Who would you rank the highest out of these 3 ?

Not to mention Hopkins still needed to cheat in order to outpoint Wright and even that was leveraged by the judges.

 

This is a bit strong, but I totally agree with the sentiments.

 

Then Jones will be taking a back seat.

 

And I'm sure Pachilles backed Hopkins to beat Trinidad, Wright, and Pavlik

 

The funny thing is, Pachilles ranks Hagler in the Top10 p4p of all time. Hagler´s best wins were welterweights too and his overall opponents and reign wasn´t that much better. And he lacks the move up in weight and longevity of Hopkins. As impressed I am from Hagler and his career, I´m even more impressed by Hopkins´.

 

A lot of the great Middleweights beat Welterweights moving up.

 

Shame you don't apply this reasoning to Monzon.

 

Monzon´s era was better. And guys like Griffith and Benvenuti were great or borderline great mws themselves. Something neither Hearns, Leonard, Trinidad or DLH were. That´s the difference. However, I don´t expect you to ackknpwledge this.

 

Hearns would have flattened Griffith and Benvenuti on the same night.

 

I highly doubt it. And even if, it doesn´t really matter since we are not talking h2h.

 

And what are the names of these Welterweights that form this valid comparison?:smooch

Also you know how my list works. Both physically and especially technically, Hagler is clearly Hopkin's superior, in my opinion

 

atschatschatschatschatsch

 

Soapy has a range and size advantage and possibly a slight strength advantage. This would only see him relatively safely through the distance, nothing more. The success he would have defensively against Hagler would be down to his physical attributes, not technical skill.

Hagler would beat him up all day. It'd be clear who the better boxer is, in my opinion.

 

You think Hopkins lacks technical ability? Get back in your cage.