If Bernard Hopkins beats Kovalev and Stevenson, he's higher on the ATG list than both Pac and Floyd

[krackdagawd]

By just about every measure, B-hop was in his RELATIVE prime during the 1st fight. As was Roy. But neither had yet peaked. Both would hit their peak at around the same time (96-2002).

B-Hop doesn't have one single win even close on his resume as Roy has over him.

So we going to act like BHop doesn't have a win over Roy?

We can use this same logic for Bernard's win over Roy but let me guess we not counting that because it wasn't "Prime Roy". There we go with those time table arguments Roy fans use.

Did you even watch the fight breh?

Roy took 3-4 rounds off Lebedev and should've been credited with a knockdown at the end of the 10th, which would've probably saved him from that horrific KO.

He would've lost by split descision and been a point away from actually taking the fight.

Yes I saw the fight friend and Roy got knocked the fukk out.

Oh he took rounds off?

He didn't get the credit for the knockdown?

That's cool and and but he lost by knock out, none of those things makes a difference friend because it didn't go to the cards..

And you seriously can't believe that Cloud, Shemenov & Murat are better than Lebedev.

Even Pascal is only just barely better than Lebedev.

The difference is that Hopkins is beating those level guys, Roy is getting brutally stopped by them.

A blown up out of shape Middleweight fighting top Cruiserweights in his mid-40's is alot more difficult than a natural Light Heavyweight fighting top Light Heavyweights in his late 40's.

We would have to assume B-Hop isn't able to compete with top Cruiserweights which is why he's not up there fighting them, even though he's naturally bigger than Roy.

All I'm seeing is a bunch of excuses.

We already seen what happens when we ask Roy if he has any more excuses.

BHop weighed in 172 for his last fight yet he is "naturally" bigger than Roy

He wouldn't be able to do so (or we would have to assume) because he hasn't beaten anybody on Prime Toney's level in his entire 26 year career.

And Toney had issues making weight his entire Middleweight/Super-Middleweight career. This is a natural 190-200 lb'er who his training staff somehow managed to squeeze into a Middleweight/Super-Middleweight frame. Still didn't stop him from putting on some of the best peformances of his career in those weight classes. Including arguably one of his best ever earlier that year against Tim Littles while having some of the same "weight problems".

Are we forgetting that at the time of Roy-Hopkins I, Roy had issues making Middleweight and had moved up to Super-Middleweight, but drained himself back down to 160 to easily outbox Hopkins (with a fractured hand) to capture the Middleweight title?

Hopkins doesn't have a name like a prime Toney? Cool he has names of three definite hof guys. Remember what I said about boxing careers being marathons? I don't have to name the accomplishments. You already know them. And for every accomplishment Roy has Bhop has as well the difference is Bhop's is growing and Roy's isn't.

What "Roids" did Roy use?
You do realize that there's nothing really abnormal about having a 6:1 testosterone ratio for any athlete in just about any sport?

This right here is all that needs to be said, you clearly are ignorant on this topic breh. 6x is a huge stretch I don't care what Vegas allows they aren't the end all be all..

I'll add this though, if this was Roy's natural level why did he blame it on a "supplement"? Why hasn't he tested that high again since?

For all we know, Hopkins, Mayweather, Pac etc. could be registering at the 6:1 testosterone ratio... and if they did, NOTHING would be reported about it because it's not illegal.

That's a great example except those guys have all fought outside of Vegas and have never popped up for elevated levels and Roy has fought outside of Vegas as well and didn't have that 6x elevated level. What could be the difference?

Roy still beat him... and clearly. While practically a shot, weight drained, dried up corpse.

Has Hopkins ever dropped 20 lbs & two weight divisions and beat the #1 rated fighter in said division?

That's the thing about this argument passed a certain point that's it for Roy and you guys don't want to include that.

Meanwhile BHop is still making history and he is doing it without PEDs.

edit Hopkin's physical peak/prime to me was from 95-2005...after that we saw a decline but I don't see anyone beating him at that period.

 

[LauderdaleBoss]

A great debate

True

and you rarely get one of these if it isn't in the OG Boxing thread at the top.

 

[krackdagawd]

I have Pac CLEARLY ahead of B-Hop, greatness wise. And Floyd & B-Hop neck & neck.

Oh my.

 

[Willy Waffle]

i honestly don't take the opinion of these boxing historians serious. they give toooooo much credit for all the fighter back in the day. i respect the benny leonards, sandy saddler, willie pep, ezzard charles, joe louis, jack johnson,and srr (and yes i have seen all of them fight before) etc but people need to stop acting like they head and shoulders (untouchable) with the likes of guys of today, like hopkins, floyd, and manny.

i was never a hopkins fan but i can't hate what he has done in his career. what i respect about him aside from all the accomplishments, is that he never had the roy jones blinding handspeed, didn't have tommy hearns ko power, never had the physical gifts of the guys in his era (toney, nunn, jones) and went on to accomplish what he did. even if hopkins never fight, stevenson or kovalev, to me he's one of the greatest fighters i've ever seen.

