Comments Thread For: Bernard Hopkins Believes Gervonta Davis Is Better Than Devin Haney: "He Beat The Better Opposition"

[MONGOOSE66]

Devin Haney and Gervonta "Tank" Davis are headstrong and considered the best of the best. While the two no longer compete in the same weight class, they've continued to argue loudly. Although it's been entertaining, fans are at the point where they simply want to see them get it on.
[Click Here To Read More]

Give me a fkn break. tttank is STILL scared of Loma. All the ELITES have fought Loma but tttank. I wonder why that is??

[Topdogggbm]

Haney is proven world class boxer. Elite actually.

Davis is manufactured cherry picker who never really fought anybody good. Give him Shakur or Loma, than we can talk.

And no chance Tank will ever fight Haney without catchweight any rehydration clause.

See I don’t believe that last part at all. I think when Tank runs out of guys he can fight as a clear favorite, he’ll eventually have to fight a belt holder or big name. And Haney in my opinion is the target. I’d rather fight that dude than Teo or Matias. Wouldn’t you?

[pnut901]

Bernard says some ****** stuff sometimes . If would much rather watch Tank fight than Haney , but the facts are that Tank is around six years older that Haney and hasn't accomplished nearly as much. I suspect that if Tank agreed with Hopkins , they would have already fought . The New Four Kings era has been an abysmal failure. They should have all fought each other by now. They talk and Tweet more than they fight. Someone should take their phones.

[SteveM]

man hopkins took too many punches to the head to think Tank beat the better opposition than Haney? I mean come on Loma was on the P4P list and none of the fighters tank beat were there at all. Prograis was also supposed to be the guy to beat at 140 give or take 1 or 2 names so he was top 3 in the division and mostly though of as the number 1 guy depending on who you talked to.

So sorry B-Hop Hector Luis Garcia and Ryan Garcia do not equal Loma and Prograis lol

while your right about Haney beating Loma an Tank there is a context - personally I saw Haney Loma as a draw. Then, I think Prograis was NOT a top 3 fighter at 140 by the time they fought - he took too much punishment in the taylor fight (as did Taylor) - where a fighter is ranked should change a lot quickker based on last performance or two. Beating Jose Zepeda looked good - except he was washed from too many hard fights. Tank has beaten 'lesser' fighters a lot more comprehensively, 'cept Pitbull

[daggum]

haney has 3 top 10 wins and tank has 0. hes obviously just trolling. everone knows tank has no resume.

[IronDanHamza]

haney has 3 top 10 wins and tank has 0. hes obviously just trolling. everone knows tank has no resume.

Out of curiosity who do you rank higher, Mayweather or Sugar Ray Leonard?

If we go by The Ring rankings, which we know you consider "facts", it seems from what I can see;

Mayweather beat 19 Top 10 opponents to Leonard's 13.

Of those 19, 14 of those were in the Top 5 to Leonard's 8, but more impressively on the "fact scale" Mayweather beat more Top 5 ranked guys than Leonard beat Top 10 ranked guys.

I personally rank Leonard ahead of Mayweather but I'm going to assume you rank Mayweather over Leonard considering the facts presented?

[Theshotyoudontsee]

BHop displaying his awesome intellect once again. Man is a genius.

Tank is alot more fun to watch than Haney, that is for sure. But Tank hasn't fought anyone apart from a zombified Ryan Garcia and a few guys that really had no shot. The case can be made that Haney doesn't have much to brag about since he won the belts from Atrocious Kambosis, Loma beat him, and he fought a shot Prograis.

But at least he fought those guys. Tank has a terrible resume.

[daggum]

Out of curiosity who do you rank higher, Mayweather or Sugar Ray Leonard?

If we go by The Ring rankings, which we know you consider "facts", it seems from what I can see;

Mayweather beat 19 Top 10 opponents to Leonard's 13.

