Is Hopkins is the best 160lbs fighter ever

[Dynamite Kid]

Hearns and even middleweight Duran are still ATG fighters

the rest of those gys you mentioned are good, solid, resume boosting wins among a few others he had

in hypothetical fights with say the 10 greatest middleweights, who do you think would win more, B-Hop or Hagler?

anyway, like i said, i can't seperate these two personally... but i don't think you could say Hopkins is clearly greater

Hopkins would win more, because not only can he fight he can box. While i know Hagler is a good boxer too he is more inclined to have to fight when he gets tagged, because his defence is not as good as Hopkins, and he is not as good a counter puncher or as quick as Hopkins.

Hopkins is not clearly greater, because that would mean im disrespecting a great fighter, but he is better IMO.

[TheGreatA]

Hagler's wins early in his career over Philadelphia middleweights such as 'Cyclone' Hart are often overlooked as well.

[S.G.]

I don't see how his resume is made out to be better than it is.

Hearns, Duran, Hamsho, Mugabi, Minter, Antuofermo, Briscoe, Roldan, etc. were clearly a better bunch of middleweights than Trinidad, De La Hoya, Joppy, Holmes, Echols, Allen, Jackson...

Echols was very highly rated before B-Hop ruined him, and you miss out Glen Johnson, Eastman and two arguable wins against Taylor as well as 1 or 2 others that have slipped my mind

B-Hop's standard of opposition at middleweight is unfairly criticised imo

[Dynamite Kid]

I don't see how his resume is made out to be better than it is.

Hearns, Duran, Hamsho, Mugabi, Minter, Antuofermo, Briscoe, Roldan, etc. were clearly a better bunch of middleweights than Trinidad, De La Hoya, Joppy, Holmes, Echols, Allen, Jackson...



Not after rocking Hearns several times. Hearns had a bigger punch than Hagler, even at middleweight, which is why he was able to get rid of Roldan earlier.

Doesn't really matter since Hagler demolished Hearns in 3 rounds.



When Mugabi was shot. Coming into the Hagler fight Mugabi was undefeated with all of his wins coming by KO, a very highly rated fighter at the time.

So i compare DLH to Vito you will say yeah, but Vito is a better MW than a blown up DLH, but im sure you will see Duran as a better MW than Joppy or J D Jackson ? thats what im talking about its pointless debating this with you.

Mugabi is rated better than he is, because he fought Hagler and gave him a tough fight same as Roldan, simple as that.

Older fighters opposition always get built up better than they are and other fans support that ,because its what the media has spoon fed them. I dont buy it

[squealpiggy]

Echols was very highly rated before B-Hop ruined him, and you miss out Glen Johnson, Eastman and two arguable wins against Taylor

Those "arguable wins" were in fact "actual losses". Hagler beats anyone on Hopkins' resume at Middleweight including Taylor.

[Drunk Punch]

No way. Hagler>Hopkins.

[Dynamite Kid]

Hagler's wins early in his career over Philadelphia middleweights such as 'Cyclone' Hart are often overlooked as well.

Nobody had even heard of Obell when he faced Hagler.

Vito got beat by Minter who was not a great fighter imo, just right place right time, because Vito robbed Hagler.

Roldan was a nobody untill he fought Hagler aswell.

Hamsho do me a favour, Hagler looked like SRL against this bum.

[S.G.]

Hagler beats anyone on Hopkins' resume at Middleweight including Taylor.

don't act like he would KO them all in 1 round though

i would favour B-Hop against everyone but Ray Leonard on Halger's resume also

and i would favour Jones against Hagler at middleweight too

[Dynamite Kid]

Those "arguable wins" were in fact "actual losses". Hagler beats anyone on Hopkins' resume at Middleweight including Taylor.

And vice versa

Hopkins would beat Roldan,Vito and little Duran a lot more decisive than Hagler did.

[Haglerwins]

Hagler. I see Hopkins fighting going backwards too much in this fight once Marvin goes in full on agressive mode, countering more than taking the lead.