 

[krackdagawd]

i honestly don't take the opinion of these boxing historians serious. they give toooooo much credit for all the fighter back in the day. i respect the benny leonards, sandy saddler, willie pep, ezzard charles, joe louis, jack johnson,and srr (and yes i have seen all of them fight before) etc but people need to stop acting like they head and shoulders (untouchable) with the likes of guys of today, like hopkins, floyd, and manny.

i was never a hopkins fan but i can't hate what he has done in his career. what i respect about him aside from all the accomplishments, is that he never had the roy jones blinding handspeed, didn't have tommy hearns ko power, never had the physical gifts of the guys in his era (toney, nunn, jones) and went on to accomplish what he did. even if hopkins never fight, stevenson or kovalev, to me he's one of the greatest fighters i've ever seen.

I kind of agree with what you are saying but when you think about who the tops guys today are you see the influence of the older guys. It's no mystery BHop looks up to and has emulated stuff from Moore or Jersey Joe. I agree those old nikkas overrate their fighters but everytime I've gone and looked at some of their fights my first thought usually is "This guy would dominate/be just as good in this era" and that's saying a lot given how far we have come diet/training wise from those days. Add in 15 rounds and how often these dudes would fight and you could see why the historians would feel that way.

I agree with you as well that even without those wins yet he is still an ATG.

Decade reign.
Most middleweight defenses.
Moving up to lightweight and getting the lineal title there.
Keeps breaking his own record of oldest fighter to hold legit titles.

The only way I can see Roy ahead of Hopkins is if we are counting amateur achievements and for these types of arguments we usually don't. I've said it a bunch of times BHop is my favorite fighter so I know I'm biased when it comes to these things though. but it seems like this argument is being brought up more often now so I can't be that off due to my bias.

 

[Newzz]

ATGs lists do not rank people by what they did at their absolute bests, it takes into account your entire career.

Once people grasp that concept, you can see that Hopkins indeed HAS passed RJJ.

Roy's career did not end once he won the Heavyweight Championship....if it did, then yes, Hopkins would have never caught him. However, he continued on just like B-Hop and destroyed his placement while B-Hop (who is older by the way) keeps on winning.

I also find it funny that we keep talking about B-Hop fighting at Light Heavy while Roy is fighting at Cruiser like that means anything. The Light Heavy division is tougher than Cruiserweight and Roy wouldnt beat these Light Heavies anyways at this point

I love RJJ and like I said, at their very bests, he beats B-Hop everytime. However, that's not what we're talking about here. It's about career/resume vs career/resume and B-Hop has surpassed him.....and is creeping up on Money Mayweather and Pacquiao (again, I cant see how I would put him over Money or Pac but it can be discussed)

 

[LauderdaleBoss]

Roy secured his legacy already. Yeah some of those losses took him down a notch, but it almost sounds like he's being penalized for still fighting way past his prime. Dude had a 14 year run. Not every fighter is built to have 30 year runs in boxing because every individual is different. nikkas hit their strides at different times. I'm sure the lost to Larry Donald will keep Holyfield from being a top 10 ATG heavyweight if that's the case. Same thing with Ali and his Berbick and Holmes losses.

In addition to that, Roy's greatness not only comes from his long body of work, but how he looked against his opponents. It's like people overlook that as well. Dude had a KO of the year with the Virgil Hill body shot. nikka was throwing punches from behind the back dropping cats. Damn near murdered Griffin in the rematch. Roy showcased so many things in the ring it's crazy how he gets discredited now that Hopkins beat some dudes that were tailor made for him at the twilight of his career.

I also don't see how Hopkins can be ahead of Roy, but still be behind Manny and Pac. That only makes sense if you favor longevity over opposition. I mean when you think about it. The type of guys Hopkins is beating now are the same types of fighters that Roy was beating up on back in the late 90's. Are Cloud and Shumenov any better than Clinton Woods? Not really. That's like saying Lebron is better than Kobe all time because he's able to play at a higher level now than Kobe is able to.

Roy's best win = Toney
Hopkins best win = Trinidad
Floyd's best win = Corrales
Pac's best win = MAB

Not only does Roy have the single best win, he also beat Hopkins and his best opponent (Yeah if we gon include all the late Roy losses, might as well include the Tito win right)

I mean I can see the MAB win being equal to Hop's Trinidad victory, but what victory does Floyd have that is equal to that? Seems like dudes are ranking Floyd higher based off of dominating dudes for over 10 years and looking unbeatable, but hold on. Roy did that too an actually looked even more dominating all while against bigger fighters with better names.

