What were the low and high points in the career of Bernard Hopkins?

Ramping that PAC is on the juice but defending Floyd to the bone bout his IV.

 

Low point , getting beaten by a white boy. High points - come back from being taken to school by calzaghe to beat pascal , Pavlik etc

 

Low point; Jumping on Dawson's back, getting thrown off and faking a backinjury.
High point; Beating the holy crep out of Trinidad.

 

B hop taking Kelly Pavlik's soul and shutting down everyone who said he was completely done as a fighter and was about to receive a career-ending beatdown .

Everyone thought Bernard was committing suicide by challenging Pavlik .

No doubt . I was one of em .

 

The highlight for me was the Tito fight. That was not only an amazing performance but it completely changed the course of his career.

The later wins over Tarver and Pavlik are right below that.

 

As far as the low points - aside from the losses, a lot of those Middleweight title defences were very hard to watch. Entertainment was at a premium for a long portion of his time at 160.

 

Low Point: His comments to Joe about losing to a "white boy".

High Point: Either beating Tito or Pavlik.

 

Highlight:- His victory over Tito. Hopkins always did it his way and the working man overcame the supposed superstar.

Low:- A lot of his fights where ugly, foul filled

 

His debut loss, the first Roy jones fight and calzaghe were the lows I felt he should have fought Toney before a certain point too

But he did have big wins like oscar and Pavlov and as his career went on his longevity was what most impressed me

 

Low point, controversial draw to Mercado, controversial loss to Taylor to lose his middleweight title.

High point probably jumping 2 divisions to beat Tarver.

 

Forget the RJJ and Calzaghe losses, the fights against Robert Allen (three of them!!), Hakkar and Eastman were worse. Just brutal.

 

High points Trinidad,Tarver (massive underdog for both)Pascal,Cloud,Shumenov title wins at an advanced age. Low points stirring racial tensions Trinidad,Calzaghe sore loser Calzaghe,ducking legend destroyer Danny Green.

 

He didn't come close to knocking out Glen Johnson.

 

I don't agree with that. I get the feeling that some people didn't even know Hopkins back then, they just assume he fought the same as he does now. The Hopkins back then was more aggressive, and mixed it up more. The only knock I could see is that he didn't have one shot power, so if the guys he was fighting had some durability, they would be there getting outboxed, and outworked for 12 rounds. The Mercado fights weren't boring, the Echols fights, weren't boring, the Jackson fights weren't boring, The first two Allen fights were chess matches, not for those who like bar room brawls. I don't have a problem with beautiful boxing. I appreciated the way he schooled Eastman, or the mugging he gave Joppy, and how he grinded out Holmes. The way he exposed and KO'd that young guy who was 21-0 with 21 KO's wasn't boring. Sure his fights weren't Hearns vs Hagler, But to claim he wasn't entertaining suggests, you didn't see many of his fights back then. Mercado vs Hopkins I, and the rematch with Echols pop into my head right off the top of quality fights with some good action. People don't realize that Hopkins got flack for his title reign, but those contenders he was fighting would for the most part be Golovkin's best opponents if he was fighting them. Geale, Macklin, and Murray, wouldn't have cut the mustard during the 90s. That boxers like Geale, and Macklin were even top rated middleweights shows you how weak the current middleweight division is.