Hopkins Should Be Ahead of Floyd on Any All Time List

What's your ATG top 20? I don't have a specific Top 20. I have a Top 10; 1. Robinson 2. Greb 3. Charles 4. Langford 5. Armstrong 6. B. Leonard 7. Fitzsimmons 8. Duran 9. Moore 10. Pep Then there's the likes of Walker Gans R. Leonard McLarnin Ross Ali Louis Canzoneri Gavilan Tunney That's just off the top of my head, that second 10. That's not necessarily who I'd have in the Top 20, just 10 fighters that came to my head first that I believe are Top 20-25 calibur. That's without including the likes of Hagler, Hearns, Arguello, Whitaker, Holyfield etc etc. Mayweather and Hopkins are great fighters but they aren't close to Top 20.

I've already given you multiple things Mayweather has done that no one else has. It's clear to see. The fact is both Hopkins and Mayweathers "unprecedented accomplishments" mean little, looks good on paper. But the facts are that their resumes are not close to Top 20 caliber. It's funny that I'm being called biased but I'm clearly stating Mayweather is not close to the top 20. I may be a fan of his but I can identify where he is and isn't. And Top 20 he isn't. Neither is Hopkins. Play with people my own age :lol1: that's funny. I wish there were more people my age on here. What's your ATG top 20?

I'm gona end the argument here, considering you're not intelligent enough to tie my laces but I will end with, no, Floyd has not done anything in the ring which is unprecedented. 5 weight world champion? SRL had done that 2 decades earlier. Winning streak? It's not even the longest in his own era lol What are these accomplishments and records Floyd has that other fighters don't? Hopkins has the longest reign as mw champion ever, the most title defences, he has been the oldest world champion in history...twice. First man to beat and stop TIto. Possibly the 2nd or 3rd best resume of any fighter 40+, ever. Man....don't you feel embarrassed that I've outsmarted you so often? damn boy. Anyway, that's enough of that, I'm tired of you, go play with people your own age. :usa2: I've already given you multiple things Mayweather has done that no one else has. It's clear to see. The fact is both Hopkins and Mayweathers "unprecedented accomplishments" mean little, looks good on paper. But the facts are that their resumes are not close to Top 20 caliber. It's funny that I'm being called biased but I'm clearly stating Mayweather is not close to the top 20. I may be a fan of his but I can identify where he is and isn't. And Top 20 he isn't. Neither is Hopkins. Play with people my own age :lol1: that's funny. I wish there were more people my age on here.

depends on your criteria Resume: i favor hopkins H2H: I favor floyd Legacy: I favor Floyd since he is the #1 draw and face of boxing for his era,, Hopkins never did that.... Both guys are great fighters,, Hopkins better resume, but floyd a better fighter and better legacy so i have to favor floyd on this

100% agree.

Floyd is far beyond Hopkings.If they would do a open weight fight Floyd would mercy kill him.Hopkings has lost to all time greats like RJJ and Calzaghe and would definetly loose to Ward GGG Canelo Floyd K2 etc.

The trouble is, when people like you try and make that point it falls flat. He's ok, not half as bad as most of your lot, but still pretty biased. He is crazy biased. I'm not even a die hard Hopkins fan, I haven't enjoyed his style for years now but I have mad respect for him, same with Calzaghe and Lewis.

LOL at this guy saying that IronDan is not intelligent. Anyone (quality poster that is) that pays attention to this site knows that IronDan knows his history regarding the sport and the guy is a straight shooter, period. The trouble is, when people like you try and make that point it falls flat. He's ok, not half as bad as most of your lot, but still pretty biased.

LOL at this guy saying that IronDan is not intelligent. Anyone (quality poster that is) that pays attention to this site knows that IronDan knows his history regarding the sport and the guy is a straight shooter, period.

He didn't beat Calzaghe so that's irrelevant. It's still only 4 is you include his loss to Calzaghe. The situation is not exactly the same but like I said, you can find an eqivalent. The reasoning you use to have Hopkins in the Top 20, all these "accomplishments" and "records" that "no one else has done" you can do the exact same for Mayweater. That's a fact. I'm gona end the argument here, considering you're not intelligent enough to tie my laces but I will end with, no, Floyd has not done anything in the ring which is unprecedented. 5 weight world champion? SRL had done that 2 decades earlier. Winning streak? It's not even the longest in his own era lol What are these accomplishments and records Floyd has that other fighters don't? Hopkins has the longest reign as mw champion ever, the most title defences, he has been the oldest world champion in history...twice. First man to beat and stop TIto. Possibly the 2nd or 3rd best resume of any fighter 40+, ever. Man....don't you feel embarrassed that I've outsmarted you so often? damn boy. Anyway, that's enough of that, I'm tired of you, go play with people your own age. :usa2:

