Watching BHOP on ESPN, he said his best career win was Trinidad. Agree?

[dde91]

Dude, way to minimize Hearns's career. Come on.

Hearns is definitely the greater fighter.

Hearns had devastating power. One of the greatest punchers of all time and he could actually box very very well. Was outboxing Leonard in the first fight and should have wont he second fight. But Hopkins is the greater fighter IMO.

[IronDanHamza]

Hopkins- Echols, Holmes, Allen, Eastman, Trinidad(HOFer), undefeated Pavlik-Lipsy-Glen Johnson, Wright(borderline HOFer), Tarver, Pascal, De La Hoya(Hofer), some other ex title holders simon brown, william joppy, and John David Jackson.

Hearns has two ATG's. And fought a Golden Era. but To me Hopkins is the better all around fighter. Easily.

Pavlik, Winky and De La Hoya are not great wins IMO.

Winky Wright may have been P4P but at 170 he is usless, as is Pavlik.

And those two were not in the Top 10 when Hopkins fought them. Neither was Glen Johnson, actually.

The De La Hoya fight was bull**** too, who is also useless at 160.

Whereas the smaller men Hearns beat (Benitez and Duran) were ranked #1 and #2 at JMW when Hearns fought them. Add the fact they are both greater than anyone Hopkins has ever fought.

Like I said in my post, his wins over Echols, Holmes, Allen, Eastman, Joppy, Tarver and of course Trinidad are excellent wins for Hopkins. Including his excellent title reign. (Although the vast majority of that reign was of a paper title.)

But in comparison to Hearns beating Benitez, Duran and Cuevas which stand out drastically compared to Hopkins, are are all argubally better than anything Hopkins ever did. Plus, Shields, Medal, Hutching, Schuler, Andries I think it's clear to see that Tommy Hearns is a greater fighter.

[ИATAS]

Pavlik, Winky and De La Hoya are not great wins IMO.

Winky Wright may have been P4P but at 170 he is usless, as is Pavlik.

And those two were not in the Top 10 when Hopkins fought them. Neither was Glen Johnson, actually.

I firmly believe the weight had nothing to do with pavlik getting schooled. He fought at 166 at beat Taylor and it's widely known he was struggling big time to make 160 pounds (they openly stated they would go up in weight after they "beat" hopkins). When Pavlik fought Martinez, he weighed like 180 pounds on fight night.

Oscar didn't belong at 160 no doubt, Winky I still found it pretty interesting to see how he took away Winky's jab which to many people was ugly to watch but it's a tactical move to take his best weapon away from him.

[ИATAS]

He didnt beat those guys and he didnt beat anyone of note at middleweight apart from Joppy. If Hopkins didnt expose him, those lot would have done.

I stand firmly by my statement that Tito would have beat keith holmes and the likes. He was in another class than those guys.

Well comparing Tito to Hearns is a poor example. Hearns hadnt been dropped by journeyman and his power was all natural not enhanced by illegal wraps.

oh haha the truth comes out! Dropped by journeymen and illegal handwraps huh? You might want to look into the handwrap situation and the rules in New York, which are different than elsewhere. He was no margarito. And yes he was dropped many guys were Pacquiao was KO'd by two guys no one knows of, Oscar was dropped by a bum, it happens to young fighters. Clearly Tito got past that.

[dde91]

I think they are saying greater as in his the greater fighter, All Time, as in legacy goes. They are arguing Hearns is legacy is greater than b-hops, based on the names on his resume.

Hopkins vs Hearns MY OPINION

Resume- Hearns by a couple steps, but only because he has Duran in his resume. If he didn't have Duran it would be almost a tie. If Hopkins could Beat Dawson and maybe Bute then I think Hopkins should move up or be even with Hearns resume even tho Bute and Dawson aren't ATG's, but i think they have potential to maybe be Hofers later when they retire which will make Hopkins resume move up 5-10 years from now.

Accomplishments- Hopkins, oldest fighter to win a title, 20 successful defenses, and was undisputed middleweight champion collecting every major belt. Hearns won titles i think in 5 weight classes. but cruiser was IBO. Even tho thats great accomplishment. so really 4 weight classes is better then 2 from Hopkins but Hopkins recent win is going to be in the History books for awhile.

