Boxingtalk readers sound off on Hopkins-Wright

Hey great question about the best fighter of this generation. This is why I think you guys are the best boxing site on the web. I agree that if Hopkins wins he should be called the best fighter of this generation he has been in the ring with greats and has fought these guys at the peak of there careers not like a lot of the guys today who fight legends and are on the down side of there boxing skills. Winky even with a win over Hopkins im not so sure you could call him the best of the generation but with Hopkins having names like Jones Jr, Trinidad, De la hoya, Tarver and Taylor on his resume and being the record holder of the most middle weight title defenses a win over Wright would just be padding the resume. PS- If Hopkins dose win do you think he will fight Roy Jones Jr and try to revenge his loss from a few years back? Brucey B.  
Goldstein:  Hopkins does have Jones Jr. and Taylor on his resume, but the Jones Jr. loss was decisive.   Although the fights with Taylor were razor thin and could have gone either way, they are still losses.  But every fighter loses.   The greatest fighters of all time have losses and I think it is a testament to these fighters that they were willing to step in the ring with anybody and not try to pad their records or hide from the deserving challengers, much like Hopkins-Taylor.   Bernard could have easily walked away a 1st ballot hall of famer and no one would have questioned his greatness, but he still took on the challenge.   If Hopkins wins tonight, he will have a win over Trinidad, De La Hoya, Tarver and Wright.   If Wright is to win he would have a two wins over Shane Mosley, a win over Trinidad, a draw with Taylor and a win over Hopkins.  IMO, there are no two fighters this decade with those kinds of resumes.   PS, I believe if Hopkins is successful tonight and Roy Jones Jr. is successful against either Taylor or Trinidad in January, then maybe we will see Hopkins-Jones II in June of 08.      

Matt, The winner of this weekend's Hopkins-Wright fight will absolutely NOT decide who the best fighter of this generation has been (up to now). First for Hopkins, I would say that the most impressive win of Hopkins' career did not come until his last fight when he beat Antonio Tarver. Before that, he did not have one win over what I would call an elite opponent. He lost very decisively to Roy Jones Jr., and yes, he did defeat Tito Trinidad and Oscar de la Hoya, but I think it is quite clear that neither man really had any business fighting at 160lbs. I'll give Hopkins credit for dismantling overmatched foes the way he was supposed to, but wins over blown up welterweights and Antonio Tarver do not put you in the running for fighter of the generation. Let's also not forget that Hopkins was defeated twice by Jermain Taylor recently, albeit in very close fights (I personally scored the first fight a draw). As for Winky, I would say he has a bit more of a claim to being known as the fighter of this generation than does Hopkins, but I still would not place that label on him even if he beats Hopkins. I would say the only really elite opponent Winky has beaten was Shane Mosley, and he did it twice. What's more impressive is that he did it at 154, and not 160. He then beat Felix Trinidad, but like Hopkins, did it at 160, where once again I think its clear Felix does not belong. And then he fought Jermain Taylor to a draw. Whether or not you think he won the fight is a moot point, the fact of the matter is that it was a very close fight regardless of how you look at it, and you can make a case for either fighter deserving the win. If you cannot convincingly beat Jermain Taylor, I don't think you can be seen as the fighter of this generation. One other note on that Fernando Vargas fight, similarly to the Jermain Taylor fight, it was a very close fight. I personally scored it for Fernando, but I understand it was very close and someone else could make an argument for Winky having one. The point is, however, fighters should not get credit for beating a fighter when they really did not. That is to say, Winky should not get credit for "a loss to Fernando Vargas that many feel he won." That's not how it works, it does not matter what "many" think when it's such a close fight, it matters what the judges think. He lost to Vargas in a very exciting close fight, he beat Shane Mosley twice, beat a blown up Trinidad, and got a draw with Taylor, not enough to be the fighter of this generation.

