People why is everyone talking about Tito and Oscar when the real deal is and always has been Bernard Hopkins. He stalked and toyed with Tito finally giving him mercy in the twelth. And plotted against a very game Oscar. I mean the guy hasn't lost in eleven years, 19 title defenses. He whooped two fighters (Tito & Oscar) that so many think are the best. He did lose to Roy but he wasn't the fighter he is today I'd like to see that rematch at middle weight. They would be carting Roy off in a stretcher after that one. Most of all let's not forget he 39 years old and still kicking ***. He's not the fastest or most powerful but he is by far the smartest. His skill is unmatchable he can counterpuch with the best or lead when needed. He may seem alittle dirty a times but it is all part of a master plan, to disect his opponent. He may take 4-5 rounds slowly waiting, watching and then he sees it the flaw that will spell doom for his opponent. Just ask Oscar, have you ever seen the Golden Boy in more pain then when he got hit by Hopkind to the body. Bernard can also swarm and beat the piss out of an opponent at will for that you'll have to ask Tito he knows. He will retire soon and my beat is he will still be the undisputed middle weight champ. Lets just hope Jermain Taylor can carry the torch some what so we don't have another division like the pathetic Heavyweight division.

The best ever is certainly overbetting the pot on this one imfamouz, but he's one of them. Hagler and Monzon both rank higher for me. Greb too probably. He certainly is determined and intelligent. It's a feat in itself that he's still going at such an older age.

Best ever! lol
Who has he beaten?

You can make a very strong case for Hopkins being the best ever. The guy has ruled the division for 10 years and made 19 defenses.

I personally rank him 3rd all time. Behind Hagler and Greb but I do rank him ahead of Monzon

I agree, Hopkins is somewhere in the top three. And...he is still champion and might have time to increase his status and become the reconized best middleweight of all time.

Best ever! lol
Who has he beaten?


thought you didnt know much about boxing except the name fighters that your dad and bro talk about?

You can make a very strong case for Hopkins being the best ever. The guy has ruled the division for 10 years and made 19 defenses.

I personally rank him 3rd all time. Behind Hagler and Greb but I do rank him ahead of Monzon


I know competition wise, Hopkins didnt face who Hagler, Greb and Monzon have faced, but 19 defenses and 11 years without a loss, make it 20 if he ends up facing Felix Sturm. I dont know, lets just all agree that the man is incredible and P4P the best right now.

Ray Robinson and Marvin Hagler would stop Hopkins. Monzon would win a UD over him. Hopkins is special and the best of this era, but would be on the level of a Gene Fullmer IMO.

he ain't that great..who has he fought?..Tito and Oscar..two welterweights coming up to 160..he's just lucky that there was no real good middleweight during his reign..the only good fighter before those two that he fought was Jones and he lost..He won't give a rematch to Tito cuz he knows that Tito is a legit 160pndr now..**** even Taylor can take his ugly ass right now..

Bernard Hopkins the best Middleweight ever.

Nope, not even close.

He's definately up there in my opinion, I think Hagler is better and would beat him had they ever met in the ring.

Grebb was excellent as well, even robinson was awsome.

I'd say definately top 5 or even top 4, but not the best ever.

roy jones jr is the greatest fighter at middleweight of all time hands down..he had ray leonards speed and more power then marvin hagler..thats why hopkins fought him scared

roy jones jr is the greatest fighter at middleweight of all time hands down..he had ray leonards speed and more power then marvin hagler..thats why hopkins fought him scared


do you have any idea how much **** you are going to get for this post?!?!?! :D

i really like Bernard Hopkins but the best middleweight ever??? NO ****ING WAY!!! That honor probably belongs to the Great Harry Greb, who defeated a lot better competition than Hopkins has, like Gene Tunney, and even Mickey " the Toy Bulldog " Walker.

Roy Jones is the best middleweight of all time. He would have beat any of the greatest middleweights. As far as Hagler vs. Hopkins...I wonder who would crack first on one of those fierce inside battles..

Greb would smother RJJ with power punches, they didn't call the guy "the Human Windmill" for nothing

Hagler would stop Roy late. Roy couldn't use his god given talents all night on Hagler. Once the marvelous one touches Roy a few times he'd start to break down and that's when Marvin would end it.

Roy may be able to eek out a UD on him...

Actually I take that back. Hagler might actually give him trouble, since he is a southpaw...

Jones biggest victories at middleweight were a decision over a green Hopkins and a knockout of Thomas Tate. Not an all-time great resume if you ask me.

As for Hopkins, i have him at #7 all-time at 160.

What's you're top 6 if you don't mind me asking...

1. Harry Greb
2. Ray Robinson
3. Carlos Monzon
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Stanley Ketchel
6. Jake LaMotta

...i know Stanley Ketchel is an unpopular pick, but i put a heavy emphasis on level of opposition. He beat Billy Papke, nearly beat Sam Langford (and some sources though he did), and a legit all-time great lt. heavyweight in Philadelphia Jack O'Briend. However, i wouldn't bicker too much if someone decided to rank Hopkins over bother Ketchel and LaMotta.

