Thoughts on this top 5 @ 160

He was still facing the best at MW, so I can't fault that decision. A fight with Jones would have been very nice, but sticking around as undisputed champ... I can't see anything wrong with that.

And then he faced the guys in the divisions above anyway, so a Roy rematch when Jones was still good is the only thing missing really.

But that wouldn't affect his MW legacy anyhow.

 

He wasn’t fighting the best though.

From 2001-2004, he fought Carl Daniels, Morrade Hakkar, William Joppy and Robert Allen.

He then cashed out against Oscar after Sturm had been robbed.

There was nothing left for him at the weight.

Again, I’m not saying that he did anything wrong. He was the champ. It was his prerogative to remain there. But how was that not a lack of ambition?

Moving up to LHW after Roy had declined speaks volumes.

 

And Holmes, Tito, Eastman and DLH. Yes, you can argue that DLH didn't deserve to win the eliminator against Sturm, but he did get the win and Hopkins faced the winner.

So over four years (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004), he fought six guys in The Ring's top 5.

They were the best at the time. Four of the top six of The Ring's top 10 for 2004 had been beaten by Hopkins.

 

I’m not disputing any of the above.

I was looking at what he’d done after he’d beaten Tito to become the undisputed champion.

The fact that he didn’t fight anyone of note until Oscar, showed his lack of ambition.

That’s how I see it.

Again, he told the media in 2008 that he could have fought at LHW in 2002 had he have wanted to. Yet he stayed at MW and fought Hakkar, Daniels and Allen etc instead.

There’s nothing else much to debate.

Again, he was a great MW. But I think he stayed there for as long as possible, as it was easier for him than targeting the better fighters at the weights above.

 

What do you think of Monzon?

Hopkins was fighting all the best middleweights he could. Criticising him for staying at 160 is shallow. There was every chance a great challenger could appear when Hopkins reigned for so many years.

He moved up when he had to after making weight for so many years took it's toll. He went straight to top flight opponents.

As a matter of fact he went straight at the guy who had recently decimated Jones in 2 rounds and just beat him comfortably in the rubber match.

 

He fought just about everyone of note in the MW division after beating Tito. That's a fact and we should be clear on this.

That you think he should have left the MW division is fair enough, but doesn't really have any bearing on his standing as a MW.

 

I respect your opinion but I disagree.

Monzon fought in a different era. Back in the days of same day weigh-ins, with no SMW division and a big jump to LHW.

Why is it shallow?

Hopkins fought in a weak era of MW’s. And after he’d finally became the undisputed champ after 7-8 years, he then challenged out all of the JMW champs to move up and fight him.

So why am I been unfair criticising him?

There was nothing left to achieve after fighting Tito.

Again, by his own admission he could have moved up to LHW years earlier. By his own admission, he could have fought there in 2002. That’s what he said in 2008. He could have been up at LHW in 2002. The same year that he wouldn’t fight Roy at SMW. He also said that he didn’t move up any earlier as he didn’t want to give up his advantages, and that if he could get a guy to a weight that he wasn’t comfortable at, then he would do that.

If you don’t have any issue with that, that’s cool. But I have an issue with it. Instead of fighting Roy or moving up to SMW-LHW, he challenged out the guys from the weight below him, before fighting Hakkar, Daniels and Allen again.

So why is that shallow?

It isn’t.

His own comments rightfully garner criticism.

There was nothing great about challenging out naturally smaller guys from the weight below, when there were better fighters to target at the weight above.

Eventually moving up to face Tarver in 2006, who could well have been drained, doesn’t give him a pass for not going up in 2002.

 

I agree.

It has no bearing on where he rates as a MW. Again, I was only giving my honest opinion.

Some people think that he was a MW legend. Where as I think that he stayed there as long as he did because it was easier for him than moving up.

I think Calzaghe did the same at SMW.

 

Maybe. Hard to know these things. Sometimes you just like what you have and what you know.

I would guess that he didn't want to face Jones again. One would think he would be more eager to erase the only real blotch on his record if he thought he'd win.

Otherwise I can't see that there was much there in the higher division. Calzaghe wasn't really known back in 2002 and Roy was the man at LHW, so it didn't make much sense to face anyone but him.

I'd would like to have seen him against Roy again, of course, and in hindsight a fight with Calzaghe would have been very nice as well, but that's hindsight.

 

Plenty of people moved from 160 to 175 before the 168 pound division come about, myriads of them. Do guys like Hagler and Monzon "lack ambition"? Monzon actually said he was looking at challenging Foster.

Monzon's era of middleweights was hardly considered amazing during it's time and nor was Monzon's. Both era's have received big boosts over time. What was eventually realised during their time was that they were both great champions who were well above their weight peers. It was the same with Hopkins. These guys ruled the division with an iron fist and smother the aspirations, records and confidence of others. They stunted careers.

So what if he was looking at the JMW division? It's time honored for guys to move up from even lower (welterweight and even lower) to fight the big guys for the prestigious Middleweight title.

Look at Hagler and Monzon. Hager had Duran, Hearns and SRL. Monzon had Napoles and Griffith tho Emile had campaigned there on and off. Often the bigger purse comes from fighting the big names moving up after you have cleaned out your division or are in the process of it.

When you reign for as long and as dominantly as these champions you are going to face multiple challenges from below. Stay in the division for 5 minutes like a Jones or whoever and you won't.

Lets just call Hopkins out however and reveal our hand.

There was everything left. He ended up setting the record for middleweight defenses and what not among other things. At the end of the day he can fight wherever he desires. He chose to build a legacy at 160. He succeeded. After that he further enhanced his legacy at higher weights - win/win.

There's nothing wrong with building a reign of greatness in one division. The thing is when he could no longer fight effectively enough at 160 to keep that reign going he released the weight shackles and went at the top dogs at higher weights - well past his best.

I can't see how that can be criticised personally. Imagine some of you lot if he didn't move up at all, Jesus Christ. He moves up late past his best, goes at big names and still gets blasted. Funny stuff.

Anyone can move up to just about any weight. So what? You're just nitpicking. It usually comes back to Roy of course. Why not fight in your best division if you are building a legacy? Hagler wouldn't move up and fight Qawi/Braxton when called out because he didn't want to give up his divisional advantage. Monzon didn't end up taking Foster on because he obviously didn't want to give up his divisional advantage. That's life. When Hopkins divisional advantage ended he moved on up - the others didn't. He could have retired like the other two did. Lets bag Hopkins tho.

You are simply nitpicking the guy as outlined above.

He can go up when he wants to as outlined in above posts. I don't think he needed or was chasing your own seal of approval. I don't think he was overly worried he might get bagged on an internet forum 15 years later.

He did good.

 

Bernard was a compiler. A great compiler but not a talent along the likes of Monzon or Greb or Hagler... Tho he certainly was cagier.