Mayweather and Hopkins

[Dempsey's Fan]

Recently I have been reading a lot of posts taking about moving up in weight classes, and the significance it has on a fighter's ATG standing. In particular, a lot of posters use the fact that Mayweather has held titles in multiple weight classes as justification for putting him higher on their ATG lists than guys like Roy Jones, B-Hop, and James Toney. However, I think when we look at how a fighter transitions between weight classes it is important to look at who the fight, and what titles they accumulate. I propose that Bernard Hopkins deserves more credit for his multi-division accomplishments than does Floyd Mayweather. Hopkins knows how to do it right, he moves into a new division and immediately goes after 'the man' whether it be Tito Trinidad, Antonio Tarver, or Tomasz Adamek (admittedly this fight isn't happening but it was discussed). Mayweather on the other hand has seemed to rely on his unbeaten record and an accumulation of lesser titles to make up for the fact that he has not established himself as 'the man' in any one division in at least 4 years. At the end of the day they are both great fighters, but I have to give the nod to B-Hop on my atg list. So, who do you guys think has implemented the better strategy when it comes to transitioning between weight classes?

[VirusTI]

B-hop, by far, after what he did to Tarver....
If floyd beats Shane right now than i will rethink

[MANGLER]

Bhop really only made 1, which was jumpin over 168 str8 to 175 to own Tarver for the world title. PBF made several, and his collection of belts in higher divisions is a strong accolade. Can't hold his lack of tough tests at 140 against him cuz the top guys there at the time (Cotto and Hatton) weren't up to fight him yet. And at 147 he left unfinished business behind, despite winnin the Ring belt. Mass cred to both imo.

[El Dominicano]

B-hop, by far, after what he did to Tarver....
If floyd beats Shane right now than i will rethink

I'd say Cotto...people would come up with an excuse as soon as Mayweather easily deals with Shane

[ßringer]

But Hopkins only made one jump in weight, from 160 to 175.

Whereas Floyd made several jumps in weight.

I don't think the question would be which one deserves more credit, because it's obvious to most fight fans that Hopkins has the greater legacy.

What I think fight fans need to re-evaluate is what they consider to be more impressive : Multiple titles in multiple divisions, or a dominant reign for several years in one particular division.

Too often I see people touting guys like Oscar and Floyd as (insert number here) time World Champions, but that begs the question : Who did they beat?

Of course you can say the same thing for a guy who's been dominant in his particular division over X number of years as well. Especially if the division is not highly stacked with talent, as Hopkins' Middleweight division was during his reign.

Basically, what I'm getting at, is that there are several factors to look at when considering things like this. But more often than not, people just opt to get hung up on one aspect, rather than the entire picture.

[Pullcounter]

floyd never lost... bhop lost at 160 and at 175

[ßringer]

floyd never lost... bhop lost at 160 and at 175

Floyd also never fought a true Welterweight, and he retired in his prime.

[El Dominicano]

But Hopkins only made one jump in weight, from 160 to 175.

Whereas Floyd made several jumps in weight.

I don't think the question would be which one deserves more credit, because it's obvious to most fight fans that Hopkins has the greater legacy.

What I think fight fans need to re-evaluate is what they consider to be more impressive : Multiple titles in multiple divisions, or a dominant reign for several years in one particular division.

Too often I see people touting guys like Oscar and Floyd as (insert number here) time World Champions, but that begs the question : Who did they beat?

Of course you can say the same thing for a guy who's been dominant in his particular division over X number of years as well. Especially if the division is not highly stacked with talent, as Hopkins' Middleweight division was during his reign.

Basically, what I'm getting at, is that there are several factors to look at when considering things like this. But more often than not, people just opt to get hung up on one aspect, rather than the entire picture.

In the bold, I respect both the same.

[Dempsey's Fan]

I agree that it is important to evaluate whether staying and clearing out a division should be valued over 'cherry picking' titles, but I also think that people need to realize that when say, Harry Greb moved up in wieght, it was a very different circumstance than when a guy like Oscar or Floyd moved up in weight ot fight a title holder.

[Pullcounter]

Floyd also never fought a true Welterweight, and he retired in his prime.

baldomir was the lineal WW champ.

I agree he retired prematurely.