This debate has been good with some real quality posting from everyone, but the overall vibe I'm getting is that when it comes to ATG rankings, people tend to weigh the losses more than they do the victories. From this point on, Floyd can't afford to lose. If he does, I can only imagine how far he'll drop in the ATG rankings for most people especially since he doesn't have that one (or two) spectacular name on his resume like Jones did.

 

[WhodatWhoadi]

I agree but I just dont see it happening,I see Bhop outboxing dudes then getting caught and finished TKO. I mean dude got dropped by Jean Pascal my dudes it would take 4 Pascals to equal the power of Krusher and Stevenson. Add the fact both are decent boxers,Stevenson more then Krusher.Theyare not just easy to outbox sluggers. ask Dawson and Clevery.

 

[Newzz]

Roy secured his legacy already. Yeah some of those losses took him down a notch, but it almost sounds like he's being penalized for still fighting way past his prime. Dude had a 14 year run. Not every fighter is built to have 30 year runs in boxing because every individual is different. nikkas hit their strides at different times. I'm sure the lost to Larry Donald will keep Holyfield from being a top 10 ATG heavyweight if that's the case. Same thing with Ali and his Berbick and Holmes losses.

In addition to that, Roy's greatness not only comes from his long body of work, but how he looked against his opponents. It's like people overlook that as well. Dude had a KO of the year with the Virgil Hill body shot. nikka was throwing punches from behind the back dropping cats. Damn near murdered Griffin in the rematch. Roy showcased so many things in the ring it's crazy how he gets discredited now that Hopkins beat some dudes that were tailor made for him at the twilight of his career.

I also don't see how Hopkins can be ahead of Roy, but still be behind Manny and Pac. That only makes sense if you favor longevity over opposition. I mean when you think about it. The type of guys Hopkins is beating now are the same types of fighters that Roy was beating up on back in the late 90's. Are Cloud and Shumenov any better than Clinton Woods? Not really. That's like saying Lebron is better than Kobe all time because he's able to play at a higher level now than Kobe is able to.

Roy's best win = Toney
Hopkins best win = Trinidad
Floyd's best win = Corrales
Pac's best win = MAB

Not only does Roy have the single best win, he also beat Hopkins and his best opponent (Yeah if we gon include all the late Roy losses, might as well include the Tito win right)

I mean I can see the MAB win being equal to Hop's Trinidad victory, but what victory does Floyd have that is equal to that? Seems like dudes are ranking Floyd higher based off of dominating dudes for over 10 years and looking unbeatable, but hold on. Roy did that too an actually looked even more dominating all while against bigger fighters with better names.

This debate has been good with some real quality posting from everyone, but the overall vibe I'm getting is that when it comes to ATG rankings, people tend to weigh the losses more than they do the victories. From this point on, Floyd can't afford to lose. If he does, I can only imagine how far he'll drop in the ATG rankings for most people especially since he doesn't have that one (or two) spectacular name on his resume like Jones did.

B-Hop also beat Oscar De La Hoya too though....who does Roy have on his list that matches ODLH at that time?

 

[LauderdaleBoss]

B-Hop also beat Oscar De La Hoya too though....who does Roy have on his list that matches ODLH at that time?

Son, just think about what you just said. Don't be that dude who's trying to reach for something that isn't there.

Blown up Oscar that looked average at best at middleweight.

I definitely wouldn't consider that as Hopkins 2nd best win. I'd place Pavlik, Pascal, and even Tarver over that win and Roy even has a win over one of those names. (Yes, he beat Tarver clearly in the 1st fight although he looked human an was his most competitive fight since Griffin 1)

Roy's win over Ruiz is wayyyy better than Hopkins victory over Oscar at 160. I mean come on fam.

The real question is what win does Floyd have that's better than Hopkins victories over Tito and Oscar.

I'll wait.

 

[krackdagawd]

ATGs lists do not rank people by what they did at their absolute bests, it takes into account your entire career.

Once people grasp that concept, you can see that Hopkins indeed HAS passed RJJ.

Yup this really ends any argument you can have for Roy over BHop.

R

This debate has been good with some real quality posting from everyone, but the overall vibe I'm getting is that when it comes to ATG rankings, people tend to weigh the losses more than they do the victories.

Roy only has like 2 more losses than Bhop does that's a negligible amount if losses are so detrimental to their rankings.

I'd say what each fighter does after said losses has more to do with their ATG ranking than the loss does.

And as far as Floyd I can see him still schooling dudes well into his 40s as well. Doesn't drink, doesn't do drugs, always in the gym, extremely disciplined, sounds familiar?

 

[LauderdaleBoss]

Yup this really ends any argument you can have for Roy over BHop.




Roy only has like 2 more losses than Bhop does that's a negligible amount if losses are so detrimental to their rankings.

