinson
#01. Harry Greb

 

Those that persist in calling Hopkins a slow paced spoiler (thinking of the old Hopkins) need to see this. Prime Hopkins was very different from the cagey counter puncher he developed into because of an ageing body.

 

People hate greatness not mediocrity! The hate revealed in this thread is doing nothing but confirming and solidifying the greatness of the executioner! Well done

 

Which 40-year old fighters (apart from Hopkins, obviously) would you call prime?

 

Hopkins isn't very popular, but not even Loudon has been as hard on him as this new guy. A late 30's Hopkins was apparently preying on 10 year younger "past prime" opponents. Ah, wait, can it be a Mendoza alt? That would actually make some sense, apart from the fact that GGG would have been in his top 5 probably.