Hopkins: greatest ever

**English Lion** · 12-18-2010, 11:58 PM

One of the greatest, not THE greatest..

**Scott9945** · 12-18-2010, 11:59 PM

Originally posted by JAB5239

I don't think after tonight that it is any longer debatable who the greatest fighter ever is at such an advanced age. I've heard Walcotts name thrown about, but usually it Foreman and even more so Archie Moore. After tonight I believe its it moot argument that can only favor Bernard. I've never really been a fan but credit is due. Would anyone argue someone other than Hopkins as the most competitive fighter at an advanced age?

I've felt that way for awhile. The Pascal fight just made me more convinced.

**NChristo** · 12-19-2010, 12:02 AM

After tonights performance I would not argue against it no, Hopkins deserved the decision tonight imo and at his age over a champion the way he did it is just incredible, for competitiveness at such a late age, he excels most others, cept Archie.

Originally posted by English_Lion

One of the greatest, not THE greatest..

Actually read the OP in future please.

**JAB5239** · 12-19-2010, 12:02 AM

Originally posted by English_Lion

One of the greatest, not THE greatest..

Fair enough. Who was a greater, more skilled fighter at an advanced age though?

**Miburo** · 12-19-2010, 12:08 AM

Best hand speed ever for someone of his age (which is not to say particularly fast, but it's incredible for him). His stamina more than anything really impressed me tonight, and he still has effective power, punishing to the body.

**Perfect Plex** · 12-19-2010, 12:11 AM

But if Archie Moore's mum was telling the truth(which alot belive she was), Moore would of still been LHW champ when he was 49 years of age, 4 years older than Hopkins.

**Uturn** · 12-19-2010, 12:12 AM

Hopkins is just different class despite his age. No doubt in my mind he is an ATG after tonight, a masterful display by him. What I do like about Hopkins is the way he neutrilizes thing away from his opponents and continuely makes them look bad (he's so good at it).

**Chex31** · 12-19-2010, 12:20 AM

Originally posted by JAB5239

Fair enough. Who was a greater, more skilled fighter at an advanced age though?

Nobody.

I thought Hopkins would have gotten tired by the late rounds, wasnt the case though.

**JAB5239** · 12-19-2010, 12:26 AM

Originally posted by TuavsRahman

But if Archie Moore's mum was telling the truth(which alot belive she was), Moore would of still been LHW champ when he was 49 years of age, 4 years older than Hopkins.

Well Moore insisted he was born in 1916 and there is no way to verify the truth. No matter who one chooses, it has to come down to a two man race between these two guys. Maybe Im getting caught up in the moment, but without those two KD's Hopkins dominated the guy he was universally recognized as the best at 175. Even the Old Mongoose can't claim that. Just my opinion, but its much easier to sit on the throne than it is to regain it. And that is no insult to Archie.

Hopkins: greatest ever