When was Hopkins prime?

**THE REAL NINJA** · 10-23-2006, 12:28 PM

I think of his peek as when he was beating Tito,Holmes,Joppy,DLH around 2000

**scap** · 10-23-2006, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by Bobby Peru

So.....when was it?

He seems to get better with age, but surley at 40 he should be totally shot by now.
Was the win over Tarver Hopkins at jis best???

Super question! Super ****ing question!

Hopkins vs. Tito...he really graduated that night into the ultimate tactician...before he was more of a dirty bralwer...this fight and more importantly the dangerous opponent that Trinidad was changed Hopkins for the better...he never switched back to what I call the "junkyard dog"

The big question is when did he fall out of his prime? It wasnt hard to see after watching a few of his fights post Tito that he was going to be in a very close fight the second one of his opponents decided to let their hands go.

**** he and Howard Eastman stared at each other for 12 rounds...had Eastman of had a sack he may have had something for Nard that night.

Taylor may not have landed many clean punches but he let his hands go and was rewarded for it...Bernard has been in a "conserve punches" mode ever since Tito and it was clear that it would catch up too him...I dont know if I buy that he is out of his prime I just think with his workrate it is easy to steel a few rounds and make the fight very close...I tend to figure that the blueprint is out on Hopkins more then I do that he is past his prime.

Plus a younger bralwer like Hopkins may not have faired well against Tito Trinidad... so take your pick a younger fresher Hopkins with half of the ring smarts and savvy or an older wiser Hopkins who is there to out think you....you dont get them both! very tough questions!

**The Noose** · 10-23-2006, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by scap

Super question! Super ****ing question!

Hopkins vs. Tito...he really graduated that night into the ultimate tactician...before he was more of a dirty bralwer...this fight and more importantly the dangerous opponent that Trinidad was changed Hopkins for the better...he never switched back to what I call the "junkyard dog"

The big question is when did he fall out of his prime? It wasnt hard to see after watching a few of his fights post Tito that he was going to be in a very close fight the second one of his opponents decided to let their hands go.

**** he and Howard Eastman stared at each other for 12 rounds...had Eastman of had a sack he may have had something for Nard that night.

Taylor may not have landed many clean punches but he let his hands go and was rewarded for it...Bernard has been in a "conserve punches" mode ever since Tito and it was clear that it would catch up too him...I dont know if I buy that he is out of his prime I just think with his workrate it is easy to steel a few rounds and make the fight very close...I tend to figure that the blueprint is out on Hopkins more then I do that he is past his prime.

Plus a younger bralwer like Hopkins may not have faired well against Tito Trinidad... so take your pick a younger fresher Hopkins with half of the ring smarts and savvy or an older wiser Hopkins who is there to out think you....you dont get them both! very tough questions!

Excellent answer! ****ing excellent answer!!

**Abe Attell** · 10-23-2006, 01:06 PM

Plus a younger bralwer like Hopkins may not have faired well against Tito Trinidad

Get the **** out of here...go back and watch Hopkins in his youth, that guy was confusing, ******ing, and destroying people with his tactics, except for Jones Jr.

Tito would have gotten beaten just the same if not worse

Go watch the Glenn Johnson fight and tell me Hopkins wasn't good.

**BuddyChacon** · 10-23-2006, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by Abe Attell

Get the **** out of here...go back and watch Hopkins in his youth, that guy was confusing, ******ing, and destroying people with his tactics, except for Jones Jr.

Tito would have gotten beaten just the same if not worse

Go watch the Glenn Johnson fight and tell me Hopkins wasn't good.

Exactly and the Hopkins that fought Joe Lipsey was downright scary. He had all those tools then just not yet showcased.

**Left2body** · 10-23-2006, 01:14 PM

Very good thread topic and good post so far. It is a good question and hard to really figure out because Hopkins had such huge gaps between loses. He lost his first fight but won 20ish fights after that then lost to RJJ and won another 20ish fights before again losing to JT.

I will only say this. For the RJJ fight while Hopkins was not as savvy as he was in later years he was far from green. RJJ was a young fighter also.

But a good measure of where we think Hopkins peaked at could be to ask:

Would the B Hop that defeated Tito have beaten the RJJ that beat Hop?

Would the B Hop that lost to RJJ have beaten the JT that B Hop lost to?

I personally think that the Echols fights might've been the pinacle for Hop since he had a better combination of work rate and savvy. He was dirty, tricky and let his hands go for those fights and I think that would've probably been the toughest version of B-Hop to defeat.

**Abe Attell** · 10-23-2006, 01:16 PM

I love the Echols fights.....

**scap** · 10-23-2006, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Abe Attell

Get the **** out of here...go back and watch Hopkins in his youth, that guy was confusing, ******ing, and destroying people with his tactics, except for Jones Jr.

Tito would have gotten beaten just the same if not worse

Go watch the Glenn Johnson fight and tell me Hopkins wasn't good.

Who said Hopkins wasnt good? Was it me abe?

The johnson fight is a great example but is Johnson Tito Trinidad?

I agree that Bernard beats any version of tito but the younger much more aggressive Hopkins is in much tougher against Trinidad then the older wiser Nard who took ZERO chances against the left hooker.

Does the Hopkins that fought Echols have an easier time with Tito then the fight we actually saw against the two? I dont think so, maybe Im wrong.

**scap** · 10-23-2006, 01:26 PM

Originally posted by Left2body

Very good thread topic and good post so far. It is a good question and hard to really figure out because Hopkins had such huge gaps between loses. He lost his first fight but won 20ish fights after that then lost to RJJ and won another 20ish fights before again losing to JT.

I will only say this. For the RJJ fight while Hopkins was not as savvy as he was in later years he was far from green. RJJ was a young fighter also.

But a good measure of where we think Hopkins peaked at could be to ask:

Would the B Hop that defeated Tito have beaten the RJJ that beat Hop?

Would the B Hop that lost to RJJ have beaten the JT that B Hop lost to?

I personally think that the Echols fights might've been the pinacle for Hop since he had a better combination of work rate and savvy. He was dirty, tricky and let his hands go for those fights and I think that would've probably been the toughest version of B-Hop to defeat.

The only version of Jones Hopkins can beat is todays version and does anyone really want to count that?

When was Hopkins prime?