Hopkins Middleweight Resume

it's overrated and garbage, similar to Wrapidad's resume at WW. Alot of defenses against bums Bums? No... No names? Yes

Hopkins schools Golovkin though. At any weight, prime vs prime at 160, current Hopkins at 170-175. Fantasy land shouldn't get you credit. This is what we call Low IQ, low information posters who bring nothing to the discussion. Disregard this post. Because I don't see the same thing as you? Just cause my opinion isn't the same as yours doesn't mean I have a low IQ. I look at it close and it's not all that but I still think he's a great boxer.

That sir, is a GOD tier resume. Lulz Yes it is and so are alot of the guys i listed in the top 20 who never get mentioned. Its depressing really when RING lists Felix Sturm in their top 10 and someone like Teddy Yarosz probably wasn't even thought of when compiling their farcical list. Oh absolutely. It really grinds at me when I see bogus title defences used to justify something. Title defences mean nothing as far as I'm concerned. Hopkins MW resume leaves a lot to be desired considering his era was undoubtedly weak. But in fairness to him he cleaned it out and deserves credit for that IMO. I think leaving him outside the top 15 is unfair. Really great posts from you here, Yarosz another underrated guy who gets little recognition these days. I was just debating in the History Section with someone who said Lytell and Booker aren't HOF caliber, ridiculous isn't it? Most definitely and Booker was probably better than Lytell he's a real 'what if' because of his career getting cut short due to vision problems that eventually left him blind. Booker beat Marshall, Williams, Moore, Shorty Hogue twice and Chmielewski. Hogue himself beat Moore twice, Marshall and Booker while Chmielewski beat Abrams and Lytell twice. Booker's wins over Moore and Williams came right at the end of his career when his vision was already deteriorating beating them at his worst compared to Lytell whose best wins against Williams and Cocoa Kid came when they were past prime and near the end of their careers. As for Hopkins his dedication, consistancy, clearing out his era, and h2h ability in a fantasy scenario earns much respect but i honestly think placing him in the top 15 is unjustifiable.

Narvaez resume at 115 is better

Yes those oldtimey guys from the 20's and 30's sure are funny aren't they. Guess what, your idol Bernard idolizes guys like Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Lloyd Marshall and has spent his career trying to emulate them while boxers like Teddy Yarosz and Ken Overlin have wins over them. Matter of fact a past prime Teddy Yarosz 14 months away from retirement beat a prime Lloyd Marshall who was a natural Lightheavyweight and considered one of the best members of Murderers Row holding wins over Charley Burley, Ezzard Charles, Holman Williams, Jake Lamotta. In addition to Lloyd Marshall Yarosz also has wins over Archie Moore, Billy Conn, Ken Overlin x2, Solly Kreiger, Babe Risko, Vince Dundee x3, Tommy Freeman, Jimmy Smith, etc. Makes Hopkins resume look entirely unworthy to discuss in the same breathe to be honest. Just because you're unaware of something don't automatically doubt its veracity. The second Kid Chocolate and a southpaw too. I understand that when making all time great ratings its very subjective but i think alot of people place too much emphasis on certain statistics like number of title defenses or their own personal preference to a boxers style. Are Abraham and Felix Sturm all time great middleweights because of their number of title defenses? RING magazine thinks so and has both in their top 10. Oh absolutely. It really grinds at me when I see bogus title defences used to justify something. Title defences mean nothing as far as I'm concerned. Hopkins MW resume leaves a lot to be desired considering his era was undoubtedly weak. But in fairness to him he cleaned it out and deserves credit for that IMO. I think leaving him outside the top 15 is unfair. Really great posts from you here, Yarosz another underrated guy who gets little recognition these days. I was just debating in the History Section with someone who said Lytell and Booker aren't HOF caliber, ridiculous isn't it?