Hagler would put all type of hands to Hopkins! No way Hopkins would hurt Hagler. Hopkins showed earlier in his career that if you hit him he can get knocked down. Hagler could put heavy pressure on him for all 12 and win a ud. Only way to beat Hagler is pay the judges and run away for the whole fight!

Hopkins is up there among the greatest you can not deny his 19 title defense, but Hagler has my vote over Hopkins...

carlos monzon

1. Harry Greb
2. Ray Robinson
3. Carlos Monzon
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Stanley Ketchel
6. Jake LaMotta

...i know Stanley Ketchel is an unpopular pick, but i put a heavy emphasis on level of opposition. He beat Billy Papke, nearly beat Sam Langford (and some sources though he did), and a legit all-time great lt. heavyweight in Philadelphia Jack O'Briend. However, i wouldn't bicker too much if someone decided to rank Hopkins over bother Ketchel and LaMotta.

jake lamotta was tough not good

he outworked and wanted it more than SRR and thats why he beat him

Hopkins deserves to be in the top ten but no way the best and i'd put hagler at least two or three notches above him

Hopkins deserves to be in the top ten but no way the best and i'd put hagler at least two or three notches above him


That's more realistic Brother, I'm a Hopkins fan and surely the guy belongs to the GREATS list . . . but not the GREATEST EVER.

^^Cheers man

jake lamotta was tough not good

he outworked and wanted it more than SRR and thats why he beat him

You think you can beat the greatest fighter to ever live simply by being tough and wanting it more? It's not that easy. Jake LaMotta's skills are so underrated by some, it's borderline ridiculous. Yeah, his skills weren't as apparent as Ray Leonard's or Ray Robinson's, but he wasn't some ordinary tough bum. His skill was subtle, but it was abundant. To deny that he was a great fighter is disrespect.

Hopkins is in top 5 for sure. Give me the win over sturm and 2nd asswhupping of Tito and he can be one of the all time greats. I think only Hagler and Monzon were better though.

Greb would smother RJJ with power punches, they didn't call the guy "the Human Windmill" for nothing

get a life loser...u going back to fighter who never fought anybody who knew what a combanation was..get real

Hagler beat two upcoming welterweights to cement his legacy too, hopkins ud over hagler, he kayo's everyone else

hey acquiited, you're the ****ing loser!! Greb fought Gene Tunney, one of the greatest boxers of all time and destroyed him, just like he'd destroy Jones, or you!

Anyone have any clips of this guy?

Robinson, Hagler and Jones ranks before Hopkins.

I wouldn't pick anyone over Hopkins with certainty. He is rough enough to maul his way through Robinson. (If blown-up welterweight and less-skilled Carmen Basilio could do it, and if brawling, straight-forward Gene Fullmer could do it, Hopkins sure as hell could.) He is technically gifted enough to take it to Hagler and Monzon, too. Hagler had trouble with tough guys. People forget, but Vito Antuofermo gave him trouble, as did Roberto Duran. Hagler actually had to come from behind and fight like hell to salvage that one. Hagler lost some decisions early in his career to some Philadelphia tough guys, and Hopkins is the best Philadelphia tough guy since Frazier. I haven't seen enough of Monzon to make an assessment, but from what I have seen of Hopkins I know that he knows how to fight, is versatile, and is never in less-than-perfect condition. Hopkins may or may not be the # 1 guy of all time at middleweight, but he definitely is in the final running and deserves to have his name right up there next to the other top middleweight legends.

I wouldn't pick anyone over Hopkins with certainty. He is rough enough to maul his way through Robinson. (If blown-up welterweight and less-skilled Carmen Basilio could do it, and if brawling, straight-forward Gene Fullmer could do it, Hopkins sure as hell could.) He is technically gifted enough to take it to Hagler and Monzon, too. Hagler had trouble with tough guys. People forget, but Vito Antuofermo gave him trouble, as did Roberto Duran. Hagler actually had to come from behind and fight like hell to salvage that one. Hagler lost some decisions early in his career to some Philadelphia tough guys, and Hopkins is the best Philadelphia tough guy since Frazier. I haven't seen enough of Monzon to make an assessment, but from what I have seen of Hopkins I know that he knows how to fight, is versatile, and is never in less-than-perfect condition. Hopkins may or may not be the # 1 guy of all time at middleweight, but he definitely is in the final running and deserves to have his name right up there next to the other top middleweight legends.


Fullmer was not a straight-ahead brawler, although he could slug-he was fast and was an excellent boxer with a great jab. And Vito got beat badly by Hagler both times, the draw was bogus.

Hopkins-probably a top 10 guy, but nowhere near the best ever. There have been SO MANY great middleweights, from Greb, Robinson, Walker, Hagler, Monzon to Fullmer, Tiger, and Cerdan. And Hopkins' era in which he was dominant is clearly the weakest field of middleweights in history. Great great fighter but not in the league of the VERY best.

id have to go with hagler i love hopkins hes definantly one the best all time but but hagler woulda killed him

Wasn't RJJ a more dominant MW than Nard?