Which is Hopkin's best win?

I can definitely see the validity in questioning his win over Winky, as Winky was patently too small to be fighting at 170, but Pavlik wasn't/isn't. Obviously he has not managed to recapture his mw form there, but the guy is a fine size for 168-170lbs range, and it was not a Winky style situation for him to fight there. Once Pavlik gets back into his stride and proves himself at 168, I'll be proved right on rating that win highly. Pavlik used to weigh 178 and weights like that he cut to 160 for the weigh-in - so having him fight at 170 is not an imposition at all.

 

Even if Pavlik proves himself in the future, it doesn't mean anything about what happened in the past. Pavlik went from weighing in at 159lbs, fighting Hopkins and then weighing in at 159lbs after it. He was clearly a genuine middleweight at the time and didn't have the physical build to fight any higher than that and still be prime.

 

Nonsense. You are completely overlooking the fact that Kelly Pavlik's fightnight weight used to be in the region of 178lbs when he cut to 159 for the weigh-in. This is a fact. Therefore, asking a 178 to make 170 for a weigh-in is in no way a difficult or strenuous or unfair task at all. Pavlik himself never complained about the weight, the reason being that he was (obviously) comfortable there, hence why he gave up the drastic draining and cutting to 160.

 

Pavlik didn't complain about being at 160lbs either. Him and his team said that they'd never fight above 160lbs and I believe that was the intention because, at the time, Pavlik was settled at the weight and despite it always being a struggle, he was strong there on fight night.

What happens in the future doesn't alter the past. It's like saying that Hopkins' win over Johnson is a good one because he went on to beat Jones and more good names. At the time, he was an easy fighter to beat, so it's insignificant.

 

And yet your conjecture over Pavlik's intentions and comfort levels does not alter the fact that he regularly weighed around 178 on fightnight when he cut to 160 for weigh-ins. Debate over, having him fight at 170 was no real disadvantage to him, anyone who knows anything about boxing weights know this. :deal

And I disagree on Johnson as well. Glen Johnson has been around a hell of a long time, and has fought a hell of a lot of top top guys, and Hopkins is the only guy to ever beat down on him and stop him. If you value quality of performance when it comes to ranking wins, then that win obviously has value.

 

Morrade Hakkar!! The guy was the European champ!! After the B-Hop fight he became EU champ again, and piled up a record of 8W and 3L!! LOL

 

It's not conjecture at all. It's what Pavlik has said and it's what his team has said. It's even what Hopkins has said to him and said about him.

Could he make 160lbs? Yes, absolutely. What he weighed on fight night isn't important if he was still able to make 160.

The loss was a huge learning experience for him. As he's said, it's the best thing that ever happened to him because it changed his mentality as a fighter. He's much better now than he was back then, so you have to mention that when talking about the win. After losing to Hopkins, he lost his next two fights to journeymen. Kiwanuka's win over Johnson came in between two losses to average and a loss to an old Paz.

Johnson simply wasn't a good fighter when Hopkins beat him. I'd also say the same about Singsurat's win over Pacquiao or something like that.

 

What he weighed on fightnight is of obvious importance to the weight he was asked to fight at vs Hopkins.

If Pavlik weighed 200 and got asked to fight at 170, people may have legitimate grounds to say he must have been drained.

If Pavlik weighed 155 and got asked to fight at 170, people may have legitimate grounds to say he was undersized for that weight.

As things stood in reality, he was a perfect fightnight weight for a guy being asked to weigh in at 170.

Fact.

Did Johnson grow another chin after Hopkins stopped him?

Hopkins is the only man to ever beat him down and the only man to ever stop him. That is a win of obvious value IMO.

 

He says he was a middleweight, his trainer says he was a middleweight, his promoter and manager say he was a middleweight, Hopkins said he was a middleweight, Richardson said he was a middleweight, he fought at middleweight several more times - Seriously, what more do you need? Your argument is based on your opinion and nothing more. Everyone involved in that fight has said that Pavlik was a middleweight, so accept it.

Considering how easy to hit Johnson was at the time, it's no surpise that he was stopped against Hopkins. I don't know why you mention his chni though because before the stoppage, Johnson wasn't hurt. In fact, I remember Hopkins pretty much pot shotting Johnson and having no killer instinct. He wasn't throwing bombs at him, he was just pcking his punches and Johnson wasn't getting hurt.

And it's not a good win. Like I said, Pacquiao was also stopped but how many people rate Singsurat highly? Both Pacquiao and Johnson were green and years before their primes. People can talk about Johnson's win over Jones and other big wins, his undefeated record at the time, but it doesn't change the fact he was a very average fighter when Hopkins beat him. Hopkins beat a guy who'd become a good fighter but he wasn't on the night they fought. To give this win a lot of credit is just wrong.

 

Tito by far.:deal

 

he was way bigger than tito LOL

 

What a simpleton.

Obviously he was a middleweight, he was holding mw title belts at the time. I don't need 17 people to tell me what I already know.

However, he was a 178lbs man who cut to 160, then ballooned up in weight after the weigh-in again.

Do you follow boxing at all?

Do you yourself understand how weight works in boxing, and not just blindly follow any statement you've ever read in the press?

If so, then you will know that a natural 178lbs man weighing in at 170 is not in any way a difficulty for him, especially if he later moved to 168 because he said he could no longer make the cut to 160...

...and had already fought with success at a 166 limit.

If anyone else had ever stopped him, I'd maybe agree. But being the only person ever to stop him means something. Why did no-one else manage it in that time period?

And also, since you seem to have seen the fight, then you will know why I rate the win highly, if you do consider quality of performance to be important in evaluating the quality of a win.

For 11 rounds against a big tough unbeaten opponent, Hopkins was absolutely superb.

 

Trinidad no question .

 

Trinidad, clearly for me.

Pavlik second, because no one expected that.

 

You're confusing my argument with what other people have said. I never said he ballooned to make 170lbs, like other people have said. My argument is that his best fighting weight wasn't 170lbs, something unanimously agreed upon by everyone. He was not close to his best weight when fighting at 170lbs, probably because he was fighting stronger men and he didn't have a huge advantage in size.

Nobody else stopped him at that time because from 1997, the best fighter he fought for the next several years was Ottke, who also beat him. Following the Ottke loss, he went a further three fights without a win.

The first significant win on his record came in 2003 when he beat Harding, 6 years aftter the Hopkins loss. He lost to very average fighters in that period of time and had he fought anyone who was good, such as Jones or Calzaghe, it's likely he would have been stopped against them too but he was so inconsistent and poor, he would never be given a shot against those guys.