If Bernard loses......

[Eman]

I think if Hopkins would beat Taylor, fight and beat winky then move up and beat tarver or jones, he would then be considered top 3 best all time middleweights. i know thats asking for alot but i think that is what it would take for the world to believe he is an all time great. if he beats taylor people will say that taylor wasnt ready, too green and many people will not count it as a big win, even though i believe it should. another question is, out of his total 21 title defenses were against allen and joppy?

[GasPed]

But on the other side of things Hopkins has 20 title defences and has basically not lost a round in all of them which is simply amazing.

Huh? Let's not get carried away here - he's lost plenty of rounds in those 20 defences!

[stepmonster]

you cant argue with 20 whatever defenses. thats amazing to me.

[stepmonster]

i dont know it should be a good fight though, bhop is good but he may have expired and taylor is might take him off of the shelves

[Eman]

Taylor wins by decision

[jabsRstiff]

Hopkins legacy can only be enhanced at this point.

If he loses to Taylor, it will because his age has finally caught up to him.

Do any of you think Taylor would have a prayer against the Hopkins who unified the crown in 2001? I surely hope none of you do.

[Bozo_no no]

will it hurt is legacy. On the countdown to Hopkins-Taylor, Jim Lapley said it would and Emanuel Stewart basically called Hopkins overrated, so what do you guys think?

I think Lampley and Steward are biased, and that asking if this would hurt an already obvious hall of fame resume is a silly question.

[Martin (Top Knowledge)]

If Bernard loses.......

It'll be for the good of boxing!

[2nd II none]

I've always said Hopkins is overrated The one time he fought a truly talented guy he got beat up. Via Roy Jones Jr.

[PRboxingfan]

Hopkins legacy can only be enhanced at this point.

If he loses to Taylor, it will because his age has finally caught up to him.

Do any of you think Taylor would have a prayer against the Hopkins who unified the crown in 2001? I surely hope none of you do.

Well, he'd have a shot against the Hopkins who unified with Holmes, a blown up Jr. Middleweight who should've never campaigned at 160 to begin with, even tho he won a title in the division. The Nard that beat Tito would've beaten many of the top #4# fighters of that era. All of them, I think, except Roy Jones and Mayweather.

Hopkins is a product of a weak division. He'd never have this many title defenses had this been a strong division. Beating people like Allen (twice), Hakkar, a used-up Joppy, Carl Daniels, Echols (twice), Simon Brown, Andrew Council, William James, and Joe Lipsey is nothing to write home to mom about. I mean, come on, let's face it, the only challengers who had a chance at beating Hopkins were Trinidad and Eastman. DLH was overmatched and out of his league at Middleweight, and Glen Johnson was still a bum back when he fought Nard. It's too bad we never saw a fight against James Toney because I think Toney would've beat him worse than Roy did.

Hopkins is to Middleweight what Roy was to the Lt. Heavies: the champ because there was nobody out there that could challenge him in a weak division. Unlike Roy, tho, he doesn't have the gifts of speed, power, and reflexes. Roy was talented and gifted, Nard is just lucky nobody out there is halfway descent.

I'm still picking Hopkins to win on points, but I wouldn't be surprised if the fight went the way of Taylor.