Some consider him that now. But not me. However if he does fight Martinez win or lose, I'd say if he wins absolutely, if he loses 2nd best of this era for sure. IMO as of right now B-hop is the greatest active fighter bar none.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
If Floyd retires undefeated having beaten Martinez is he the greatest of the era?
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Bushbaby View PostSome consider him that now. But not me. However if he does fight Martinez win or lose, I'd say if he wins absolutely, if he loses 2nd best of this era for sure. IMO as of right now B-hop is the greatest active fighter bar none.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 4CornersKid View PostThat's a lot of IF's.
The most likely way I see Floyd's career playing out is this......
Spring 2012: Cotto
Late 2012: Saul Alvarez (if he beats Kirkland)
Spring 2013: Amir Khan (if he beats Peterson, and some at WW like the Berto-Ortiz II winner)
Those are givens I think, and those are all good fights.
Now, if I had my way, this is how he'd finish after that:
Late 2013: Sergio Martinez/Manny Pacquiao
Spring 2014: Sergio or Pac, which ever one you didn't before.
Late 2014: One of the up-and-coming fighters who keeps on winning (Danny Garcia, Kell Brook, someone like that).
I really doubt it happens though.
But, if Floyd beats Sergio at 154-160, he'd have to be the best of this era, given it's already up for debate. That would seal the deal in all reality. I still doubt that fight happens though.
Of course an "era" can be stretched or contracted to encompass as many or as few years as suits the purposes of whoever...which is to aggrandize Mayweather over Pacquiao.Last edited by edgarg; 04-06-2012, 12:55 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bushbaby View PostSome consider him that now. But not me. However if he does fight Martinez win or lose, I'd say if he wins absolutely, if he loses 2nd best of this era for sure. IMO as of right now B-hop is the greatest active fighter bar none.
Having Trinidad and DelaHoya move up was legacy-defining by any means.
It wasn't until Hopkins stepped up in 2005 that he should get ANY credit.
And truthfully, BHOP's resume from 2005 to present day isn't the greatest of this era.
Not only because he's lost several times, but because he waited until he was so old to start taking chances that losses at this point aren't heavily held against a 45 year old man.
That in itself is bullshit.
In truth, I don't feel as though Hopkins even beat Winky Wright or Pascal the first time. But officially he's lost to Taylor twice and Calzaghe since 2005.
None of his wins since then validate him being considered the best of any era.
Look at BHOP's resume from 1988-2004 and then tell me that resume is the best of an era.
No chance.
And when Dawson puts BHOP away, the point will be even stronger.
Problem with some people is that they wish to give BHOP extraordinary credit for ANY win since 2005, but win he loses they say "Aww come on man ... he's an old dude who is hangin' with these young guys".
If he can take credit at 45, he can lose credit at 45.
Factor EVERYTHING in.
Comment
Comment