So because gatti was a "WARRIOR" that was a good win? And because Oscar was the richest fight ever means something in terms of resume? Again, you dont understand what resume means in boxing. its WHO you fight WHEN you fight them...not how much money the fight made, nor how many paper champs you beat and certainly not if a guy is a "WARRIOR" Now you need to go look up the definition of "champ" He is a HOFer right ? He must have been pretty good to get inducted to HOF,right ?:boxing::boxing::boxing:

Mayweather's a better fighter with a better resume who took risks moving up in weight that Hopkins never took, so I don't know what you're talking about. Hopkins has more longevity...then again Floyd was a world champion first in 1998 and Hopkins first in 1995. So he only has a few years championship longevity on him at that. ...Then there's the losses of course. You know what? Ima have to go with Floyd on this one. Sorry.

Come on man, you're gona count WInky and not Calzaghe? And I don't think I said Hopkins beat potentially 5 HOFers, I said he faced (if I did say beat then it was an error). And no, the Mayweather situation is not the same. He didn't beat Calzaghe so that's irrelevant. It's still only 4 is you include his loss to Calzaghe. The situation is not exactly the same but like I said, you can find an eqivalent. The reasoning you use to have Hopkins in the Top 20, all these "accomplishments" and "records" that "no one else has done" you can do the exact same for Mayweater. That's a fact. You use one thing for one and another thing for another. The facts are, neither are Top 20 nor close. May has never faced a guy he would have been an underdog to or a guy who could be considered a physical threat, not on the same level as guys like Tito or Pavlik. All of these wins came when most fighters are on there downward slope....you know what I could go through all the arguments with as I have done for what seems like an eternity. The fact is you think Mayweather beating old ass Mosley, Ortizz, Guerrero, shopworn Cotto and fat Marquez make him close to Hopkins then you really don't know much about the sport. You are what I call a May/Pac fan lol Good luck to you Again, yes he has. He's fought both that fit that criteria. It's nice you putting little names infront of those fighters. You could do the same for Hopkins but I won't do that. I am a Mayweather fan, yes. And? Despite being a fan, I'm still in touch with reality and that's the fact that Mayweather isn't close to the Top 20 right now. You're the one who thinks Hopkins is a Top 20 ATG which is of course, absurd.

Tito wasn't physically bigger than Hopkins hell the only reason Tito was the favorite is because people barely knew who B-Hop was; nor was Oscar. You are making points that suit your argument. You didn't say Oscar won the WBO not WBA title from Felix Sturm in a fight most people feel he lost and if Oscar was so comfortable at MW why didn't he ever fight there again. You seemed not to mention Winky hadn't fought within over year when they fought and I believe that was at 164. Pascal and Cloud are the same level as Ortiz and Guerrero.

You're the one bringing up other peoples opinions. "Tons of people rank Hopkins in the Top 20". Well, as do people of Floyd. No one considered Hopkins a Top 50 fighter 10 years ago, let alone 30. Everything you're saying you can say the eqivalent for Mayweather. Mayweather has beaten more past/present/future world Champions than almost anyone. Those guys you listed, atleast 5 of HOF'ers? They only definite HOF'ers on that list who Hopkins beat are Tito and Oscar. I count 2. Let's give Winky Wright the benefit of the doubt. That's 3. Mayweather's beaten more future HOF'ers than Hopkins has. Not that that means anything, just another "accomplishment" you can include for Mayweather that you have for Hopkins. Everything you use as reasoning and "accomplishment" to justify Hopkins being a Top 20 ATG you can have one for Mayweather. But Hopkins is Top 20 and Mayweather is lower 40's? Look at that resume you just presented. It's clearly not a Top 20 calibur resume nor close. Neither Floyd or Hopkins are close to Top 20. Come on man, you're gona count WInky and not Calzaghe? And I don't think I said Hopkins beat potentially 5 HOFers, I said he faced (if I did say beat then it was an error). And no, the Mayweather situation is not the same. May has never faced a guy he would have been an underdog to or a guy who could be considered a physical threat, not on the same level as guys like Tito or Pavlik. All of these wins came when most fighters are on there downward slope....you know what I could go through all the arguments with as I have done for what seems like an eternity. The fact is you think Mayweather beating old ass Mosley, Ortizz, Guerrero, shopworn Cotto and fat Marquez make him close to Hopkins then you really don't know much about the sport. You are what I call a May/Pac fan lol Good luck to you

