Felix Trinidad vs GGG 160lbs

The Jap who is such a good fighter you can't remember his name? Cherifi was absolutely dreadful. He lost to Reid and every single other half-decent fighter he ever fought except from Holmes, who sparked him out in a rematch. There were a lot of people who thought Eastman was jobbed against Joppy. If that's a resume defining win, your resume is cack.

MTF

 

Tell me more about this Syd Vanderpool fellow. How did he prove himself better than Joppy and how would he beat Trinidad? How do they stack up to Robert Allen and Antwon Echols?

 

I am on record, more times than I can count, criticising Hopkins' MW resume. It is IMO arguably the worst resume attached to a consensus ATG greater fighter in any weight class, ever. You're deflecting, here.

MTF

 

He fought the best guys around him for a decade and a half. They may not have been legends but his dominant reign proved something. He success at Lightheavy proven a lot too. Therefore I don't see the point you're trying to make. Are you saying that Hopkins wasn't a proven great fighter? You think he's mediocre. You think in past eras he wouldn't even be a blip on the radar? What are you saying? What???????????????

 

No they aren't on a different level than Joppy... that's the point... The era was fucking horrible... Joppy's challengers were actually worse than Hopkins' if that's possible

If you'd pick any of those guys against Hamsho, for example, you're smoking rocks

 

I fail to see how Hamsho is levels above Vanderpool or GCJ. The guy was rudimentary as fuck. And this is coming from an arab. You have this weird tendancy of seeing these 80's middle of the road guys as much better than they are. I wonder if you only rely on your memory, cause when you looks at them, they are nowhere as incredible as you claim they are.

They were exciting for the most part, and not as pampered (they were actually fighting each other) as today fighters though

 

But you're not saying it's about eras or levels. You admit Tito was on a higher level than all these guys. You're saying he'd lose because he was so useless at 160 compared to 154. If he can move up an eradicate a solid guy like Joppy he can beat solid guys like these. And none of these guys were all that much more than solid.

 

I have this weird tendency of watching hundreds upon hundreds of fights from every filmed era in the history of the sport causing me to become familiar with the various fighters

 

Hamsho would beat the shit out of them. Vanderpool was nothing and Johnson was even less at that point.

 

two of them were undisputed champions at the weight:scratcher:

When Vito defended against Hagler, he was in fact the only undisputed champion in all of boxing

Apparently, this equates to not much more than solid

Joppy isn't a factor in the middleweight division in 1979, frankly... He was a mediocre fighter and a paper champ

 

Vanderpool probably cause while he had some potential, he never really showed it. Johnson on the other hand was a very good fighter, even when he was losing most of his fights. He was hindered by the fact that he was only getting a few weeks to prepare for a fight, and that he developped a loser mentality (which he didn't had against Hopkins). If he was well prelared and did not have the loser mentality, i'd pick him without hesitation against Hamsho.

 

But yes, you are the only one who've watched fights from that era. That explains everything

 

If William Joppy was around to take on the monumental task of fighting Hugo Corro or to do the impossible and make Alan Minter bleed by punching him in the face he could've been undisputed champ as well.

 

I have an article from this era, and they considered Corro one of the worst champ ever :: . Now with the years hes considered an excellent fighter ::

 

No, just clearly watched a lot more of them than you chaps

 

Yeah, they couldn't have envisioned a world where 4 different guys could call themselves "Middleweight Champ" and boxing was like the 9th most popular sport in America... Good catch, though, way to go

There's an article or 300 out there from Nat Fleischer where he earnestly attempts to argue that Joe Gans was better at boxing than Willie Pep... You can find poor commentary from boxing writers as long as there have been boxing writers

 

It was that simple!

 

It was... Quite a few chaps stopped Minter. Who did Minter beat besides Vito anyway?

Don't get me wrong, Minter was really good. I'd pick him over Joppy but his skin made him vulnerable and Joppy was a scrappy guy that threw lots of punches and took a good shot.

 

Hugo Corro was a MUCH better fighter than fuckin Joppy! Corro was a damn fine technician.

 

Yup... excellent pure boxer... Didn't like the rough stuff (which is why he lost to Vito despite having a good early lead) but anybody with eyes and even rudimentary knowledge could see the guy could box

 

Minter definitely had bad skin, major problem for him ... He beat some solid guys like Kevin Finnegan, Gratien Tonna and Ernie Singletary in addition to beating Vito (who cut even more than he did)... Beat old-ass Emile Griffith in Griffith's final bout (who, despite being ancient, could still fight pretty well) ... Those guys were certainly as good or better than any of Joppy's wins

Outside of a cut (which is a possibility, admittedly) I think his boxing skill and his jab would be more than enough to deal with Joppy

 

You're showing a bias in naming guys like Finnegan, Tonna and Griffin. Finnegan was a journeyman whose only good wins were Tonna and Sibson, Tonna's record is even softer than Joppy's, and Griffin was losing consistently to nobodies at that point.


It seems like you give guys a lot of credit for fighting in a strong era regardless of if they won consistently or actually beat alot of good fighters. If everybody from the era is a name and they all fought then they're all going to have names on their resume. The only names Joppy had an opportunity against just happened to be guys that would thrash most mw contenders from most eras.

Don't get me wrong, Minter was a really good boxer though. But it's hard to pick a guy that cut so consistently over an accurate banger like Tito.

 

Let's be honest corro sucked. Even if Cdogg saw him being a scrub a thousand times (but hey, he's the only one who has acces to youtube, the lucky one), he' s still a fucking scrub

 

Let's be honest ... That's simply not true

 

I wasn't naming them as great fighters, only as solid guys Minter beat... It was a vastly superior division to the one Joppy fought in

 

Hopkins was a dominant champ in a very weak era but, in his pomp, he generally handled the rubbish around him with the ease you'd expect from a great fighter. However, his MW resume is cack. It's not exactly his fault - I couldn't name any good middles he didn't fight and beat at the time - but his resume is thin at 160. That's the only point I'm making here.

His best wins pretty much all came above 160. It was these wins, plus the longevity of his reign at 160, which mark him out as a great fighter. I'll say this, though. IMO Hopkins is overrated by a lot of people. He is one of those guys who seems to get a pass for all his meaningful losses.

Not much of this has to do with how unproven a MW Tito Trinidad was, but there you go.

MTF