Hopkins/Ray Robinson....

Will it's gonna take some time for me tell you about some of Moorer's brutal knockouts, I forgotten many of these guys name, I have to look at these fights again to tell you about some of his brutal knockouts. He knocked out everybody. All I can tell you at this time, I've never seen anyone hit harder at 175, Moorer had some brutal knockouts. Also he defended his title for a long time, yea you can say he beat many bums, but still it doesn't change his dominants as an LHW. You don't have to tell me....I saw everyone of his televised fights, bro. Moorer KO'd no one at 175, who was worth a damn, with one punch. He didn't KO leslie Stewart with one punch. Swindell was never dropped. Jeff Thompson ? Ramsii Hassan ? These guys were nobodies ! You compared him to Hearns & Jackson. They KO'd world class opposition with single shots. He never did. The dude was a super hard hitter, but overrated. Spinks KO'd better guys, & with less punches, than did Moorer. That makes him a better puncher in my eyes.

This might be a bit off subject, but I'm starting to think Hopkins would've beaten the Marvelous one.

Foster hit hard, but you have to be kidding me with Spinks hitting Harder then Moorer. Moorer at 175 had Hearns or Jackson type of power in their respectable weights. Look at the single left hand Spinks took out Marvin Johnson with.....better than ANY punch Moorer threw in his entire career.It's one of the greatest punches ever thrown. Look at the overhand right hand Spinks KO'd Vonzell Johnson with...the right uppercut that took out Jerry Celestine....the triple left hook that nearly killed Mustapha Wassaja...the bombs that took out Yaqui Lopez, Murray Sutherland. The right hand that nearly separted Johnny Davis' head from his shoulders.... Did you see any of those fights/punches ? If you did, maybe you'd still think Moorer hit harder than Spinks.....but you wouldn't say "you have to be kidding me".

back to the original topic- sugar ray robinson in all honesty DID do EXACTLY what hopkins did. he won 11 or 12 rounds. the difference maker being of course that his fight was 15 rounds and he was boxing in 110 degree heat. hopkins wouldn't have made it in those conditions either. sugar ray robinson has not been eclipsed by hopkins outstanding win. nobody will eclipse ray robinson.

The thing is, if Moorer stayed at LHW for all of his career, I think he would've not lost for a decade. He was a monster at that weight. Do you think anyone hit harder then Moorer at 175?? Also I never like comparing fights, because I can come up with some real funny ones. Bob Foster......& by a mile. Foster one-punch KO'd world-class opposition. Bob Foster is easily one of the hardest hitters in boxing history, lb4lb. Michael Spinks also had more one-punch KO's,over good fighters, than did Moorer. Archie Moore may not have hit as hard as Moorer did, but he was a better puncher.

Jabs, Moorer was the hardest puncher I've ever seen in the LHW division. His chin wasn't bad in the LHW, he was also very fast. I don't agree with Spinks knocking Moorer out, I would've favored Moorer over Spinks at 175, but I would've favored Spinks over Moorer if they fought in the HW. Moorer beat NO ONE at 175, absolutely NO ONE. His biggest wins were over Swindell, & Leslie Stewart. Leslie Stewart was wasted in more decisive fashion by Donnie LaLonde than he was by Moorer. Swindell was handled easier by Prince Charles Williams than by Moorer. I see no one resembling marvin Johnson, Eddie Mustafa Muhammad, or Dwight Braxton on Moorer's 175lb resume. Not even close. Moorer, even more overrated at 175 that I thought, 10 minutes ago.

He was almost KO'd by Frankie Swindell at 175. He was knocked down in his career almost as much as Tommy Morrison & Carl The Truth Williams were. I saw Moorer at 175, a lot. His career there is incredibly overrated. Spinks would have destroyed him. Moorer was 22-0 all by ko no matter who wins someone is getting ktfo

Only Tua, Holyfield, and Foreman stopped Moorer...He has a pretty good beard dude. He was almost KO'd by Frankie Swindell at 175. He was knocked down in his career almost as much as Tommy Morrison & Carl The Truth Williams were. I saw Moorer at 175, a lot. His career there is incredibly overrated. Spinks would have destroyed him.

ok .. Michael Morrer and a cruiserweight Holyfield would have gave him all he could handle :D Truthfully.... Spinks woulda knocked Moorer out cold at 175.

Charles & Moore would have had their hands full with Spinks, believe me. A guy who decisions Eddie Mustafa Muhammad & Dwight Braxton- & never lost at 175- is not going to be easily handled by any 175lber. Spinks was a versatile, awkward fighter.....who carried legitimate one punch power in both fists. ok .. Michael Morrer and a cruiserweight Holyfield would have gave him all he could handle :D

Charles & Moore would have had their hands full with Spinks, believe me. A guy who decisions Eddie Mustafa Muhammad & Dwight Braxton- & never lost at 175- is not going to be easily handled by any 175lber. Spinks was a versatile, awkward fighter.....who carried legitimate one punch power in both fists.I am not among those polled, so, I am not one of those who think Spinks will be easy for both Charles and Moore. It is my opinion that Spinks awkward style may give the two some pause, but, I also think both will solve the problem rather well. Quawi and Eddie Mustaffa are truly quality opposition. I recall that both were in The Ring's top 20 LightHeavies ever. Can't recall their exact positions in the roll though.