Of those 19, 14 of those were in the Top 5 to Leonard's 8, but more impressively on the "fact scale" Mayweather beat more Top 5 ranked guys than Leonard beat Top 10 ranked guys.

I personally rank Leonard ahead of Mayweather but I'm going to assume you rank Mayweather over Leonard considering the facts presented?

i actually have floyd beating more than 19, i think 23 by my count but i count guys that make the rankings after the fight so marquez for example even though he technically wasnt in the top 10 when they fought. then again i had floyd losing to castillo in the first fight and pac so 21 on my personal top 10 meter which is still really good. its no ali who has like 31 but its really good. we have to actually use these facts to make decisions. the facts dont tell us anything by themselves. for example its a fact robert horry has more championships than jordan. is he better than jordan? i dont think so.

the rankings are just a rough outline of a fighters career. they dont give you the detail needed to compare fighter A to fighter B in depth. it just shows you if they are fighting quality opponents or not. i dont deny floyd fought quality opponents, he jsut doesn't have the prime greats like leonard and he did that purposefully. ranking greatness is not an accumulation thing. for example leonard fought a bunch of greats that were in their primes or very close to it. floyd did not. huge advantage leonard. its up to you to decide how much weight to give to prime greats and how much weight to give to old greats like pac, mosley, hoya, etc...i personally think beating a guy in his prime is a lot better and when you have 4 of those like leonard, you are greater than a guy with 0 even if that guy has 21 top 10 wins and you only have 13. its how you personally weight it since this is subjective. floyd accumulated a lot of good solid wins throughout his career which is hard to do, but he doesnt go down with the greats because of his lack of top level wins. some guys like pac, ali, etc...have top level wins and a lot of quantity so imo they are above floyd. leonard is above floyd because he had the quality but not as much quantity. i also think fighting the very best is more likely to shorten your career since those fights are so tough physically and mentally so if floyd had fought the best guys in their primes i dont think he would have made it to 21 top 10 wins but thats just my opinion.

back to haney vs tank. if you have 0 top 5 wins you are automatically out in terms of being a great fighter or a top fighter. you are automatically not on the level of a guy that has 3 top 5 wins if you have 0. i dont think thats in dispute at all is it? dont think we need to break that down. for example if leonard had 8 and floyd had 0. thats easy to decipher no? 8 vs 14 sounds better for floyd on the surface but if you want to go below the surface and go deep...did floyd beat anyone as good as prime hearns? no not even close, prime duran? not even close. prime benitez? not even close. close to prime hagler? not even close. hes got a past it pac, past it mosley, past it hoya, drained canelo, etc...their used to be a narrative that leonard waited till hagler got old which may be somewhat true but the level of waiting floyd did is far beyond anything leonard did. hagler was 32 and hadnt been knocked out cold a couple fights earlier. pac was 36 and had been knocked out cold a couple fights earlier. cotto took 2 hellacious beatings, mosley was 39 and looked terrible in most his fights for years before and after the marg fight. hoya didnt look good for years before and after figthing floyd. benitez went on to have a great career, duran the same, hearns the same, hagler retired but hadnt lost in 10 years looking very dominant. those are A level wins. dont see that for floyd. i would say canelo since he went on to do great things but canelo at that time of his career and at 152? i dont personally give him that one.

[Roadblock]

I dont think Bhop is talking rankings I feel he is talking eye test, Tank seems to catch a lot of crap but the guy can fight like fck I just wish they would fight the big fights to prove it.

