Take a look at the opponents that Hopkins has beaten since his losses to Taylor. Antonio Tarver went on to suffer lop-sided losses to Chad Dawson. Chad didn't beat him as convincingly in those fights as Hopkins did though. And then we have Winky Wright. You can make the inactivity excuse all you want. But it still doesn't change the fact that he got his shit pushed in by the Punisher and Hopkins had a lot more trouble with Winky than Paul did.
Now picture the scenario of where Paul Williams scores a dominant victory over Pavlik, which is by no means a forgone conclusion, but definitely possible. We've already seen Jermaine Taylor turn out to be a let down where the win column is concerned. Hopkins needs to hope that Chad Dawson beats Glen Johnson in the rematch which I view as a 50-50 fight. Nobody is going to give Hopkins credit for a victory over Roy Jones. Some will, but most won't. It will help his legacy in the sense that it may influence some boxing historians to rank him over Jones, who I've already got him ranked over.
Hopkins has these haters on these forums like DJtmal I think is his name. And my god, Chicano79Us is relentless. As a fan of Hopkins, I want him to silence these guys once and for all. Hopkins has also fought guys moving up in weight four times in a row when he fights Ornelas. This needs to stop. That is a good aspect about the Roy Jones rematch though. And the poster who calls himself BernardHopkins (Who I think is the real B-Hop) with the Golden Boy sig is welcome in this thread. The reason that I am making the thread I'm making is because I'm actually a Bernard Hopkins fan, and I want everybody to think highly of his resume.
What truly amazing and what people tend to forget is that this all happened past the age of 40 which is beyond his prime. It's rare for anyone to still be around at age 40. It's almost unheard of for someone to be elite past the age of 40.
That is a valid point. You have got these guys like Jermaine Taylor, Miguel Cotto, and even Manny Pacquiao (Although he is a better fighter than the two others mentioned) talking about retiring by the age of 30. That is what makes Hopkins superior in that regard.
What truly amazing and what people tend to forget is that this all happened past the age of 40 which is beyond his prime. It's rare for anyone to still be around at age 40. It's almost unheard of for someone to be elite past the age of 40.
Bernard probably isn't gonna fight again when he beats Roy...
That's on him if he doesn't. It's his choice. I can respect him going out on a high note. He already could if he wanted to because of that win over Pavlik.
If Dawson gets another gift decision against Glen Johnson, or flat out loses the fight, I think Hopkins should go after Paul Williams if Paul beats Kelly Pavlik. Who else would there be for Hopkins to fight? And I also would've rather have seen a Williams-Hopkins fight than a Jones-Hopkins fight. Williams would beat Roy Jones just like Calzaghe did. Only he would go out of his way to actually stop him and never get knocked down in the fight.
Bernard probably isn't gonna fight again when he beats Roy...
If Dawson gets another gift decision against Glen Johnson, or flat out loses the fight, I think Hopkins should go after Paul Williams if Paul beats Kelly Pavlik. Who else would there be for Hopkins to fight? And I also would've rather have seen a Williams-Hopkins fight than a Jones-Hopkins fight. Williams would beat Roy Jones just like Calzaghe did. Only he would go out of his way to actually stop him and never get knocked down in the fight.
ali's resume is starting to lose its shine as well.
foreman lost to shannon briggs
frazier had a draw with jumbo cummings
norton lost to gerry cooney
liston lost to leotis martin
pretty flimsy if you break it down. i cant believe they didn't go undefeated for the rest of their lives.
Not everyone has the resiliance to do big things after a loss, especially, the 12 round schoolings Hopkins gives.
Michael Nunn was #1 P4P before he got knokced out by James Toney and he couldn't do anything after.
What matters is what he was when he got beat, what happens after is just a bonus.
Take a look at the opponents that Hopkins has beaten since his losses to Taylor. Antonio Tarver went on to suffer lop-sided losses to Chad Dawson. Chad didn't beat him as convincingly in those fights as Hopkins did though. And then we have Winky Wright. You can make the inactivity excuse all you want. But it still doesn't change the fact that he got his shit pushed in by the Punisher and Hopkins had a lot more trouble with Winky than Paul did.