I am really not sure who I would give the title of "best fighter of this generation" to at this point. But I really don't want to get started on another long winded rant on who is should be, so suffice it to say I am quite sure it should NOT be Hopkins or Wright, even though they are both great fighters and its great to see 2 such talented guys squaring off.   Ian Read…

Goldstein:  Ian, the Tarver win was impressive but it was certainly not the most impressive.   The wins over Trinidad and Oscar De La Hoya were not merely blown up welterweights.   Both fighters were middleweight titlists and Jr. middleweight titlists, De La Hoya even being undisputed.   Trinidad also KO'd his William Joppy at middleweight who at the time was the best fighter in the division behind Bernard Hopkins.   This proved that Trinidad could carry his power to the 160lb weight class.  Let me ask you something; did Marvin Hagler's two biggest wins come against blown up welterweights in Thomas Hearns and Sugar Ray Leonard?   Wait minute, Hagler lost to Leonord.  LOL  As far as Winky's win not being impressive against Trinidad at 160 lbs I will completely disagree.  Trinidad was not bullied or overpowered by Wright or Hopkins, Trinidad was out boxed, plain and simple.   Hopkins and Wright technical artistry was what proved they were the better men that night, not size. 

Matt, I believe Trinidad's resume is better than both Winky and Hopkins.  Here's why: Trinidad has been fighting and beaten tough competition from WAY back.  A list of victims include several Olympic gold medalists and fighters which were ruined, or both.  (I doubt Winky or Hopkins have ruined any fighters in the manner Tito has.)  Those fighters consequently became Hopkins and Oscar's leftovers.  Oba Carr – 32-0 (ruined), Yory boy Campas -56-0 (ruined), Camacho (while he was still a viable boxing commodity), Whitaker, Reid (ruined), Vargas (ruined), Joppy (ruined), Mayorga – at the time quite feared and avoided.  (I didn't include Oscar, since I feel Oscar deserved the nod.)   Whitaker deserved a decision against Oscar, but in comparison was given a beat down by Trinidad. Carr, Campas, Camacho, Vargas and Mayorga all became part of Oscar's "great" resume AFTER having gotten mugged by Trinidad.   Even Hopkins faced Joppy AFTER Trinidad administered a whipping on the kid.  In addition, Trinidad has had belts in more divisions than Hopkins or Winky can count.  Hopkins only got the light heavy belt because he beat one of the most overrated fighters and weakest belt holders in recent memory.  That would be Tarver, of course.   That's my story and I'm sticking to it, David Martinez…

Goldstein:  David, You make some great points about De La Hoya and Hopkins getting Trinidad's leftovers, but Tito's win over Whitaker would not have been the same outcome had they fought 5 years earlier.   Pernel Whitaker was one of the greatest fighters of all time, but by the time he fought Tito he was a shell of himself.   But I do think Whitaker deserved the nod against De La Hoya and of course Julio Cesar Chavez.   And although Trinidad's KO wins over Mayorga and Joppy are impressive, those guys made it easy for Tito by keeping their hands down and letting Trinidad tee off on their face.  The most important reason that I cannot put Trinidad above Wright or Hopkins for fighter of the decade is that Hopkins and Wright both beat Tito Trinidad in near shut outs.   These fights were not even close and it would be virtually impossible to point to 3 rounds that Trinidad won in both fights combined.  Tito is considering coming out of retirement and he could steal the show if he gets a win over Taylor or Jones, but Trinidad cannot be fighter of the decade considering he was retired for half of it.                         

matt, the best in the gen.?  I don't think so.... jermain dominated bhop in the second fight and I think won a close one in the first fight although scoreboard counts so he won both. and jermain got a gift in the draw on winky I admit but only because winky ran the last round that WOULD have turned the score card ....  either way look out for Taylor to blow up in the next couple years with his huge wins over pavlik and next calzaghe  and if my wish comes true Taylor not former prisoner or krispy-cream king winky , Taylor will prove he's the best of the gen   with wins over bhop 2times pavlik and calzaghe????  now seriously where do you think jermains really at/ I appreciate the time in reading this email thanx matt - Aaron a loyal jermain fan from the rock.   Aaron Johnson…

Goldstein:  Aaron, by no means did Jermain Taylor dominate the second fight.   Many people are more convinced Hopkins won the second fight than they are convinced that he won the first.   Taylor-Hopkins I&II were both very close fights and could have gone either way.   I also thought Winky Wright won the fight against Taylor.  Taylor-Pavlik is a pick'em fight and one that will be very exciting I hope, but I think Calzaghe and Kessler will both manhandle and outgun Jermain Taylor.   Taylor's best chances at a higher weight are Roy Jones, Trinidad and Tarver.  If Jermain were to beat Pavlik and the winner of Calzaghe-Kessler he would certainly be in the running.   PS. Were you nervous when Michael Buffer was reading off the score cards for Taylor-Spinks?  LOL
 

