For anyone who believes that Hopkins was still in his prime when he fought DLH (talking to you, Ring and Dan Rafael) watch this video and then rethink your opinion. This was Bernard at his best - and when he was still watchable.
Bernard Hopkins at his best was one of the very best fighters EVER to lace-em up. A true GENIUS in the ring who had EVERYTHING except perhaps a killer punch.
Good job at stating the obvious (although Hopkins smartness is certainly debateable). Do you have anything to say about his fight with Johnson or not? ::
See and that's the problem with young idiots now that refuse to rank Hopkins among the all time middleweights ever. They watch him over the last few years and forget that he was a great fighter and an exciting fighter over a long period. Now he wins (or competes) with guile, treacherous cunning, and ring smarts. But it wasn't always that way..
I think Hopkins started to decline after the Carl Daniels fight. I thought as early as the Joppy fight that he was starting to slightly slip. Just like I believe Roy started to slowly decline after the Hall fight.
i dont think hops was in his prime when he kicked titos ass, all that he faught a perfect fight was something cooked up by tito fans to save face
A prime that ended when the first bell rang against Jermaine Taylor. :crafty: But miraculously regathered itself again for Antonio Tarver.
Nobody is gonna be prime @ age 40. Hopkins had been showing his age in his diminished workrate, mainly in his previous 3 fights. Old guys can't do what they do when they're younger, they can only do it in spots. Hopkins still had remarkable reflexes, speed, and freshness for a 40 year old. But that's still for a 40 year old.
:nono: Uh uh uh uh!,.. "Green" for Roy - "Old" for Jermaine. "Old" reserved for whoever beats his arse next. Same "Old" story.
prime at 40? answer the question dont bring in other distractions because you dont want to answer the question, no one is prime at 40, end of discussion, no more diversions please
:nono: He's "primer" now than he was back when he was being dumped on his arse by Seguito Mercado..or was that his "Green" phase,.. how about Lennox Lewis, did he have consecutive "old" allibuys when he was dominating the division late in his 30's?..:nono: No excuses,.. Jermaine OWNS that arse like vintage wine.
FYI I picked Taylor over him in the first fight you simp. Because I knew Nard had slipped. I was actually disappointed in Jermain, I thought he would beat B-Hop more convincingly than he did.
:dunno: Why would you be dissapointed you sim..ian, he beat what most people regard as a "greater middleweight than Marvin Hagler", yet Fraud's last 3 performances seem adequate enough to quench your thirst?...Mosely for one oughta be devistated with Floyd's split decision :: ,.. Xplosive on Mosely during round 2 against Collazo "Floyd would whup Shane's arse!"..oh dear, jumped the gun didn't we,..:crafty: ...the power of that precious ..............'0'.............
wow here we go again, another thread not about floyd, and you bring him into it again, i bet we cant find a single post on this board where you havent somehow turned it into about floyd, who gives a fuck about floyd that much? i know i dont
I dont either. Honestly this guy really overrestimates how much I like Floyd. He's my fav current fighter by default, since Tyson is retired and Roy is semi-retired. But he's easily more obsessed with Floyd than ANY groupie is. I'm sure Floyd would be honored if he knew some hater was obsessing over him to the extent than this clown does.
he thinks the stuff he says gets to people, only way it bothers me, is how annoying it is that he brings the shit up in every thread, my man has a one track mind
:nono: Uh, Gentleman,..that's rather an ambivalent acumen if I may say so, let us assume no longer, let me explain and take my advice. What you oughta both do, is not internalise my perspective in a personal manner, you would do yourselves a favour if you were both a little less apprehensive, I merely attack and ravage Fraud's identity alone, that's all, he's the catalyst for my madness, this is where all the venom is actually going directly, and sometimes vicariously. I DO accept that it's become a bit tempestuous on my behalf, I mean sure you groupies have these constant irritating beliefs and irrational formulations woven obsessively around your god, but it's no reason for me to be malicious or insidious towards you guys on a personal level, the debates are mere play if you please, I mean if I went bazerk and manifested upon every statement bashing Margarito on this messageboard, I'd have sprayed bullets into a crowded Australian marketplace by now :dunno: wouldn't I?. :nono: I do accept that my fickled Fraud intangibles are disturbing, it worries me too, and I'll try my hardest to suck them back in, and release them into appropriate outlets, I feel I've been systematically derranged through this subject and it's proving difficult, but I'm confident that I can regain some control.
This video confirms once again that at his best, Hopkins was a better fighter than both Hagler and Monzon. Discuss...opcorn:
So a guy's gonna be in his prime for 12 years? Name all the fighters who had a prime consisting of a 12 year span. Furthermore, name all the fighters who were still prime at age 40. Why should Hopkins be any different? Oh yeah, because he lost a couple of close and debatable decisions to Jermaine Taylor. Therefore he has to be prime in your eyes, since it was Taylor he was fighting. I don't see how this fight confirms it. Oh, and Prime Hopkins close decision over prime Hagler.