I'm a fan of both but Mayweather is ahead of Hopkins. Hopkins had great wins against Oscar and Trinidad but had no business losing to Jermaine Taylor. Taylor was a HBO/Dibella (former HBO employee) hype job. Even though I thought Hopkins won the fights, he kept it too close. To me, losing to Taylor would be the equivalent of Mayweather losing to Guererro (without the hype). Hopkins also had no business losing to Calzaghe. That was a winnable fight for Hopkins but for some reason he cruised his way through the fight (much like he did against Taylor), and complained about not getting the win. Again, that would be like Mayweather losing to Hatton. Let's not forget Hatton having all those British fans singing and carrying on. Mayweather had way more pressure on him against Hatton than Hopkins did fighting Calzaghe. For every great win Hopkins had, there were the stinkers. Add the Winky Wright fight to the two I mentioned above. If Mayweather beats Canelo, there is no way they're even close.

First point, opinions, they're like ass holes.... by 2000 its arguable if someone had hopkins belows top 30 but imo that's ridiculous, it's more a list built on star power and i've seen that espn list, they had floyd that high before he had faced some of his best opponents lol You're the one bringing up other peoples opinions. "Tons of people rank Hopkins in the Top 20". Well, as do people of Floyd. No one considered Hopkins a Top 50 fighter 10 years ago, let alone 30. anyway by the start of the millenium, people who know boxing knew how great hopkins was, he was THE man at 160, didn't have a tonne of great fighters but did h ave a boxfull of tough contenders, champs and former/future champs, he made the most of what he had. since the turn of the century, hopkins has fought (only listing his best wins here): holmes trinidad joppy oscar taylor tarver wright calzaghe pavlik pascal dawson each one of those fighters was a champion, present/future/past at least 5 of those fighters are HOFers 2 are lineal champs pascal is still going strong today and at the time was THE lhw on the planet, is a top 5 guy now. Dawson is one of the leading lhws of the last half a decade. pavlik the man at 160 ( i know fight happened higher) orcar and tito may be famous for being mws but tito and ripped a whole in the division by KOing Joppy i think it was. oscar had just won one of the other important belts, the wba from sturm. they were guys who could handle the 160 weight. he beat a legit lhw in tarver too...actually he took the man to school. he lost to taylor yes but both fights were damn close. the calzaghe fight was horrible and should have been a draw. the winky fight too was horrible viewing but hopkins won handily. at 46, he beat the lineal champ at 175 twice imo, the second time round he almost made it look easy at times. that's one heck of a list of top wins and a great stretch of the best fights available. hopkins ain't ducked nobody. he fought the best and more often than not won...when he did lose, it wasn't exactly unanimous. taht puts him ahead of anyone else in the last 20 years, may be jones and pac come close, jones more on his seeming invincibility during the 90s but lacks majorly in resume. Everything you're saying you can say the eqivalent for Mayweather. Mayweather has beaten more past/present/future world Champions than almost anyone. Those guys you listed, atleast 5 of HOF'ers? They only definite HOF'ers on that list who Hopkins beat are Tito and Oscar. I count 2. Let's give Winky Wright the benefit of the doubt. That's 3. Mayweather's beaten more future HOF'ers than Hopkins has. Not that that means anything, just another "accomplishment" you can include for Mayweather that you have for Hopkins. Everything you use as reasoning and "accomplishment" to justify Hopkins being a Top 20 ATG you can have one for Mayweather. But Hopkins is Top 20 and Mayweather is lower 40's? Look at that resume you just presented. It's clearly not a Top 20 calibur resume nor close. Neither Floyd or Hopkins are close to Top 20.

Hopkins > Mayweather

Whatever the consensus was at the time, has Floyd ever been in the same spots as bhop prefight where people thought he was in serious trouble? Only for Bhop to prove everyone wrong. I guess thats my bigger issue, Floyd always has everything so damn easy. He never pushes himself. Who between 140-154 would be the favorite over Floyd? you can not blame him for being the best

Whatever the consensus was at the time, has Floyd ever been in the same spots as bhop prefight where people thought he was in serious trouble? Only for Bhop to prove everyone wrong. I guess thats my bigger issue, Floyd always has everything so damn easy. He never pushes himself.