A vast majority thinks so too. I saw a poll some years back that had Charles topping the list of the Greatest LighHeavies ever, followed by Archie, then Bob, then Billy. Spinks was at 5th. When asked if Ezzard could handle Spinks who had done what he had not been able to do (win the Heavyweight crown) most people replied, not only Charles but also Archie would have walked over Michael. Many were not too sure about Bob and Billy. Those who doubted Billy looked at his low KO rate, while those who suspected Bob said they were not sure because no challenger really ever tested Foster at LightHeavy. I'm not too sure, but in an edition of The Ring reflecting the opinions of its writers, also some years back, I think it had Conn at third and Bob 4th. Charles & Moore would have had their hands full with Spinks, believe me. A guy who decisions Eddie Mustafa Muhammad & Dwight Braxton- & never lost at 175- is not going to be easily handled by any 175lber. Spinks was a versatile, awkward fighter.....who carried legitimate one punch power in both fists.

Ezzard Charles would have beat Spinks at LH with one handA vast majority thinks so too. I saw a poll some years back that had Charles topping the list of the Greatest LighHeavies ever, followed by Archie, then Bob, then Billy. Spinks was at 5th. When asked if Ezzard could handle Spinks who had done what he had not been able to do (win the Heavyweight crown) most people replied, not only Charles but also Archie would have walked over Michael. Many were not too sure about Bob and Billy. Those who doubted Billy looked at his low KO rate, while those who suspected Bob said they were not sure because no challenger really ever tested Foster at LightHeavy. I'm not too sure, but in an edition of The Ring reflecting the opinions of its writers, also some years back, I think it had Conn at third and Bob 4th.

The list of great/good/above average/current/past MW's and SMW's who would have beaten the Tarver from Saturday night is so long that I don't even want to start typing it. LOL So yes, the original poster is right, let's not get carried away. who the hell is Tarver anyways :rolleyes: one big win !!!!! well 2 or 3 but he is not on the level of fighters that should bring up such a debate

Nope, I won't. Not if one is talking about a fighter who, as LightHeavy champ, "did to his rival as he pleased." (New York Times) and led on two of three judges scorecards in a challenge of the immortal Joe Louis at Heavyweight before being KOd in the thirteeth (first fight). An important matter that one should take into consideration, perhaps, is that Conn never lost as a LightHeavy. Most of his losses were at Middleweight and below, along with his losses to Louis at Heavy. Many of those who don't like Conn are quick to point to his performance in the return match vs. Louis, that resulted in the Associated Press' calling him, "The Flop of the Year." But, again, that fight was at Heavyweight. Not that my opinion really matters.:) Ezzard Charles would have beat Spinks at LH with one hand

The list of great/good/above average/current/past MW's and SMW's who would have beaten the Tarver from Saturday night is so long that I don't even want to start typing it. LOL So yes, the original poster is right, let's not get carried away.

You won't put Spinks ahead of Billy Conn, either.Nope, I won't. Not if one is talking about a fighter who, as LightHeavy champ, "did to his rival as he pleased." (New York Times) and led on two of three judges scorecards in a challenge of the immortal Joe Louis at Heavyweight before being KOd in the thirteeth (first fight). An important matter that one should take into consideration, perhaps, is that Conn never lost as a LightHeavy. Most of his losses were at Middleweight and below, along with his losses to Louis at Heavy. Many of those who don't like Conn are quick to point to his performance in the return match vs. Louis, that resulted in the Associated Press' calling him, "The Flop of the Year." But, again, that fight was at Heavyweight. Not that my opinion really matters.:)

You won't put Spinks ahead of Billy Conn, either. myself maybe :confused: but not over Archie

good post but if anyone thinks Hop is better the Ray they need to do some boxing homework :boxing:Thanks! You have entered a reply that is too short....

This was a pretty big fight, made bigger by Hopkins winning & by how he won. There will be more people reading about boxing, today, than is normally the case. I just don't like them to be even the least bit mislead... For the record- I truly believe that Bernard Hopkins was a better middleweight than Ray Robinson. Ray Robinson's lb4lb greatness has lead people to rate him as the best middleweight ever, which I don't believe he was. Lb4lb, Robinson is of course far greater than Hopkins, however.Yes, if the weight is specified, I can see the point. But I tend to view Sugar Ray in terms of his entire career. Much in the manner that I take the career of Henry Armstrong. I also agree with widely held view that Sugar Ray was at his best at Welterweight, though, again, looking at SRR as a welterweight--alone-- would leave a lot off the total picture. Hopkins spent all but a minute part of his entire career at middleweight. He is, thus, best compared to others with similar careers. The way I see it, comparisons of the sort will favor Bernard. Data is insufficient to form a solid opinion of Bernard as a LightHeavy. As far as I know he has had only two fights in that division: his debut (when he tipped the scale at 177) and the last. Such insufficiency of data however cannot prevent speculations on how he would have fared as LightHeavy. The manner that he dealt with Tarver will get a majority hyper-ventilating about the prospect. However, if he keeps to his planned retirement, the speculations will remain merely as such.