Bob Fosters LHW Reign Vs Bernard Hopkins MW Reign. Overrated?

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Slightly overrated maybe as far as his spot in top 10s but I have Hopkins top 5 MW because he dominated everybody he could at MW. I dont take much stock in his loss to Jones because he was green and that loss probably made him into the ATG he is today.

I actually think Hopkins could of beaten Tony, McCaullen, and the other solid MWs of the 90s if he peaked around then. Idk I just think Hopkins could have won a close decision to Toney.


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

I agree about hopkins beating toney,, Toney was just too lazy most of the time to keep up with hopkins,,
That said, i think that the toney that fought mccallum would beat hopkins, but toney only really ever lived up to his talent in those 2 mccallum fights,,

For the record i think mccallum could beat hopkins, but i favor hopkins over G-man, euabnks, watson, benn, collins,

[IronDanHamza]

Slightly overrated maybe as far as his spot in top 10s but I have Hopkins top 5 MW because he dominated everybody he could at MW. I dont take much stock in his loss to Jones because he was green and that loss probably made him into the ATG he is today.

I actually think Hopkins could of beaten Tony, McCaullen, and the other solid MWs of the 90s if he peaked around then. Idk I just think Hopkins could have won a close decision to Toney.


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

I think neither have the reigns to warrant Top 5 calibur in either division. Especially Middleweight considering how deep the division is.

[Humean]

Foster was an excellent boxer, and much more than a pure power guy. The only time I saw him outboxed was by Ali, and Ali's natural size advantage had plenty to do with that.

From what I can see on video, Foster could win a fight with his jab alone. I don't understand the interpretation of him as just a puncher.

If you take away something from any fighter they are not going to be as successful. That apply's to all fighters. I don't understand that logic. You can't penalize a fighters boxing skills just because he's knocking his opponents out. Obviously Foster was setting up these punches by boxing. It's not like he was running in with wild punches and no boxing skills.

I don't think anyone would argue that Foster didn't have good skills, that he was some kind of light heavyweight version of Max Baer or something similar. However discussions about Foster involve his place in the very best of the history of the light heavyweight division. In this context I don't think his skills were up there with the very best and that his exceptional power was a very important factor in his success along with fighting in a weak era. If his skillset was as excellent as you think then you'd have to imagine he could have outboxed some of the finest light heavyweights even if he had only 25-50% of the power he had and I for one don't think he would. That is not a claim against Foster in the sense that no apologies should be made for him having amazing power but I don't think his skills should be elevated higher than they were. To me there are some similarities between Bob Foster and Sandy Saddler although Foster certainly had more refined skills than Saddler. Both were really big and powerful in their respective divisions and both had these long and gangly arms and bodies that made them look ungainly.

[Scott9945]

I don't think anyone would argue that Foster didn't have good skills, that he was some kind of light heavyweight version of Max Baer or something similar. However discussions about Foster involve his place in the very best of the history of the light heavyweight division. In this context I don't think his skills were up there with the very best and that his exceptional power was a very important factor in his success along with fighting in a weak era. If his skillset was as excellent as you think then you'd have to imagine he could have outboxed some of the finest light heavyweights even if he had only 25-50% of the power he had and I for one don't think he would. That is not a claim against Foster in the sense that no apologies should be made for him having amazing power but I don't think his skills should be elevated higher than they were. To me there are some similarities between Bob Foster and Sandy Saddler although Foster certainly had more refined skills than Saddler. Both were really big and powerful in their respective divisions and both had these long and gangly arms and bodies that made them look ungainly.

Despite his one punch power reputation, Bob Foster was a true boxer/puncher. He was very deliberate in boxing and setting up his opponents into walking into a big shot. But Foster would box all 15 rounds with no problem if he needed to. The only time I remember him being aggressive was against DePaula (who rushed him from the opening bell) and Rondon (which was a grudge fight as Foster deeply resented Rondon's WBA title). Foster was not the boxer that Conn, Loughran, or Charles were, but he was way above Max Baer in boxing skills.