Bernard Hopkins vs Joe Louis

[ßringer]

The only snag is Walcott was about 40lbs north of Hopkins' peak weight.

Seriously, did I do a Rip van Winkle and sleep through Hopkins' glorious move up to heavyweight, in which he schooled the Klitschkos, Haye, Valuev, Povetkin etc, after which he reigned as undisputed heavyweight champ until the age of 50? That's the only explanation I can think of for all those who want to pit a career middleweight against all-time great heavyweights, and think he can win.

The Conn comparisons don't work either. Conn was undefeated as light-heavy champ and also beat several top heavyweight contenders prior to facing Louis. Considering Hopkins has never faced a heavyweight and his sole meaningful win at 175 was against a lacklustre Tarver, there really is no comparison.

As for the Conn-Louis fight, Louis took Conn lightly and drained himself to get to below 200lb, not wanting to be accused of being a bully beating on a little guy. Even so, it was never the boxing clinic that some claim - Louis swept the early rounds with his body attack, which paid dividends later - and given the way some talk about the fight, it's easy to forget that the end result was Conn lying on the canvas and out for the count. I also disagree that Conn only lost because he went for the KO. He fought the 13th the way he fought the rest, Louis just caught up with him.

If Calzaghe can turn Hopkins into a spoiling whiner, crawling around on the canvas after phantom low blows, I have little doubt what a dose of Louis' power would do to him. Louis may appear "flat footed", but he was very good at cutting down the ring, had fast hands, and an excellent boxer himself. He'd send Hopkins into orbit, which is where this match-up ought to be.

So Louis by KO.

Louis is a small Heavyweight by today's standards. They're roughly the same height (Joe 6'2", Bernard 6'1"), roughly the same reach (Joe 76", Bernard 75"), and not that far apart in weight. Hopkins comes in on fight night at around 190 or close to 200lbs.

Physical attributes aside, Louis was a very flatfooted, basic fighter. Hopkins is a very elusive target who fights like Walcott, he likes to lay traps, create angles, slide the shoulders, and pop the right hand over the jab.

I'm not saying Louis couldn't KO Hopkins, Louis hit like a truck. But in order to KO Hopkins, he'd have to catch Hopkins flush on the chin, and that's a tall order for any fighter to fill. The great Joe Louis included.

[TheGreatA]

Louis is a small Heavyweight by today's standards. They're roughly the same height (Joe 6'2", Bernard 6'1"), roughly the same reach (Joe 76", Bernard 75"), and not that far apart in weight. Hopkins comes in on fight night at around 190 or close to 200lbs.

Physical attributes aside, Louis was a very flatfooted, basic fighter. Hopkins is a very elusive target who fights like Walcott, he likes to lay traps, create angles, slide the shoulders, and pop the right hand over the jab.

I'm not saying Louis couldn't KO Hopkins, Louis hit like a truck. But in order to KO Hopkins, he'd have to catch Hopkins flush on the chin, and that's a tall order for any fighter to fill. The great Joe Louis included.

I have never heard of Hopkins coming to a fight close to 200 lbs.

I believe he was nearly 190 lbs against Calzaghe but came in at 180 against Pavlik and looked significantly better in that fight.

[ßringer]

I have never heard of Hopkins coming to a fight close to 200 lbs.

I believe he was nearly 190 lbs against Calzaghe but came in at 180 against Pavlik and looked significantly better in that fight.

He was 190 against Joe, and 180 for the Pavlik fight.

Which one was it that he refused to re weigh in at? Tarver?

If Hopkins came in around 190, the difference in weight would only be about 15lbs. I think the advantage he would have in speed would help negate Louis' power advantage.

[them_apples]

Louis only has 15 lbs on Hopkins. Everything else besides power he is on the lacking end in comparison.

Hopkins is the better boxer, better defense, better feet, handspeed and he is the master of cutting off his opponent's strengths. Louis is a very sharp puncher with lots of heart, it would be a good fight.

given how Louis walks in with his left down all the time, Hopkins would probably fire the right hand over the top and catch him over and over. Walcott did it, so could B-Hop.

[JAB5239]

Louis only has 15 lbs on Hopkins. Everything else besides power he is on the lacking end in comparison.

Hopkins is the better boxer, better defense, better feet, handspeed and he is the master of cutting off his opponent's strengths. Louis is a very sharp puncher with lots of heart, it would be a good fight.

given how Louis walks in with his left down all the time, Hopkins would probably fire the right hand over the top and catch him over and over. Walcott did it, so could B-Hop.

Are we talking prime Louis here against the B-Hop we've seen at 175? If so, Hopkins is a dead man. Bernard is not the better boxer, only slightly faster, but does have the better feet and defense. Unfortunetly for him sooner or later he's going to have to to either get trapped on the ropes or be forced to trade with Louis. When that time comes, its lights out. Louis isn't Tarver, and he certainly isn't powder puff punching Calzaghe. Both of who Billy Conn and Walcott were better than when Louis put them to sleep.

