Hopkins is my dude but tactically I always believed he is overrated as a tactician

[AntonTheMeh]

its not about athleticism...

pretty sure that's what i was getting at when i posted this.

totally disagree. hop has never been that athletic at all. he's been near the top of the sport for 15 years because of his cunning and guile. that's what a tactician is to me.

in response
to this

He's not overrated. He just doesn't look as smooth and precise as guys like, Floyd, Rigo, ect.

i said this.

because those guys are uber athletic.

still stand by it. a better athlete just as schooled as someone who isn't as good an athlete, will look smoother more natural then the lesser athlete.

[Citizen Koba]

Obviously some of you guys don't know the meaning of tactics, judging by some of the posts. Technique and tactics are not the same. Technique is the proper way to throw punches, positioning, slip slide and parry,etc. Hopkins is a master at this like I said before. Tactics are plans to deal with an opponent and adjust when plan A isn't working. Fighters who had great technique but were not tacticians are guys like Jorge linares, Brian viloria Michael Nunn, Zab Judah, Dawson etc who can execute every move in the ring but tactically were not great

Hear what you're saying 'bout tactics and the ability to adjust mid-fight is one of the attributes shared by many of the very best boxers - but Hopkins has long been known for his meticulous preparation and fight planning. He works hard in advance to ensure he finds the best method for ensuring victory against a given opponent. I believe this is what is meant when his tactical acumen is praised.

At the risk of sounding pedantic, I would probably accept your definition of tactics, while crediting Hopkins with what should perhaps be called strategic excellence.

I'm not a great fan of B'Hop or his fighting style, but there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that he should be considered an ATG, however you define his ability to gain the win. His longevity at the very top of the game alone guarantees such status.

[boxing maniac]

Would Hopkins been able to beat Sugar Ray Leonard or Marvin Hagler ? He couldn't even beat Calzaghe

[Light_Speed]

If you mean that he's not as intelligent as people make him out to be, I would have to agree. His best asset is not his intelligence but his discipline. He comes into the ring with a good strategy and executes it to a T, without losing focus (think that's the real meaning of his nickname) but when it comes to adapting during the fight, he's not great in that department.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Would Hopkins been able to beat Sugar Ray Leonard or Marvin Hagler ? He couldn't even beat Calzaghe

You do realize that hopkins was over 40 years old when he fought joe and was nowhere near his physical prime,,, Hopkins has to fight at a slower pace to preserve energy,,, Hopkins at 30 would have beaten up Joe,,,

But no i dont think a prime hopkins on his best day would beat hagler and SRL but that isnt a knock on hopkins, its just a testament of how good hagler and srl were

[ИATAS]

Tayler, Joe and Dawson he was in his 40's and past prime. Other than Dawson a case can be made he won those fights too.

Can't fault a young Hopkins to Jones. James Toney is a great tacticians and we was literally embarrassed by Jones, whereas Hopkins was competitive.

[IronDanHamza]

Hopkins relies on tactics.

He's world champion at 50 because of tactics.

He doesn't and never really had the talent or athelticsm of the likes of Jones, Tony, Whitaker, Mayweather etc.

[ИATAS]

Hopkins relies on tactics.

He's world champion at 50 because of tactics.

He doesn't and never really had the talent or athelticsm of the likes of Jones, Tony, Whitaker, Mayweather etc.

The thread isn't about his athletic ability it's about being a great "technician", which he obviously is and was. You don't put on masterful clinics against guys like Trinidad by simply using tactis. Incredible skills did it.

Sure, pushing 50 his wins are almost purely ring IQ, but lets not act like he's always been 48 years old.

[AntonTheMeh]

The thread isn't about his athletic ability it's about being a great "technician", which he obviously is and was. You don't put on masterful clinics against guys like Trinidad by simply using tactis. Incredible skills did it.

Sure, pushing 50 his wins are almost purely ring IQ, but lets not act like he's always been 48 years old.

a technician is tactical. ya'll are arguing semantics. the athletic argument lends credence to the fact that he is in fact, not an overrated technician because, at the ripe old age of 50, he is still, one of the best in the sport.

[I Love Jesus!]

I totally agree about your entire post. The point I was making is that he isnt able to deal with all styles like say Leonard, Mayweather, Whitaker, etc. Thats part of tactics....knowing when something is not working and changing it up....thats just something I think he is overrated at...the sublties, the nuances, and as far as knowledge of the game in the ring he has forgot more than what some have learned.

lol he lost 2 fights clearly, Jones in 93 and dawson 20 years later. But your right he cant deal with different styles