B Hop and Hagler

Hagler and Monzon built a significant part of their respective legacies by beating smaller GREAT fighters. Hopkins is no different.

he didn't ruin tito. he beat tito but he didn't ruin him. in tito's fight after hopkins against cherifi (a top level natural middleweight) , tito still had it. retirement ruined tito. tito would've beat every 160 guy at the time NOT named bernard hopkins. though a natural welterweight , tito had middleweight power and his skills are very underrated. just because he lost to hopkins doesn't mean he had crappy boxing skills. look at how bad he made joe calzaghe look and this was years after he beat tito. tito is so underrated nowadays...... Very nicely put.

I don't think much of the win over DLH. DLH never proved much above 154 other than the fact that he could be fat and get a gift over Felix Sturm. Although to be fair, Hopkins did agree to a catchweight of 158 and made 156. The win over Tito, however, was a great win. I don't like how it's so often underrated by saying "Tito was a welterweight". Tito WAS a welterweight, a huge one, who'd left the division in 1997. He came back to chase a big money fight with DLH. I remember Merchant saying "Trinidad really should be at 154" Tito had weight problems at 147 for years, he was a big welter. Tito had just destroyed the consensus #2 MW in the world in Joppy and was a 3-1 favorite over Hopkins. 15 of 20 polled by The Ring picked Tito. And it wasn't like Hopkins beat Tito with his size, he outboxed, out-skilled, out-thought Trinidad. That was a great win.

Hagler fought better opposition on the road to the MW title, and beat some solid middleweights (Hamsho for example) as champ as well. Both guys are considered greats by most observers anyway, regardless of those who criticize Hopkins for having his biggest wins beating smaller guys.