I ahve said it many times, Bernard Hopkins ruins fighters, and their careers.

[ßringer]

he does like fighting smaller guys though,there is no 2 ways about it

How the hell can you say that?

Because of two physically smaller opponets? (Oscar, and Winky.)

Tito may not have been as tall as Bernard, but he fit at the weight, and was a World Champion @160.

And Kelly and Hopkins are identical in size and body proportions.

Take away the smaller Winky and the smaller Oscar, and Hopkins is 47-5 against men his own size. (And one of those losses was his pro debut at 175.)

[Sir Tom Jones]

All of that is bull****.

Just because one of his biggest wins came against a guy moving up in weight (Tito). By those standards then Hagler's wins over Duran and Hearns mean ****. And anybody else's who had to fight a guy moving up in weight.

Tito wrecked Joppy, a damn good career Middleweight in his own right with a record of 32-1-1 against guys at 160. A guy Hopkins himself couldn't finish off despite his best efforts.

Wright was completely blown up. No doubt about that one.

De La Hoya was moving up, challenging him. I don't see how that's Hopkins fault for taking that big payday against a superstar like Oscar. Anybody else would've done the same.

Tarver was bigger than Hopkins.

And Pavlik was exactly the same size at the catchweight of 170 (just 4lbs north of 166 where Kelly beat Jermain in the rematch).

don't shoot the messenger.

just the 'picks on small guys' seems to be said on here.

Fighting De la Hoya is a joke tho.

[The_Demon]

How the hell can you say that?

Because of two physically smaller opponets? (Oscar, and Winky.)

Tito may not have been as tall as Bernard, but he fit at the weight, and was a World Champion @160.

And Kelly and Hopkins are identical in size and body proportions.

Take away the smaller Winky and the smaller Oscar, and Hopkins is 47-5 against men his own size. (And one of those losses was his pro debut at 175.)

all im saying is he likes guys stepping up.not hating i know how smart hopkins is,a very shrewd businessman

[ßringer]

don't shoot the messenger.

just the 'picks on small guys' seems to be said on here.

Fighting De la Hoya is a joke tho.

Oscar had a title at 160, and was a superstar who offered him even more money than his megafight with Tito did.

What would you do?

Say "no thanks, I'll wait for Robert Allen to become my mandatory for the 4th time instead."?

[The_Demon]

Oscar had a title at 160, and was a superstar who offered him even more money than his megafight with Tito did.

What would you do?

Say "no thanks, I'll wait for Robert Allen to become my mandatory for the 4th time instead."?

that glorified sparring session was his biggest payday no doubt.

[ßringer]

all im saying is he likes guys stepping up.not hating i know how smart hopkins is,a very shrewd businessman

All of those guys stepping up were stepping up on their own accord.

Either they wanted a crack at Hopkins' belt at 160. (Tito, Oscar.)

They wanted a crack at getting a legend's name on their record. (Tarver, Wright.)

Or they wanted both a legend's name on their record, and a nice payday that they thought would be easy work. (Pavlik.)

It's not like Hopkins made any of those guys fight him.

They all came to him and challenged the throne.

Marvin Hagler fought a ****load of "small men" throughout his career, even more than Hopkins. But I never hear anyone peep about that.

I honestly think it's just Hopkins hate, that will all blow over in the years to come.

[ßringer]

that glorified sparring session was his biggest payday no doubt.

I never said the fight was amazing.

But for such easy work, a nice name on his record, and millions of dollars ; who would pass that up?

Nobody.

[The_Demon]

All of those guys stepping up were stepping up on their own accord.

Either they wanted a crack at Hopkins' belt at 160. (Tito, Oscar.)

They wanted a crack at getting a legend's name on their record. (Tarver, Wright.)

Or they wanted both a legend's name on their record, and a nice payday that they thought would be easy work. (Pavlik.)

It's not like Hopkins made any of those guys fight him.

They all came to him and challenged the throne.

Marvin Hagler fought a ****load of "small men" throughout his career, even more than Hopkins. But I never hear anyone peep about that.

I honestly think it's just Hopkins hate, that will all blow over in the years to come.

hey im not hating hopkins is one of my favourite fighters just saying he is smart out of the ring as well as in the ring

[ßringer]

hey im not hating hopkins is one of my favourite fighters just saying he is smart out of the ring as well as in the ring

Of course.

I just think Hopkins gets a lot of hate because of the kind of guy he is. Therefore certain people feel the need to potshot his accomplishments, while dismissing all of the other guys who have records similar to his.

Like I said, Hagler fought many more "small men" than Hopkins. But he gets a pass, because he's generally loved by everybody.

Paul Williams fights smaller men all the time, but nobody mentions it.

And what about guys who move up and win, but against less than stellar opposition?

Pacquiao got a hell of a lot of praise for beating David Diaz in his 135 debut. But honestly, Diaz was a paper Champion who should've lost his belt to the mummy of Erik Morales, and the weakest link in the division by far.

**** look at Floyd, hasn't fought a single Welterweight in his entire career. Yet he fights at Welterweight. And has more groupies than a prime Jim Morrison.

Lots of intangibles in this game of ours. And it seems like popularity plays as much a role as opposition.

[The_Demon]

Of course.

I just think Hopkins gets a lot of hate because of the kind of guy he is. Therefore certain people feel the need to potshot his accomplishments, while dismissing all of the other guys who have records similar to his.

Like I said, Hagler fought many more "small men" than Hopkins. But he gets a pass, because he's generally loved by everybody.

Paul Williams fights smaller men all the time, but nobody mentions it.

And what about guys who move up and win, but against less than stellar opposition?

Pacquiao got a hell of a lot of praise for beating David Diaz in his 135 debut. But honestly, Diaz was a paper Champion who should've lost his belt to the mummy of Erik Morales, and the weakest link in the division by far.

**** look at Floyd, hasn't fought a single Welterweight in his entire career. Yet he fights at Welterweight. And has more groupies than a prime Jim Morrison.

Lots of intangibles in this game of ours. And it seems like popularity plays as much a role as opposition.

ye i know what u mean,its easy to pick holes in any fighters record
but i think its more important to appreciate what a fighter has done rather than look at what they havent