Lol @ Hopkins not being a top 20 MW. Pulling up names from like 1920 haha Anyways, a lot of those guys hopkins beat who knows what they would have become. Joe Lipsey for example was a great amatuer, undefeated as a pro and Hopkins sent him into retirement. It also took Hopkins a while to unify because don king wouldn't let his fighters, the other title holders near him, not until finally the MW tournament and that was only because he was so confident Trinidad would win. At the end of the day Hopkins fought all the top guys, hardly lost a round in a ten year span until finally he was 40. Great stuff :boxing: Yes those oldtimey guys from the 20's and 30's sure are funny aren't they. Guess what, your idol Bernard idolizes guys like Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Lloyd Marshall and has spent his career trying to emulate them while boxers like Teddy Yarosz and Ken Overlin have wins over them. Matter of fact a past prime Teddy Yarosz 14 months away from retirement beat a prime Lloyd Marshall who was a natural Lightheavyweight and considered one of the best members of Murderers Row holding wins over Charley Burley, Ezzard Charles, Holman Williams, Jake Lamotta. In addition to Lloyd Marshall Yarosz also has wins over Archie Moore, Billy Conn, Ken Overlin x2, Solly Kreiger, Babe Risko, Vince Dundee x3, Tommy Freeman, Jimmy Smith, etc. Makes Hopkins resume look entirely unworthy to discuss in the same breathe to be honest. Just because you're unaware of something don't automatically doubt its veracity. That's a good list of underrated MW's there but let's be honest, a lot of those aren't greater than Hopkins at MW or it's at the very least up for debate. I loved your including of Lytell. Who funnily enough I was going to make a thread about the History Section in comparison to Hopkins. To me, Lytell's definitely a Top 15 MW. What he lacks in consistency at the weight he sure makes up in Quality. That said, Hopkins is a Top 15 MW and that's at least. The second Kid Chocolate and a southpaw too. I understand that when making all time great ratings its very subjective but i think alot of people place too much emphasis on certain statistics like number of title defenses or their own personal preference to a boxers style. Are Abraham and Felix Sturm all time great middleweights because of their number of title defenses? RING magazine thinks so and has both in their top 10.

Sure but first i want to say that i understand a boxer cannot choose what era they fight in which is why some people rate Hopkins 20 title defenses so highly but that goes both ways. I have no doubt that Fred Apostoli or Mickey Walker would have beat every opponent Hopkins defended his title against including Jermain Taylor and it wouldn't have taken them 10 years to do it. Whether contemplating them in Hopkins era or Hopkins in theirs ultimately both scenarios are fantasy and what i do know is they have multiple wins over great Middleweights and Bernard does not. 21 Middleweights Greb Langford Fitz Robinson Gibbons Ketchel Williams Burley Steele Yarosz Overlin Apostoli Darcy Monzon Hagler Walker O'Dowd Corbett III Thil Lytell Tiger The majority of these additional 13 Middleweights i would rate over Hopkins who does not belong in the top 25. Abrams Kreiger Booker McCallum Hostak Flowers Garcia Lamotta Fullmer Basilio Kalambay Toney Nunn For example look at Toney or McCallum who fought near the same time as Bernard while their Middleweight resumes don't have the quantity because both guys only fought in the division for 4 years they have a more impressive resume when comparing top 5 wins. Toney - McCallum, Nunn, Reggie Johnson, DeWitt, Sosa McCallum - Kalambay, Watson, Collins, Graham, Walker Hopkins - Trinidad, Holmes, Joppy, J.D. Jackson, DLH or Johnson who never did anything at 160 That's a good list of underrated MW's there but let's be honest, a lot of those aren't greater than Hopkins at MW or it's at the very least up for debate. I loved your including of Lytell. Who funnily enough I was going to make a thread about the History Section in comparison to Hopkins. To me, Lytell's definitely a Top 15 MW. What he lacks in consistency at the weight he sure makes up in Quality. That said, Hopkins is a Top 15 MW and that's at least.

