Who would win an ATG "Super Six" at 160lbs?

That works both ways: Hopkins has fought guys with better fundamentals than most - if not, all - of Monzon's opponents.

Hopkins toyed with and dominated DLH. The outcome was never in doubt, and DLH's only genuine foothold in the fight was cynically flurrying on the inside. He did what you'd expect him to do to a blown-up Welter.

And Benvenuti had some sloppy fundamentals, too.

 

De La Hoya never had a chance against Hopkins though, he's overrated as **** even at his own best weight, nevermind taking on a great middleweight.

 

Not for me it doesn't work both ways itry, i obviously don't agree Hops has fought fighters with better fundamentals.Though maybe expanding that to stylists with good technical chops and/or finesse would be more accurate to what i'm trying to get at.

It's more the Hopkins reputation Teeto was mentioning in general i don'yt quite agree with though, rather than how he'd match up against Monzon to be honest though.

I'm not disagreeing with you as far as DLh vs Hopkins goes, but it's still one of the better technical efforts put up buy one of his opponents...which shows what i'm trying to get at.

And Benvenuti had his flaws for sure, but he was a much better ring technician than anyone X ever beat.

 

What can i say, i rate Hopkins as a strategist, i think his defense is sublime. It's the type that rather than avoidng punches, it doesn't give fighters a chance to get set to land. The only thing to bring up is the level of opp imo, Mercado had very successful moments in their first bout, but i'm sure we could do that with nearly all greats. Some of his wins against the likes of Joppy are at least solid.

It's just my opinion.

 

All i'm saying is i think he's actually quite unproven in those chessmatch kind of fights Teeto.Not trying to say you are flat out wrong or anything.

Floyd is quite similar i think incidentally.More proven against pressure fighters and aggressive types, rather than slicksters.

 

Yeah i see your point fully Mante. I just think that that the same case can be made for a lot of fighters, not particularly even in this thread, but in general, it's not very often that two bona fide top level strategists share a ring, i just think it's still possible to determine one when you see one.

Same to you on the not saying you're outright wrong.

 

Roy Jones

 

OK. Here's my super 10:


Ketchel
Greb
Walker
Robinson
Monzon
Hagler
LaMotta
Hopkins
Zale
Fitzsimmons.

 

Personally i'd take out Zale and throw in Tiger but that's just me, who do you reckon would win your tourney then? Too hard to say i think.