Rank the following Middleweights

[O Prophet]

In what order would you rank the following Middleweights and their reigns?

(in no particular order)
Martinez
GGG
Hagler
Monzon
Hopkins

Taking into account their skills, longevity, opposition, excitement, etc.

[bojangles1987]

Hagler and Monzon are pretty decisively at the top, then Hopkins, then Golovkin, then Martinez.

[Joe Beamish]

Hagler and Monzon are pretty decisively at the top, then Hopkins, then Golovkin, then Martinez.

Anything else would be sheer idiocy.

[BoloShot]

Hagler and Monzon are pretty decisively at the top, then Hopkins, then Golovkin, then Martinez.

Yeah that's about the only credible list one can make.

[Chollo Vista]

In what order would you rank the following Middleweights and their reigns?

(in no particular order)
Martinez
GGG
Hagler
Monzon
Hopkins

Taking into account their skills, longevity, opposition, excitement, etc.

1. Hagler
2. Monzon/Hopkins
3. Martinez/G
4.
5.

[Citizen Koba]

Echoing what several others have said:

Monzon / Hagler
>
>
Hopkins
Golovkin
>
Maravilla

Monzon and Hagler is whichever you like, Golovkin and Hopkins - just taken by their MW careers - really ain't that far apart. Golovkins best wins were all close, Hopkin's were against Tito and Oscar who despite the name value never did jack at 160 and were elite at 147.

[BoloShot]

1. Hagler
2. Monzon/Hopkins
3. Martinez/G
4.
5.

Having Hopkins on the same level as Monzon at 160? Nah. Hopkins is a great fighter but he won too many fights relying on illegal tactics. That headbutt of his seemed to cut all of his opponents. Not to mention the losses he took against Roy and Taylor, plus his awful Mercado performance. The names weren't as good too. Monzon beat fellow greats at middleweight, Hopkins beat mostly beltholders, contenders and an Oscar who had no place at 160 (plus possibly a dive) alongside Trinidad who was much the same. Very good wins, just not great.

[Chollo Vista]

Having Hopkins on the same level as Monzon at 160? Nah. Hopkins is a great fighter but he won too many fights relying on illegal tactics. That headbutt of his seemed to cut all of his opponents. Not to mention the losses he took against Roy and Taylor, plus his awful Mercado performance. The names weren't as good too. Monzon beat fellow greats at middleweight, Hopkins beat mostly beltholders, contenders and an Oscar who had no place at 160 alongside Trinidad who was much the same. Very good wins, just not great.

My initial thoughts were to pick Monzon as well. Then I thought about the 9 draws of which I'm not sure how many of those he lost. I'm sure there can be arguments.

I'd have to look at Monzon a little closer, but the draws coupled with Hopkins losing to man nobody in the last 100 years at 160 would've beat in the great RJJ and then he lost to Taylor. The other loss was his first fight in which Monzon has 1 to similar opposition

I don't know it's close.

[Mammoth]

Monzon
Hagler
Hopkins
Martinez
Golovkin

[BoloShot]

My initial thoughts were to pick Monzon as well. Then I thought about the 9 draws of which I'm not sure how many of those he lost. I'm sure there can be arguments.

I'd have to look at Monzon a little closer, but the draws coupled with Hopkins losing to man nobody in the last 100 years at 160 would've beat in the great RJJ and then he lost to Taylor. The other loss was his first fight in which Monzon has 1 to similar opposition

I don't know it's close.

Well he never had a draw in his championship run which is what we're really talking about here. I think most of his draws were either debatable in his favour or fair except for the Bennie Briscoe one which was controversial. Briscoe was a great fighter though so I don't fault him on that, it came well before his championship run too which was totally dominant. He put any doubt to sleep about Briscoe possibly beating him in their rematch when he was champ.