Bernard Hopkins took calculated risks, he is 1 of the most overrated modern ATG

[-PBP-]

can you read...i said the wbo wasnt legit then, and it isnt now imo

So we're making progress. Joe Calzaghe was not a legitimate world champion. He held a title that we both considered not to be legitimate. Paper title holder.

he was a titlist...if you're not the undisputed champion or lineal you are a titlist

More progress. Antonio Tarver was the lineal 175 pound champion. Your criteria, not mine.

So what we can establish is, Bernard Hopkins had 2 options:

1. Move up 1 division to fight for a not legitimate paper title against a realtively unknown fighter; or

2. Move up 2 weight divisions to fight for the legitimate world championship against a fighter that knocked out Roy Jones Jr.; the pound for pound #1 fighter on the planet at the time.

As far as risk taking and legacy at that particular point in time (we haven't seen Calzaghe demolish Lacy and Kessler yet), this is a no brainer.



Now let's resolve our other issues:

the fighters make the belts...he fought good fighters regardless with or without the trinket,

therealpugilist the guy that says GGG's entire resume is trash because he hasn't won a legitimate lineal world championship, now holds the opinion that "the fighters make the belts." Unbelievable 180 on your part bro. You write off Hopkins 20 title defenses as trash. You write off GGG's run through the 160 division as trash. Because they did not win the lineal title.

But win it comes to Joe Calzaghe, on January 1, 2006, "the fighters make the belts. He beat good fighters." Unbelievable.

now answer mine
Is GGG a legit world champion? he is "unified"

But bro, you said keep that hypejob's name out of your thread. LMAO!!!!!! Now because I exposed your contradicting, inconsistent ass, you want to run back to GGG talk.

So let's talk GGG.

GGG is a legitimate world champion because he's demolished many of the top contenders in the MW division. He holds all of the meaningful belts (Remember, the WBO is NOT LEGITIMATE (your words not mine)

Wait a minute Mr. Pugilist.......Let's look at what you're saying.

1. According to you:

can you read...i said the wbo wasnt legit then, and it isnt now imo

So Billy Joe Saunders is not a legitimate title holder


2. According to you:

he was a titlist...if you're not the undisputed champion or lineal you are a titlist

So if the WBO is not legitimate, the undisputed champion holds the WBA, WBC and IBF?

Guess which titles GGG holds?

Hello Mr. Undisputed champion per Mr. Pugilists criteria:




I can't wait to see the way you weave your way outta this one. Somebody get me some popcorn!!!!

[-PBP-]

Of course he was. But Golovkin isn't. Something something poor competition something something boardrooms something something please don't remember that I said Golovkin was scared of Lemieux.

And Toney was better than Hopkins despite inconsistent performances because he beat better fighters. But Calzaghe was better than Tarver in 2006 because Tarver was too inconsistent, and it doesn't matter that he beat better fighters.

The dude mumbled and stumbled so much that he just indirectly acknowledged GGG as the undisputed, legitimate middleweight champion.

[therealpugilist]

So we're making progress. Joe Calzaghe was not a legitimate world champion. He held a title that we both considered not to be legitimate. Paper title holder.



More progress. Antonio Tarver was the lineal 175 pound champion. Your criteria, not mine.

So what we can establish is, Bernard Hopkins had 2 options:

1. Move up 1 division to fight for a not legitimate paper title against a realtively unknown fighter; or

2. Move up 2 weight divisions to fight for the legitimate world championship against a fighter that knocked out Roy Jones Jr.; the pound for pound #1 fighter on the planet at the time.

As far as risk taking and legacy at that particular point in time (we haven't seen Calzaghe demolish Lacy and Kessler yet), this is a no brainer.



Now let's resolve our other issues:



therealpugilist the guy that says GGG's entire resume is trash because he hasn't won a legitimate lineal world championship, now holds the opinion that "the fighters make the belts." Unbelievable 180 on your part bro. You write off Hopkins 20 title defenses as trash. You write off GGG's run through the 160 division as trash. Because they did not win the lineal title.

But win it comes to Joe Calzaghe, on January 1, 2006, "the fighters make the belts. He beat good fighters." Unbelievable.



But bro, you said keep that hypejob's name out of your thread. LMAO!!!!!! Now because I exposed your contradicting, inconsistent ass, you want to run back to GGG talk.

So let's talk GGG.

GGG is a legitimate world champion because he's demolished many of the top contenders in the MW division. He holds all of the meaningful belts (Remember, the WBO is NOT LEGITIMATE (your words not mine)

Wait a minute Mr. Pugilist.......Let's look at what you're saying.

1. According to you:



So Billy Joe Saunders is not a legitimate title holder


2. According to you:



So if the WBO is not legitimate, the undisputed champion holds the WBA, WBC and IBF?

Guess which titles GGG holds?