Hopkins makes a great point in saying that there were a lot of 'sleepers' that he knocked out, that potentially could've turned out to be very good to great fighters, but nothing materialized because they never fought again once he disposed of them. Still, even that deserves credit on it own. Sending formerly undefeated fighters into retirement is something else, even if we don't know their specific reason for never fighting again. You know you legacy is lacking when.... So your approach in trying to boost Hopkins legacy is by claiming his devastating power ruined potential great middleweights that would have gone on to amazing feats had it not been for them facing his Thor like punishment? Even if you shamelessly wanted to try and sell that Lipsey is the only guy who fits the criteria. Bernard never had devastating power in spite of being a natural supermiddle/lightheavy who had a size advantage over alot of his opposition and that isn't including all the welterweights he beat up.

His greatness is overrated as hell. Most of the guys he faced sucked at MW. However, bums or not having all those defenses for a long period of time is very difficult to have. Hopkins schools Golovkin though. At any weight, prime vs prime at 160, current Hopkins at 170-175.

Nowhere near top 20? I would love to see your top 20 middleweights and beyond that Hopkins doesn't come close to. Sure but first i want to say that i understand a boxer cannot choose what era they fight in which is why some people rate Hopkins 20 title defenses so highly but that goes both ways. I have no doubt that Fred Apostoli or Mickey Walker would have beat every opponent Hopkins defended his title against including Jermain Taylor and it wouldn't have taken them 10 years to do it. Whether contemplating them in Hopkins era or Hopkins in theirs ultimately both scenarios are fantasy and what i do know is they have multiple wins over great Middleweights and Bernard does not. 21 Middleweights Greb Langford Fitz Robinson Gibbons Ketchel Williams Burley Steele Yarosz Overlin Apostoli Darcy Monzon Hagler Walker O'Dowd Corbett III Thil Lytell Tiger The majority of these additional 13 Middleweights i would rate over Hopkins who does not belong in the top 25. Abrams Kreiger Booker McCallum Hostak Flowers Garcia Lamotta Fullmer Basilio Kalambay Toney Nunn For example look at Toney or McCallum who fought near the same time as Bernard while their Middleweight resumes don't have the quantity because both guys only fought in the division for 4 years they have a more impressive resume when comparing top 5 wins. Toney - McCallum, Nunn, Reggie Johnson, DeWitt, Sosa McCallum - Kalambay, Watson, Collins, Graham, Walker Hopkins - Trinidad, Holmes, Joppy, J.D. Jackson, DLH or Johnson who never did anything at 160

Lipsey and Glen Johnson were Hopkins' best wins considering they were undefeated at that time, John David Jackson only has one loss and beat Reggie Johnson, who goes on to win a light heavyweight title, Holmes and Joppy were title-holders, and rematches with Allen and Echols. Hopkins' resume were still impressive, the only disgraced was the Hakkar guy and the third fight with Allen. The WBO champion in Hopkins' era, Lonnie Bradley, how would he fare against Bernard.

If you're looking at it in the context of all time great middleweights Hopkins resume is laughably bad. Doesn't belong anywhere near the top 20. Nowhere near top 20? I would love to see your top 20 middleweights and beyond that Hopkins doesn't come close to.

Hopkins career is a long conversation. A great one to discuss with boxing nerds because of the ups/downs, self made man?, long time trainer fired, his dedication to the middleweight class in a 175 frame. He's had a great career, but if his story is ever told theres a whole lot to talk about and discuss!

His greatness is overrated as hell. Most of the guys he faced sucked at MW. However, bums or not having all those defenses for a long period of time is very difficult to have.

He did have some questionable losses at 160 and 175 though. At 160 many people thought he beat Taylor twice, but personally I thought Taylor won both. I am biased, Taylor was my favorite fighter after Roy Jones. At 175 many people thought he beat Calzaghe, personally Hopkins antics during the fight made it difficult for me to give him enough rounds to give him the fight. Calzaghe appeared to be the winner in the end, in my eyes. Also he was outright robbed of a W against Pascal the first time. Regardless, those are 4 iffy decisions that could have gone to Hopkins as wins, depending on what the judges were looking for. Those 4 decisions being wins, would have had a giant impact on Hopkins career.

