Who were the best fighters Hopkins beat at MIDDLEWEIGHT ?

You can say that, but you can also argue technically speaking that the Hearns/Johnson comparison is valid. That's not my standpoint though

 

:good Anyway, who argued that?

 

yeah i was just bored and having a go at any possible double standard using posters, saying 'i'm just playing devil's advocate' can be annoying as hell i'll stop it now.

:good

 

You guys confused me a bit. Scary.

 

I've read quite a few comments and I think people tend to forget the momentum that Tito Trinidad had going into the Hopkins fight. After he beat Joppy, it was clear that he was still very effective at 160 and that moving up in weight made absolutely no difference in his ability. He was a clear favorite over Bernard Hopkins and at the time it was expected that a late stoppage would be a likely outcome to build up the superfight with Roy Jones Jr @ 168 where most people felt would be a good competitive fight.

So for Bernard Hopkins to outbox, outfox, outwork and TKO Trinidad it simply was an amazing victory over an elite fighter.

The comparisons to Hagler beating Hearns are not out of line, it depends on how much stock you put into each fighter.

Tito didn't duck anybody and took dangerous fights, maybe he didn't have a Benitez to fight but the impression was if there was other elite fighters at 154 apart from Vargas & Reid Tito would have fought them and beat them.

When it comes down to it; it is a question of talent or perceived talent rather and that is what is relevant here. Tito coming into the Hopkins fight was perceived to be every bit as dangerous if not more dangerous than Hearns coming into the fight with Marvin Hagler. Hopkins beating him makes it a special win.

As for the 2nd win?

Echols
Eastman
Holmes
Joppy

De La Hoya?

 

Yeah maybe in '94 when he beat Thomas Tate. But in '93 when he beat Hopkins he was inexperienced himself. With only wins over Castro and Vaca.

Bodhi makes it seem like the Hopkins win for Jones wasn't that good. I mean Bernard Hopkins is an ATG. An ATG at 28 years old with over 20 wins can't be too bad.

The Glen Johnson and Bernard Hopkins inexperienced argument is bad. Johnson was never and never will be the fighter Hopkins was and isn't even close to an ATG.




Also, putting Echols and Eastman up as good wins is just ****en ridiculous.

John David Jackson
William Joppy
Oscar De La Hoya
Glen Johnson
Keith Holmes
Syd Vanderpool

are much better wins than those bums Echols and Eastman.

 

Syd Vanderpool was better than Echols?

 

Yes. Antwun has a win over Charles Brewer that's it. Where he got knocked down 3 times in one round, but then came back to TKO him. Other than that he has no one else and 15 losses to follow.

Vanderpool isn't that good either but he does have a win over Glen Johnson in 2000 which is much better than anything Echols has accomplished.




*** Eastman doesn't even have a significant win on his resume, just pointing that out as well.

 

Who didn't have a win over Glen Johnson in 2000?

Echols atleast had the punch to bother Hopkins, and gave him two tough fights. The Hopkins vs Vanderpool fight on the other hand was a terribly dull bout.

 

Echols sucks, it's not a good win at all.

 

Lupe Aquino was an OK win as well. Although past his best it was alright in '94.

 

Echols was a beast at the time..but wasnt suited for moving up and I think his heart was taken by Hops a bit because he couldnt even beat him when he was a cripple.