Hello Mr. Undisputed champion per Mr. Pugilists criteria:




I can't wait to see the way you weave your way outta this one. Somebody get me some popcorn!!!!

you're not unified if you didnt fight an opponent for your titles, nice try

GGG is a titlists with 3 trinkets....he only fought for one belt in the ring

[therealpugilist]

The dude mumbled and stumbled so much that he just indirectly acknowledged GGG as the undisputed, legitimate middleweight champion.

no you idiots cant comprehend so you put words in peoples mouth

before he fought lacy he was a titlist just like GGG is a titlist now....GGG has not fought the other highest ranked guys to be legitimately undisputed

he only fought for 1 belt in the ring.....GGG literally has one of the least meaningful "unified" titles of all time

the MFER only fought for 1 out 3 belts he holds...thank you come again

[-PBP-]

you're not unified if you didnt fight an opponent for your titles, nice try

GGG is a titlists with 3 trinkets....he only fought for one belt in the ring

Official definition of Undisputed champion - Holds the WBC, IBF, WBA and WBO Belts

therealpugilist - The WBO is not legitimate (your words not mine. You said this)

Undisputed champion per therealpugilist - Holds the WBC, IBF and WBA belts

Gennady "GGG" Golovkin - Holds the WBC, IBF and WBA Belts

Undisputed champion per therealpugilist - Gennady "GGG" Golovkin


Ain't nobody putting words into your mouth main man. That's what you said.

no you idiots cant comprehend so you put words in peoples mouth

NSB...Did I put words into therealpugiist 's mouth? Or did he actually say that:

1. Undsputed or lineal is a legitimate champion
2. The WBO is illegitimate?

Come on son. Don't play me like that.

before he fought lacy he was a titlist just like GGG is a titlist now

NO NO NO..You just said the WBO was not legitimate. Now you are calling him a titlist. Pugilist I NEED SOME CONSISTENCY BRO!!! Your killing me right now.

A few minutes ago it was:

[quote]

......so fighting an undefeated world champion (in reference to Joe Calzaghe), one weight class up is pointless....ok

You called Joe Calzaghe and undefeated world champion. Then you say the WBO is not legitimate. Now you turn back and call him a titlist.

Dude is ALL OVER THE PLACE.


And why would Hopkins move up to fight for a title you don't even consider to be legitimate? Come on man.

....GGG has not fought the other highest ranked guys to be legitimately undisputed

"Hi, I'm therealpugilist and I make up definitions of undisputed and rewrite history when I get my ass kicked in boxing debates."

he only fought for 1 belt in the ring.....GGG literally has one of the least meaningful "unified" titles of all time

the MFER only fought for 1 out 3 belts he holds...thank you come again

But bro, you said a legitimate world champion is either undisputed or lineal. GGG is undisputed by YOUR DEFINITION.


Where is the consistency bro? No wonder you love inconsistent fighters like James Toney.

[IronDanHamza]

you didnt follow him, admit it and move on.....tell me what Im revising? that I prefered he fight Calzaghe and his style was tougher for him than tarver? were they not one weight apart for years? Was calzaghe not a titleholder since 1997?

moving on bro, its not my fault you didnt know who calzaghe was in 2006 or before then

GGG is a paper champion, its not stopping people from drooling over him and wanting to see him fight people from 154-175....moving on

I absolutely did follow him.

What you are revising is history. You are trying to claim that Calzaghe was a better threat/fight than Tarver at the time when that absolutely was not the case.

He was a title holder from 1997 yes, the WBO title that wasn't even considered a legitimate title and he won it by beating Eubank for the vacant title when Eubank wasn't even ranked in the top 10.

In 2006, Calzaghe had ZERO wins over top 5 ranked opponents. Yes, ZERO.

Antonio Tarver was the #1 LHW and a P4P top 5 fighter.

Nothing more to be said on the matter.

[IronDanHamza]

no body with common sense would put Tarver top 5 p4p when he had one big win over jones over a washed up roy jones and lost to friggin glen johnson 3 fights prior to losing to Hopkins'

Johnson was no world beater, his claim to fame is beating a gun shy jones post tarver ko, and lost most of his other big fights, some close losses some clear.


come one dude, did magazines and message boards control your common sense? Just because ring magazine or who ever you read had this guy top 5 over one win doesnt mean everyone else thought that highly of him when it was fighters on the top longer in the sport still kicking butt.


ring magazine has GGG top 3 today, as does this site...i have a brain of my own...dude isnt proven enough to even be top 10 let alone anything top 5 when other fighters take risks and he doesnt

He was universally considered to be a P4P fighter and the #1 LHW in the world. Fact.

Joe Calzaghe was an unknown paper champion - Fact.

[IronDanHamza]

This beating is hideous. Inhumane.

This guy really said that the Lineal Title is the only title that matters and paper titles don't count.

Calzaghe in 2006 - Paper champion one weight class above

Tarver in 2006 - Lineal Champion 2 weight classes above.

[IronDanHamza]

no you idiots cant comprehend so you put words in peoples mouth

before he fought lacy he was a titlist just like GGG is a titlist now....GGG has not fought the other highest ranked guys to be legitimately undisputed

he only fought for 1 belt in the ring.....GGG literally has one of the least meaningful "unified" titles of all time

the MFER only fought for 1 out 3 belts he holds...thank you come again

What you just described about GGG is literally exactly the same as Calzaghe in 2006.

Calzaghe in 2006 fought zero fighters ranked in the top 5. He was the WBO champion that he won vacant vs an unranked fighter.

Address your hypocrisy.

[-PBP-]

What you just described about GGG is literally exactly the same as Calzaghe in 2006.

Calzaghe in 2006 fought zero fighters ranked in the top 5. He was the WBO champion that he won vacant vs an unranked fighter.

Address your hypocrisy.

GGG only beat bums with head on center of defense and deliberate styles. Joe Calzaghe beat a lot of great fighters. You guys just haven't heard of them because you weren't following boxing back then.