Combined with what he did at LHW, all the times he was underdog and won, other "HOF'ers" would trade for Hopkins' overall career. He fought every one he had to fight at 160. If prime Hagler, Leonard, Hearns, Duran were at 160 in 1993-2005, Hopkins would have fought them. He did fight Jones, Trinidad, Taylor, who were as good as it gets for the time he was there. I could also bring up Winky(2007) and Pavlik(2008) who were favored against him at 170lbs, they were the best MW's at the time and were looking for lucrative fights, Hopkins stepped in and even sacrificed 5lbs at his old ass age. Those were not MW fights but it was fights that most fans predicted Hopkins would lose regardless. Overall, to talk about Hopkins you have to bring up both 160-175, cause every one knows 160 wasn't at its best when B-Hop was there, and he did get rid of the best guys there anyway. I think 175 added a lot to Hopkins overall legacy, but his work at 160 and 175 should be separated unless making an overall evaluation of his career. He can't be ranked higher ATG at middleweight for what he did at 175; his legacy at middleweight must be judged based on what he did in the division. Hopkins 160 (Age 23-40): 46-4-1 (32 KOs) Lineal, WBA,WBC,IBF,WBO During his lineal reign (01'-04') he fought: Trinidad, Taylor (loss), Joppy, De La Hoya Earlier in his career he also fought: Roy Jones (loss), Glenn Johnson, John David Jackson Hopkins 175 (Age 41-48): 7-2-1 (0 KOs) Lineal, WBC, IBF During his first lineal reign (06'-08'): Calzaghe (loss), Tarver, Wright During his second lineal reign (11'-12'): Dawson (loss), Pascal He also fought: Pavlik, Whright, Cloud (Shot RJ was too shot to be incl.)

Combined with what he did at LHW, all the times he was underdog and won, other "HOF'ers" would trade for Hopkins' overall career. He fought every one he had to fight at 160. If prime Hagler, Leonard, Hearns, Duran were at 160 in 1993-2005, Hopkins would have fought them. He did fight Jones, Trinidad, Taylor, who were as good as it gets for the time he was there. I could also bring up Winky(2007) and Pavlik(2008) who were favored against him at 170lbs, they were the best MW's at the time and were looking for lucrative fights, Hopkins stepped in and even sacrificed 5lbs at his old ass age. Those were not MW fights but it was fights that most fans predicted Hopkins would lose regardless. Overall, to talk about Hopkins you have to bring up both 160-175, cause every one knows 160 wasn't at its best when B-Hop was there, and he did get rid of the best guys there anyway.

His middleweight resume got 90% better when he became undisputed.

Ehh it's alright. To me personally it's not much different then haglers they cleaned there division out against what was offered to them haglers time frame was different but most of his big fights were against guys who came from a Lower weight class Duran srl hearns mugabi I know I'll get **** for this but it's just how I feel I rank them about the same with haglers destruction of hearns putting him slightly ahead of Hopkins but Hopkins dismantling of Tito makes it even up again in my mind. I see what you mean there, but Hagler's resume looks ridiculously better when you start listing names; both guys fought several opponents moving up in weight (see bold). Hagler: Leonard (SD loss), Hearns, Duran, Mugabi, Minter, Antuofermo, Roldan Hopkins: Trinidad, Taylor (UD/SD loss), De La Hoya, Joppy Hagler's destruction of Hearns is much more impressive than Hopkins 12 round TKO of Trinidad although Hopkins was considered an underdog (largely because he was so underrated at the time).

Ehh it's alright. To me personally it's not much different then haglers they cleaned there division out against what was offered to them haglers time frame was different but most of his big fights were against guys who came from a Lower weight class Duran srl hearns mugabi I know I'll get **** for this but it's just how I feel I rank them about the same with haglers destruction of hearns putting him slightly ahead of Hopkins but Hopkins dismantling of Tito makes it even up again in my mind.