Somehow, I think Gibbons, being able to go 15 with a near prime Dempsey and not taste the canvas would translate in him being able to withstand any offense put forth by Hopkins, and he sure wouldn't be a Pavlik-type foil for Bernard. A hard-bitten, equally crafty old-school guy wins over the modern equivalent of one, IMO.
People are picking Hopkins at LHW? Seriously? Why? Because he beat Antonio Tarver and Winky Wright? Gibbons was one of the few light heavy's to not lose a series to Harry Greb. Georges Carpantier, Billy Miske and Kid Norfolk are all ATG light heavyweights that Gibbons beat. What has Hopkins done at the weight that makes people think he could beat someone as good as Gibbons?
Norfolk was blind at the time of the gibbons fight. I pick norfolk over gibbons prime for prime. I do believe watching film of both fighters, hopkins has the more developed modernized boxing skills.
Gibbons was consumate master boxer, perhaps as cerebral as Gene Tunney or Tommy Loughran. He is also probably one of the hardest punching 175 pounders of all tim. He was verry complete. A veritable nightmare for anybody. It is notable that the guys who beat him are not only hall of famers but acknowledged pound for pound greats. Greb, Dempsey and Tunney are all ranked either top of their weight class or close to it by many people on this forum in the 21st century!!!!!!