[120]

here's the thing. Hopkins greatest accomplishments have been over smaller boxers that he could bully...I got Joe in a DCN

[them_apples]

Are we talking prime Louis here against the B-Hop we've seen at 175? If so, Hopkins is a dead man. Bernard is not the better boxer, only slightly faster, but does have the better feet and defense. Unfortunetly for him sooner or later he's going to have to to either get trapped on the ropes or be forced to trade with Louis. When that time comes, its lights out. Louis isn't Tarver, and he certainly isn't powder puff punching Calzaghe. Both of who Billy Conn and Walcott were better than when Louis put them to sleep.

couple questions with your assessment.

When has Hopkins ever been trapped on the ropes (and much less beaten down) Even against a much faster Calzaghe he was on the ropes for 2 seconds at best.

Also, when has Hopkins mindlessly traded punches, he's a punch and not be hit kind of guy.

Hopkins is definently the better boxer in my eyes, I honestly wonder who you are watching when you look at Louis and say he boxed better than Hopkins.

Everyone seems to think it's an insult to great heavyweights of old giving a LHW a shot at beating them, really it comes down to size - the LHW's of today have day before weigh in's, which usually means they come in at around Marciano and Louis' weight. Not that it matters, Jones Jr laid a beat down on one of the bums in todays HW division, and even he isn't as big as B-Hop.

so it comes down to skills, and Hopkins has more of it. Power, obviously goes to Louis, if he did manage to land (albeit to the body), then it could be game over for B-Hop, but i like Hopkins chances non-the less.

[them_apples]

here's the thing. Hopkins greatest accomplishments have been over smaller boxers that he could bully...I got Joe in a DCN

Pavlik, Tarver...both bigger than him

Trinidad, the so called smaller boxer, actually weighed more than Hopkins. The best middleweights have often been welterweights, a la Hearns, SRL, Trinidad.

[Kid McCoy]

Louis is a small Heavyweight by today's standards. They're roughly the same height (Joe 6'2", Bernard 6'1"), roughly the same reach (Joe 76", Bernard 75"), and not that far apart in weight. Hopkins comes in on fight night at around 190 or close to 200lbs.

Physical attributes aside, Louis was a very flatfooted, basic fighter. Hopkins is a very elusive target who fights like Walcott, he likes to lay traps, create angles, slide the shoulders, and pop the right hand over the jab.

I'm not saying Louis couldn't KO Hopkins, Louis hit like a truck. But in order to KO Hopkins, he'd have to catch Hopkins flush on the chin, and that's a tall order for any fighter to fill. The great Joe Louis included.

Louis was not a "basic fighter". Sorry, but it's ignorant to suggest that he had no skills and essentially that someone like Hopkins would box his ears off all night. Louis was an exquisite boxer. And while citing the Walcott fight in the case for Hopkins, it's also worth bearing in mind that he, like Conn, finished the second fight out for the count. Both were a much bigger threat to Louis than Hopkins would be, with a track record of beating top heavyweights. Both were just as elusive as Hopkins, but Louis always caught up with them in the end.

Btw, I'd be interested which fights Hopkins weighed close to 200lb for. Even so, Hopkins might be able to bulk up to a higher weight, but that doesn't mean he belongs in a higher weight class. Louis was much the bigger man, and a far far better boxer than many give him credit for. I have no qualms at all in saying Hopkins would not be vertical by the final bell.

[JAB5239]

couple questions with your assessment.

When has Hopkins ever been trapped on the ropes (and much less beaten down) Even against a much faster Calzaghe he was on the ropes for 2 seconds at best.

When has Hopkins fought a man as big, strong and skilled as Louis would be? At 40 plus years old, Hopkins would get bullied.

Also, when has Hopkins mindlessly traded punches, he's a punch and not be hit kind of guy.

Come on my man, all fighters have to trade punches to land them at some time during the fight.

Hopkins is definently the better boxer in my eyes, I honestly wonder who you are watching when you look at Louis and say he boxed better than Hopkins.

And what are you basing this on? Louis' technique was flawless and his punches were perfectly timed. Hopkins is a great, great fighter. I just don't think he's near as good as Joe.

Everyone seems to think it's an insult to great heavyweights of old giving a LHW a shot at beating them, really it comes down to size - the LHW's of today have day before weigh in's, which usually means they come in at around Marciano and Louis' weight. Not that it matters, Jones Jr laid a beat down on one of the bums in todays HW division, and even he isn't as big as B-Hop.

I don't think its an insult, only far fetched considering who they have beaten.

And please tell me you didn't just compare John Ruiz to Joe Louis!

so it comes down to skills, and Hopkins has more of it. Power, obviously goes to Louis, if he did manage to land (albeit to the body), then it could be game over for B-Hop, but i like Hopkins chances non-the less.

How do you decide Hop has more skills? Has he beaten a better caliber of opponent through out his career? No. Has he ever beat a heavywight? No. And at 42, 43 and 44 years old is this the best Hopkins we've seen? I doubt it.

opkins is a great fighter, he just doesn't match up here and there is no way to prove he could. On the other hand, its very easy to prove that Joe Louis not only matches up, but possesses huge advantages also.