[IronDanHamza]

i actually have floyd beating more than 19, i think 23 by my count but i count guys that make the rankings after the fight so marquez for example even though he technically wasnt in the top 10 when they fought. then again i had floyd losing to castillo in the first fight and pac so 21 on my personal top 10 meter which is still really good. its no ali who has like 31 but its really good. we have to actually use these facts to make decisions. the facts dont tell us anything by themselves. for example its a fact robert horry has more championships than jordan. is he better than jordan? i dont think so.

the rankings are just a rough outline of a fighters career. they dont give you the detail needed to compare fighter A to fighter B in depth. it just shows you if they are fighting quality opponents or not. i dont deny floyd fought quality opponents, he jsut doesn't have the prime greats like leonard and he did that purposefully. ranking greatness is not an accumulation thing. for example leonard fought a bunch of greats that were in their primes or very close to it. floyd did not. huge advantage leonard. its up to you to decide how much weight to give to prime greats and how much weight to give to old greats like pac, mosley, hoya, etc...i personally think beating a guy in his prime is a lot better and when you have 4 of those like leonard, you are greater than a guy with 0 even if that guy has 21 top 10 wins and you only have 13. its how you personally weight it since this is subjective. floyd accumulated a lot of good solid wins throughout his career which is hard to do, but he doesnt go down with the greats because of his lack of top level wins. some guys like pac, ali, etc...have top level wins and a lot of quantity so imo they are above floyd. leonard is above floyd because he had the quality but not as much quantity. i also think fighting the very best is more likely to shorten your career since those fights are so tough physically and mentally so if floyd had fought the best guys in their primes i dont think he would have made it to 21 top 10 wins but thats just my opinion.

back to haney vs tank. if you have 0 top 5 wins you are automatically out in terms of being a great fighter or a top fighter. you are automatically not on the level of a guy that has 3 top 5 wins if you have 0. i dont think thats in dispute at all is it? dont think we need to break that down. for example if leonard had 8 and floyd had 0. thats easy to decipher no? 8 vs 14 sounds better for floyd on the surface but if you want to go below the surface and go deep...did floyd beat anyone as good as prime hearns? no not even close, prime duran? not even close. prime benitez? not even close. close to prime hagler? not even close. hes got a past it pac, past it mosley, past it hoya, drained canelo, etc...their used to be a narrative that leonard waited till hagler got old which may be somewhat true but the level of waiting floyd did is far beyond anything leonard did. hagler was 32 and hadnt been knocked out cold a couple fights earlier. pac was 36 and had been knocked out cold a couple fights earlier. cotto took 2 hellacious beatings, mosley was 39 and looked terrible in most his fights for years before and after the marg fight. hoya didnt look good for years before and after figthing floyd. benitez went on to have a great career, duran the same, hearns the same, hagler retired but hadnt lost in 10 years looking very dominant. those are A level wins. dont see that for floyd. i would say canelo since he went on to do great things but canelo at that time of his career and at 152? i dont personally give him that one.

But wait wait wait, you said Fulton beating more Top 10 ranked guys than Spence meant it was a fact that he had a better resume? Or it’s similar because they’ve both beaten the same amount of ranked guys or whatever your dumb argument was. I said that's not a fact due to context. But now you're moving the goalpost and saying context matters. Why?

Oh it's a "rough outline" now......When it suits you When it came to the Spence Fulton comparison when discussing your new play thing Inoue, it wasn't an outline it was just pure numbers. Or how you liked to put it: "Facts." You did the same shit 10 years ago when you had a crush on Rigondeaux when you were hyping up his win over Rico fuckin Ramos of all people because "he was top 5 ranked" despite the fact Rico Ramos is garbage. Context was irrelevant then, just numbers, all that matters was the ranking. When it's a guy you have a weird hate thing for, context comes into play. You've been doing this nonsense for a over a decade and a half guy, it's bad. Real bad.

Such as Baldomir for example, you remember Carlos Baldomir, right? I think you might have mentioned him once or twice over the years. He was ranked #1 when Mayweather beat him. So objectively, on the fact scale, that's a great win? And in his prime too. Prime #1 ranked fighter? Very impressive I'm sure you'll agree?

This is exactly my point when I say you die by the "rankings" sword entirely when it suits you. When it doesn't, you move every goal post there is.

Very disingenuous of you, but you know that. Or maybe you don't, I don't know. It's difficult to tell how far down the delusional hole you've fell at this point.

Either way, it's neither here nor there. Just try and be more consistent in future.