Perception going in is one thing. They're why Hopkins gets so much credit. How good these fighters are is another.
Again, if you list the 10 best opponents they've fought, Floyd will have the majority, and maybe the large majority, of those names. Expand that list to 20 and you're listing only Floyd for almost the entire thing.
Hopkins is a great for his skill and longevity. The names lack in comparison to Floyd Mayweather. Roy Jones, too.
what do you mean perception? Was a 39 year old Mosley who hadn't boxed in some 14 years and only looked good once in years better than say Pavlik who was unbeaten at MW and had true KO power and the hugely favoured fighter? No.
It's not perception, it's fact. Perception is going by names and reputations built on something which was accomplished a decade earlier.
what do you mean perception? Was a 39 year old Mosley who hadn't boxed in some 14 years and only looked good once in years better than say Pavlik who was unbeaten at MW and had true KO power and the hugely favoured fighter? No.
It's not perception, it's fact. Perception is going by names and reputations built on something which was accomplished a decade earlier.
Yes it is perception. As in Mosley was champ at 147 and was coming off the Margarito destruction where he looked better than ever. He also came on the back of a hall of fame career and they fought at the weight Mosley had been campaigning at for years.
As opposed to Pavlik fight that was contested at 170 - way higher than Pavlik had ever fought at or would fight at again.
Pavlik was a good win, but it wasn't more than that. Mosley wasn't a top win either - but it was good. The difference is that Hopkins only has 2-3 wins that are better than Pavlik, whereas Mayweather has 7-8 wins that are better than Mosley.
Plus Mosley will forever be remembered in far better light than Kelly Pavlik.
Comment