Top 5 Middleweights.....Hopkins?

[JAB5239]

Is ANYBODY going the answer the original question? GhostofDempsey is the only one to make that effort so far. Is there an argument he should be rated above Mickey Walker, Bob Fitzsimmons or Stanley Ketchel at Middleweight?

[Bronson66]

Is ANYBODY going the answer the original question? GhostofDempsey is the only one to make that effort so far. Is there an argument he should be rated above Mickey Walker, Bob Fitzsimmons or Stanley Ketchel at Middleweight?

No,I don't think so.
I previously answered on page 6 !

[JAB5239]

No,I don't think so.
I previously answered on page 6 !

Unfortunately I don't know as much as I should about Fitzsimmons, but his middleweight resume seems pretty thin. Ketchel is arguable in my opinion.

[Mr Mitts]

Is ANYBODY going the answer the original question? GhostofDempsey is the only one to make that effort so far. Is there an argument he should be rated above Mickey Walker, Bob Fitzsimmons or Stanley Ketchel at Middleweight?

By God, If I haven't answered then what have I done? Old primitives no one knows much about are Ho'kins' best chance. He might be able to stink the joint up with Ketchel who seemed to be sloppy and formless.

I think it would be much easier to make an argument he was not a top15 rather than he was a top 5 middleweight. I already listed the guys I think would beat him, and I didn't even need any of Fitz, Ketchel or Walker to keep him out of the top 5. I barely dipped before 1940 and he still didn't make it.

His only good wins were against welterweights. And need I remind anyone that Hoya and Trinidad are no Leonard and Hearns, either one of whom would whip both Trinidad and Hoya and their daddies in the same evening? Literally.

Remind me who this braggart beat that would even put him into consideration for a seat at the captain's table. Nobody. Other than the 2 welters, his opposition is already forgotten by history. So much so that if he actually had any fans they would have to go to the record books just to remember who he fought.

[JAB5239]

By God, If I haven't answered then what have I done? Old primitives no one knows much about are Ho'kins' best chance. He might be able to stink the joint up with Ketchel who seemed to be sloppy and formless.

I think it would be much easier to make an argument he was not a top15 rather than he was a top 5 middleweight. I already listed the guys I think would beat him, and I didn't even need any of Fitz, Ketchel or Walker to keep him out of the top 5. I barely dipped before 1940 and he still didn't make it.

His only good wins were against welterweights. And need I remind anyone that Hoya and Trinidad are no Leonard and Hearns, either one of whom would whip both Trinidad and Hoya and their daddies in the same evening? Literally.

Remind me who this braggart beat that would even put him into consideration for a seat at the captain's table. Nobody. Other than the 2 welters, his opposition is already forgotten by history. So much so that if he actually had any fans they would have to go to the record books just to remember who he fought.

Listing the guys you think would beat him in fantasy fights is just that, a fantasy. There is no way to prove it. What i am asking for is how his resume, longevity and number of title defenses stack up to those other particular ATG's.

[Mr Mitts]

Listing the guys you think would beat him in fantasy fights is just that, a fantasy. There is no way to prove it. What i am asking for is how his resume, longevity and number of title defenses stack up to those other particular ATG's.

Jesus Christ, Alice, we already know most of his defenses were useless jokes against ABC mandatories. You want to compare his resume to what? He has a lousy resume--what do you want now, a number?

[JAB5239]

Jesus Christ, Alice, we already know most of his defenses were useless jokes against ABC mandatories. You want to compare his resume to what? He has a lousy resume--what do you want now, a number?

Like Wladimir Klitschko at heavyweight, to have that many defenses takes incredible focus and longevity. I've never claimed he had a great resume. But if you can't answer the question just say so. Otherwise, I am asking for opinions on what makes Fitzsimmons and Ketchel's resume and middleweight achievements make them rank higher? No need to work yourself into a tizzy.

[Marchegiano]

How does one place Greb and older guys like his opposition in the context of best MW wins? I have seen Maxie, the LHW champion, put up as a great Greb MW win because it happened at MW but I've also seen B-Hop lose credit for Trin even though that fight was a MW title fight.

It seem like olde tyme favoritism to me, tbh. It seems like if they existed anywhere from MW to HW and fought a man who was filmed in sepia then they are whatever the principle character was. For example, Dempsey's resume is held up by LHWs no different than Bernard's resume depending to some degree on WWs.

Greb, IMO, is more the benefactor of favoritism than a true distinct figure that actually did anything special. We have heaps of dudes who once you strip them of every name who found success outside of their division have very few names worth mention leftover. No one does this to Greb. Norfolk, the LHW Colored and Panama's HW champion, is a MW for Greb's MW resume.



You know what makes B-Hop a great MW? Being an actual MW fighting other MWs in a time and sport that has matured enough for fighters to specialize at specific weights. Strip Greb of every man who found success outside of MW and he hasn't much resume. Guess what? That's because MW was hardly a division for the first 50 years of sanctioned fighting. The catch-all between MW and HW where everyone, everyone, with any name at all, fought in all those divisions because there was not enough talent to make any one of them worth a piss on their own does not make for a good specialist nor anything great outside of p4p. There's a reason everyone before him and after him did the same exact thing until there were opponents in each division respectively. It's fine to call him p4p king but MW goat ... that need challenged. The idea of him possibly even being in the running is ******.


I'd place Fitzs above Hopkins but Hopkins above Greb.

[Mr Mitts]

Like Wladimir Klitschko at heavyweight, to have that many defenses takes incredible focus and longevity. I've never claimed he had a great resume. But if you can't answer the question just say so. Otherwise, I am asking for opinions on what makes Fitzsimmons and Ketchel's resume and middleweight achievements make them rank higher? No need to work yourself into a tizzy.

Indulge in fantasy if you have to while you accuse others of it. You are getting squat out of Hopkins' resume, Alice, except that it is lousy. Oh, sure, you are going to compare Hopkins' resume in some logical manner to boxers who fought everyone you never saw fight a hundred years and more ago, across all kinds of rule changes, equipment changes and technique changes. And after all what you will do is put together a fantasy based on some weak research, old tales of boxing writers and a big dab of pre-conditioning.

Fantasy, eh? Let's call your big idea fantasy ratings then, fantasy comparisons.

Yes, I will get excited if some asshole drives me to it and one did.

[Biledriver]

Indulge in fantasy if you have to while you accuse others of it. You are getting squat out of Hopkins' resume, Alice, except that it is lousy. Oh, sure, you are going to compare Hopkins' resume in some logical manner to boxers who fought everyone you never saw fight a hundred years and more ago, across all kinds of rule changes, equipment changes and technique changes. And after all what you will do is put together a fantasy based on some weak research, old tales of boxing writers and a big dab of pre-conditioning.

Fantasy, eh? Let's call your big idea fantasy ratings then, fantasy comparisons.

Yes, I will get excited if some asshole drives me to it and one did.

Well THAT escalated quickly