Longitivity- Hopkins

Power- Hearns

Speed- about the same, Hopkins maybe a little faster

Ring presents- Hopkins

Footwork- Hopkins

Defense- Hopkins

so Hopkins to me wins the head to head legacy matchup. But this is my Opinion. Hearns could be greater in your books. and thats fine. most agree Hopkins would win head to head and Most of Hearns great wins came at 154-160's. and most say Hopkins would win at 160. so to me HOpkins>Hearns

[dde91]

Pavlik, Winky and De La Hoya are not great wins IMO.

Winky Wright may have been P4P but at 170 he is usless, as is Pavlik.

And those two were not in the Top 10 when Hopkins fought them. Neither was Glen Johnson, actually.

The De La Hoya fight was bull**** too, who is also useless at 160.

Whereas the smaller men Hearns beat (Benitez and Duran) were ranked #1 and #2 at JMW when Hearns fought them. Add the fact they are both greater than anyone Hopkins has ever fought.

Like I said in my post, his wins over Echols, Holmes, Allen, Eastman, Joppy, Tarver and of course Trinidad are excellent wins for Hopkins. Including his excellent title reign. (Although the vast majority of that reign was of a paper title.)

But in comparison to Hearns beating Benitez, Duran and Cuevas which stand out drastically compared to Hopkins, are are all argubally better than anything Hopkins ever did. Plus, Shields, Medal, Hutching, Schuler, Andries I think it's clear to see that Tommy Hearns is a greater fighter.

Glen Johnson was the mandatory for the IBF
De La Hoya had the WBO (even tho robbed sturm)
Pavlik is fighting at super middle. and beat taylor at 166.

Glen johnson isn't a GREAT win because he was green. but is a solid just like Jones win over Hopkins. De La hoya had a belt. Hopkins took it cause he was in his divison. Pavlik challenged him and got bashed on. Was a top p4p fighter that was suppose to retire him.

[IronDanHamza]

I firmly believe the weight had nothing to do with pavlik getting schooled. He fought at 166 at beat Taylor and it's widely known he was struggling big time to make 160 pounds (they openly stated they would go up in weight after they "beat" hopkins). When Pavlik fought Martinez, he weighed like 180 pounds on fight night.

Oscar didn't belong at 160 no doubt, Winky I still found it pretty interesting to see how he took away Winky's jab which to many people was ugly to watch but it's a tactical move to take his best weapon away from him.

I think it was, not majorly, but I do think it was. I think Pavlik moved straight back down to 160 for a reason, I think he may have believed he could compete thought but got a cold dose of reality (In both ways).

I personally don't think he looks good at 168 right now, we'll see.

But all means, I'ts not a bull**** fight like I feel Oscar was. It's a good win. But only because of the way he did it, IMO. I rate his wins over Echols, Holmes, Allen, Joppy and Eastman better than that win over Pavlik.

As I do Winky, again, the main reason that's a good win is because of the way he dominated him. Winky has no business at all at 170, in all honesty.

I think his win over Winky is solid at best and Pavlik being a little better but still both not amongst Hopkins' best wins.

[dde91]

loving this debate. But i got to go to work be back on later tonite to read the post. HITMAN VS THE EXECUTIONER

[djtmal]

i said he lost. NEVER SAID He didn't. Jones won fair and square. but at the end of the day Hopkins will have a greater legacy then Jones who was a p4p fraud for a decade after. he was top 10 p4p but no way in hell he should have been p4p #1 all them years.

Talk about frauds. Hopkins takes the cake. A lightheavy who scaled down to middleweight and beats a plethora of weak middleweights, whose biggest wins come against blown up welterweights is the greatest con job in the history of boxing.

[IronDanHamza]

Glen Johnson was the mandatory for the IBF
De La Hoya had the WBO (even tho robbed sturm)
Pavlik is fighting at super middle. and beat taylor at 166.

Glen johnson isn't a GREAT win because he was green. but is a solid just like Jones win over Hopkins. De La hoya had a belt. Hopkins took it cause he was in his divison. Pavlik challenged him and got bashed on. Was a top p4p fighter that was suppose to retire him.

But this still isn't as good as Benitez, Duran and Cuevas alone, though. Let alone the rest, where other than Trinidad they compare quite evenly.

Johnson wasn't in the Top 10 at that point I know that much.

I don't care what Oscar had, he didn't win the fight against Sturm and he is useless at 160.

Pavlik's a good win but it's not great, I would say Hearns' win over Virgil Hill is certinaly better.