I'd say what each fighter does after said losses has more to do with their ATG ranking than the loss does.

And as far as Floyd I can see him still schooling dudes well into his 40s as well. Doesn't drink, doesn't do drugs, always in the gym, extremely disciplined, sounds familiar?

but if a nikka is clearly past it and has been on top for over 10 years, you have to expect some sort of drop off especially when you factor in the weight loss Roy had after the Ruiz fight, but your a Bernard stan so I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

Like I said earlier, I place more weight on the victories and heights soared. You hold more value on longetivity so we'll never agree on Hopkins being ranked higher than Roy at least until he beats Stevenson and Kovalev.

As for Floyd, you basing his ranking off potential. It doesn't matter if he fights until his 50's if he's only whupping the Maidanas and Guerreros of the world.

 

[krackdagawd]

but if a nikka is clearly past it and has been on top for over 10 years, you have to expect some sort of drop off especially when you factor in the weight loss Roy had after the Ruiz fight, but your a Bernard stan so I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

Like I said earlier, I place more weight on the victories and heights soared. You hold more value on longetivity so we'll never agree on Hopkins being ranked higher than Roy at least until he beats Stevenson and Kovalev.

Me being a Bernard stan doesn't mean Roy didn't get caught cheating breh so even with the heights he soared they have an * next to them.

And that "victories and heights soared" seems a lot like you wanting to deal with timetables like I said all Roy stans do.

ATG conversations are about the entire career, wins, losses, draws, failed drug tests and everything in between.

As for Floyd, you basing his ranking off potential. It doesn't matter if he fights until his 50's if he's only whupping the Maidanas and Guerreros of the world.

Don't do this

Marquez future hof fighter
Cotto arguable future hof fighter
Mosley future hof fighter
Oscar hof fighter
Gatti hof fighter
Castillo future hof figher
Corrales future hof fighter

All while only being hurt once by Mosley.

Wait until Canelo levels up again He'll be on that list as well.

 

[LauderdaleBoss]

Me being a Bernard stan doesn't mean Roy didn't get caught cheating breh so even with the heights he soared they have an * next to them.

And that "victories and heights soared" seems a lot like you wanting to deal with timetables like I said all Roy stans do.

ATG conversations are about the entire career, wins, losses, draws, failed drug tests and everything in between.



Don't do this

Marquez future hof fighter
Cotto arguable future hof fighter
Mosley future hof fighter
Oscar hof fighter
Gatti hof fighter
Castillo future hof figher
Corrales future hof fighter

All while only being hurt once by Mosley.

Wait until Canelo levels up again He'll be on that list as well.

Honest to God, Floyd's an ATG, but his resume doesn't stack up against Roy, Hopkins, and Pac.

Most of those names you listed for Floyd have a bunch of * by them and are great if you're a B+ level fighter, but if you're and elite A level fighter and those are your best names it;s pretty much you wanna debate this shyt type status. Floyd was the big favorite for most of those fights. He never defied the odds like Roy, Hopkins, and Pac.

Marquez undersized
Cotto way past it
Mosely past it (coming off a big win though so that helps him a bit)
Oscar past it

Like nikkas is really reaching.

This the thing. This debate will never go anywhere due to our difference in perspectives.

In my book wins and in ring accomplishments while being the p4p #1 for mad years outweighs longevity and never being p4p #1. You call it a timetable, but I call it reality. So go ahead and do you breh.

 

[krackdagawd]

Honest to God, Floyd's an ATG, but his resume doesn't stack up against Roy, Hopkins, and Pac.

Most of those names you listed for Floyd have a bunch of * by them and are great if you're a B+ level fighter, but if you're and elite A level fighter and those are your best names it;s pretty much you wanna debate this shyt type status. Floyd was the big favorite for most of those fights. He never defied the odds like Roy, Hopkins, and Pac.

Marquez undersized
Cotto way past it
Mosely past it (coming off a big win though so that helps him a bit)
Oscar past it

Like nikkas is really reaching.

"Undersized" Marquez put Pac to sleep
Cotto was way passed it now? I'm starting to see some bias here
Mosley was passed it yet coming off his arguable greatest win
Oscar was passed it huh but he is fine weight drained and passed it on Pac's resume right

Who in boxing aside from maybe Manny has more hof guys on their resume, I'm about to put you in the Floyd hater category along with Black Jesus

Ain't nobody ranking Floyd off potential we're ranking him off dominance and resume.

This the thing. This debate will never go anywhere due to our difference in perspectives.

In my book wins and in ring accomplishments while being the p4p #1 for mad years outweighs longevity and never being p4p #1. You call it a timetable, but I call it reality. So go ahead and do you breh.

You just destroyed your own argument against Floyd and UOENO

As far a Bhop we agree to disagree