is calzage an all time great if he beats rjj and retires undefeated???

[Jim Jeffries]

I answered that question in several ways but hey, who am I to say anything?

The guy was making the 15th defense of his middleweight crown against Tito so that should tell you something. After all, someone might say "who had Calzaghe beat before Lacy?" We know thats BS - and it works the same way for Hops.

And Tito being such a huge favorite (it was 3-1 not 6-1 BTW), has nothing to do with Hops and everything to do with Tito-mania. He was considered either #1 or 1A on the p4p charts at the time, had just CRUSHED William Joppy in his first fight at 160, coming off two CRUSHING victories over the 154lb. champs!

And Hops was just some nobody who had tied the record number of middleweight defenses...

Yeah the double standards on here are pathetic. Thanks for the correction on the Tito odds, I must have mixed them up with the DLH odds, where DLH was a 6-1 underdog (if I'm wrong on that one, I'm really screwed up tonight.)

If Hopkins' 4 biggest wins came after he turned 36, and his prime was indeed 30-34 as one poster claimed, then perhaps Bernard "wasted" his prime in much the same way as Calzaghe did, with Joe's biggest win coming at gee, 36.

Anyway, as for the thread, I don't think Joe is a top 50 ATG, and I don't think Roy at this point will push him past that, unless somehow Roy fights on after the Calzaghe loss and beats Sam Peter or something crazy like that.

[IMDAZED]

Yeah the double standards on here are pathetic. Thanks for the correction on the Tito odds, I must have mixed them up with the DLH odds, where DLH was a 6-1 underdog (if I'm wrong on that one, I'm really screwed up tonight.)

If Hopkins' 4 biggest wins came after he turned 36, and his prime was indeed 30-34 as one poster claimed, then perhaps Bernard "wasted" his prime in much the same way as Calzaghe did, with Joe's biggest win coming at gee, 36.

Anyway, as for the thread, I don't think Joe is a top 50 ATG, and I don't think Roy at this point will push him past that, unless somehow Roy fights on after the Calzaghe loss and beats Sam Peter or something crazy like that.

It's unfair to say Hopkins wasted his prime. He was real good when he was 30-34...scary good. I mean, look at the 36yr old version who annihilated Tito.

Hop0kins really had no choice but to hold onto his belt. It was the only leverage he had. He had no promoter, a running beef with Don King (who had the other two titleholders at 160 - Joppy and Holmes) and was seen by the powers that be AND other fighters as too big a problem, not worth the risk.

If Hops doesn't hold on to the belt, he never gets that chance against Tito. Actually, they weren't gonna give him the chance anyway! Titop planned to go to 160, beat Joppy and then go straight to Jones. And he always said "Joppy is the best middleweight anyway."

It wasn't until Hopkins started showing up and interrupting press conferences, beating his chest to anyone that would listen, that King finally relented and placed him in the tourney. The rest is history.

[Jim Jeffries]

Actually, I'm not sure I agree.

For instance, I like Calzaghe's wins over Sheika and Brewer better than EVERY other win except for Kessler and MAYBE Hopkins. Why? Because they were tougher opponents than anyone else he fought. They didn't really have the names and half the kids on here don't know them (watch them go to boxrec to try to "discredit" this) so they will disagree. But those are the fights that convinced me Calzaghe was damn good.

And a win over Glenn Johnson, who certainly wasn't "green" at 32-0, is pretty ****ing impressive. Especially when you just pound him out like Hops did. That was the best Bernard Hopkins. Unfortunately, no one on this site seems to have seen him.

The Johnson win was pretty impressive, but Johnson at that point had a record much like Eddie Chambers did when he fought Povetkin. Eddie was 30-0 and had beaten some decent names like Brock and Guinn, but not much else. Johnson would lose 6 of his next 10 (yeah I know, robbed in a few) but it doesn't seem like he really peaked until about 6 years after the Hopkins fight.

[IMDAZED]

The Johnson win was pretty impressive, but Johnson at that point had a record much like Eddie Chambers did when he fought Povetkin. Eddie was 30-0 and had beaten some decent names like Brock and Guinn, but not much else. Johnson would lose 6 of his next 10 (yeah I know, robbed in a few) but it doesn't seem like he really peaked until about 6 years after the Hopkins fight.

I agree Johnson got better but part of that is because he learned a lot from the Hopkins fight. Bernard was simply WORLD'S better than him. I mean picture Glenn Johnson - ANY version - just getting hammered round after round by a BUSIER, more POWERFUL, equally VICIOUS and INTELLIGENT fighter. That's what Hopkins was.

Everyone laughed at Jose Luis Castillo before his first fight with Floyd because he had already lost four times. Records don't always tell the whole story. The story does.

[Jim Jeffries]

It's unfair to say Hopkins wasted his prime. He was real good when he was 30-34...scary good. I mean, look at the 36yr old version who annihilated Tito.

Hop0kins really had no choice but to hold onto his belt. It was the only leverage he had. He had no promoter, a running beef with Don King (who had the other two titleholders at 160 - Joppy and Holmes) and was seen by the powers that be AND other fighters as too big a problem, not worth the risk.

If Hops doesn't hold on to the belt, he never gets that chance against Tito. Actually, they weren't gonna give him the chance anyway! Titop planned to go to 160, beat Joppy and then go straight to Jones. And he always said "Joppy is the best middleweight anyway."

It wasn't until Hopkins started showing up and interrupting press conferences, beating his chest to anyone that would listen, that King finally relented and placed him in the tourney. The rest is history.

Wasted is probably a strong word. What I mean is, besides fighting Roy early, Bernard took 13 years before he faced another great fighter. He fought Roy before his prime and if he fought Tito while past his prime (I'm still not sure about that one), then he missed an opportunity to pole vault himself way up there by either rematching Roy or unifying the division much much earlier than he did.

[IMDAZED]

Wasted is probably a strong word. What I mean is, besides fighting Roy early, Bernard took 13 years before he faced another great fighter. He fought Roy before his prime and if he fought Tito while past his prime (I'm still not sure about that one), then he missed an opportunity to pole vault himself way up there by either rematching Roy or unifying the division much much earlier than he did.

Well I just pointed out why he didn't do those things.

William Joppy and Keith Holmes were Don King fighters. Please note how King was ready, willing and able to put Joppy in with another one of his fighters (Trinidad) but never Hopkins before. In fact, all Joppy fought were King fighters - Julio Cesar Green, etc lol.

King wasn't putting in his best fighters against a beast like Hopkins who refused to sign away his life to him. Eventually Hops had to sign with King in order to get in the tourney. But the only reason that even happened was because King thought he finally had a fighter who could beat him lol. They couldn't even present Hopkins the Sugar Ray Robinson trophy they were gonna give the winner because Tito's name was already inscribed in it!

As for a rematch with Jones...don't you think Hops would've wanted that? Instead, he had to endure Jones ignore him for years. Jones wasn't ducking him; it's just that he had already beat him then vacated the title Hops picked up, and moved on to bigger and better. Made no sense for him to go backwards. Which is why Hops played the same game with Roy once he reached a certain plateau himself.

[THE REED]

who cares! its my bday in 2 mins!

[Jim Jeffries]

who cares! its my bday in 2 mins!

Bizatch.

Good stuff ImDazed, thanks for the info man.

[THE REED]

chyeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1/4 century!

[bsrizpac]

chyeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1/4 century!

Happy b-day. Live it up.