Now picture the scenario of where Paul Williams scores a dominant victory over Pavlik, which is by no means a forgone conclusion, but definitely possible. We've already seen Jermaine Taylor turn out to be a let down where the win column is concerned. Hopkins needs to hope that Chad Dawson beats Glen Johnson in the rematch which I view as a 50-50 fight. Nobody is going to give Hopkins credit for a victory over Roy Jones. Some will, but most won't. It will help his legacy in the sense that it may influence some boxing historians to rank him over Jones, who I've already got him ranked over.
Hopkins has these haters on these forums like DJtmal I think is his name. And my god, Chicano79Us is relentless. As a fan of Hopkins, I want him to silence these guys once and for all. Hopkins has also fought guys moving up in weight four times in a row when he fights Ornelas. This needs to stop. That is a good aspect about the Roy Jones rematch though. And the poster who calls himself BernardHopkins (Who I think is the real B-Hop) with the Golden Boy sig is welcome in this thread. The reason that I am making the thread I'm making is because I'm actually a Bernard Hopkins fan, and I want everybody to think highly of his resume.
For some reason or another, fighters are not the same after they fight B-Hop!
After?????????
Margarito got his ass kicked by an older guy who his hardcore fans referred to as a tune-up fight before hand with Mosley. After Margarito beat Cotto he came on BoxingScene and said, "I'll gladly fight Manny Pacquiao." And here is another one from that one interview on the Fightfan web site, "I've got no score to settle with Paul Williams." But of course, these kind of things don't apply to the fighters you root for. You defend Margarito like the Ricans do with Juan Ma.
Its not ok to talk shit about someone who is so called a "great" but yet not really challenge himself??
I'm putting Hopkins on the spot somewhat in this thread. I know you don't like him, and nothing will change that. :moon: But in order for there to be anything worthwhile out there for Hopkins after he disposes of Roid Jones, Dawson needs to hold up his end and beat Johnson convincingly in the rematch. Do you think he is going to do that? I've got my doubts unlike a lot of people. And Johnson is a guy that Hopkins has already dominated.
iceta i can respect this thread and i'm not here to trash it or hate on hopkins, just state my opinion...
you should want your favorite fighter to fight and beat the best in his weight class or higher or die tryin'....not make a name off of big name smaller fighters that, whether most of his diehards like it or not, are two divisions smaller...then think you belong on a list with names like sugar ray, duran, hearns, hagler, monzon, ali, etc.
as far as his great move up to 175, he was only moving back to his natural division...everybody knew by the time he got to tarver, tarver was hanging out on movie sets with stallone...not the same fighter...winky wright and pavlik were both slow and sluggish at a weight they never officially fought at, and calzaghe once again proved that when nard fights somebody close to his size or bigger with equal talent, he loses...so yeah when you look at the resume it looks great on paper, but look at the actual fighters and it pales in comparison...
How could this be his "natural" division when he spent centuries at 160?
winky wright and pavlik were both slow and sluggish at a weight they never officially fought at
could write an essay on this thread...but i dont feel like it
just wanted to point this out, that you are implying that pavlik would have won at a lower weight, or would have given hopkins more trouble. both of those statements are false. wouldnt matter, pavlik looked the same as he always does to me, he looked slow cause bhop was faster and was taking pavlik to school. there is no shame in losing to bhop.
also tarver was supposed to beat b-hop, pavlik was supposed to beat b-hop, trinidad was supposed to beat b-hop - all of those fighters have made legit names for themselves, at one point or another. b-hop was supposed to lose to all three, but he DOMINATED.
its like trying to take away the de la hoya win from pacquiao. regardless of de la hoya's status on fight night (none of these fighters b hop fought were near de la hoya's condition...) pac stunned the world by annihilating him. you can't take away an upset from a fighter.