I think Hopkins, Mayweather, and Pacquiao are on the short list but I just can't see Winky on there.  Yes, he beat a coming out of retirement Trinidad easily, but after the blueprint was already there to beat him.  And yes, he beat a blown up jr. middleweight in Shane Mosley, who has shown that he shouldn't have been at that weight.  He did draw with Taylor but I think we've seen that Taylor's not all he was made out to be.  And he lost to Vargas.  Period.  After that, who has be fought?  3 fights with Bronco McKart just don't cut the mustard.  Hopkins lost 2 to Taylor but in beating Tarver, Hopkins  showed that he could have done more had he not been so stubborn and went outside the pocket against Taylor and simply threw more punches.  He beat Trinidad when everyone thought he was unstoppable and put on the most clinical beating I've seen and he was the middleweight champ for a very long time.  However, his list of titled defenses mostly came against nondescript opposition and the best fighter on his record, the best fighter of the last generation Roy Jones, shows up as a loss.  

The fighter of this era has got to be Mayweather.  He's undefeated and currently fighting anywhere between 140-145, making him this generation's Henry Armstrong.  He has moved up from 130-154, in the process beating Genaro Hernandez, Manfredy, Corrales, Chavez, Castillo, Judah, and De La Hoya.  Some of those names may not seem big, but recall that at every weight class, he called out the top guys and I do mean ALL…Hamed and Morales at 126, Casamayor and Frietas at 130, Johnston and Castillo at 135, Hatton, Tszyu, and Cotto at 140, and De La Hoya and Mosley at 147… and only Castillo and De La Hoya had the balls to get in there with him; everyone else had some excuse or talked a big game but didn't back it up.  Does anyone think that Mayweather would have turned down ANY of those big money fights before he fought Gatti if they could have been made?  And even De La Hoya made sure he had every advantage he could and still lost.  No matter what happens in Hopkins v Wright, the best fighter of this era will still be Pretty Boy.   Carl Rice…

 
Goldstein:  Carl, Trinidad was not coming out of retirement when he faced Winky Wright. Trinidad KO'd Mayorga just a few months earlier and I do not think Wright used an existing blue print to beat Trinidad.   Wright simply used one of the best jabs in the game and Trinidad just could not avoid it.  Yes, he did draw with Taylor even thought I thought he won and I wouldn't call Shane Mosley a blown up Jr. middleweight considering he was the undisputed champion.   Obviously, he was big enough.  As well, the Fernando Vargas fight was very close and most people think Winky won, but there is no shame in losing to a prime Fernando Vargas.   Your right about Hopkins-Trinidad; that was the coldest clinical beat down I've ever seen as well.   It was a thing of beauty.   I sure hope HBO makes that apart of their "Legendary Nights" series.  Floyd Mayweather is currently the #1 P4P fighter in the world and he is certainly one of the greatest boxers ever, but his resume, although very impressive, still lacks the multiple marquee names that Hopkins and Wright possess.   Floyd will need wins over two or three marquee names before he is considered.  I would like to see wins over Mosley, Cotto, or Hatton.   That to me would put Floyd on top without a doubt.   Also, is Pacquiao is able to get a win over Juan Manuel Marquez and maybe a Joan Guzman, than it can be argued for Manny as well.  

 

I think the winner of Hopkins-Wright can very much take that title. Both have beaten some big names and even some their losses can be debated. I personally think Hopkins beat Taylor in the 2nd fight (first I saw it a draw) and the same can be said about the Wright/Taylor bout.   Both these guys have beat the best and even in their losses again it can be debated. Though Manny can very well take that title. A win over Marco and Marquez with his other wins might be hard to deny him. Floyd is a great fighter no doubt. Best out there now, but I do feel he needs some more victories over top fighters before he can be called the best fighter of this generation. Both Wright and very much Hopkins dominated their era. I normally avoid questions like this, but in this case one can make an argument for why the winner was the best of his generation.   Dave Kaye…

Goldstein:   Agreed, agreed and agreed.  

I think if Hopkins wins, he should be regarded the best of his generation…..not so much if winky wins (although he's definitely in the top 3 of his generation). Unfortunately, you cant really argue about winky's decisions that should have gone the other way, because otherwise, you can make a strong case for DLH, who should have 1 win over both Moseley and Trinidad….. you've gotta go by the official decisions. You can also make a stronger case for Hopkins as well, who should have 1 win over Jermain Taylor. Anyways, besides Hopkins' big wins over Trinidad, DLH, tarver and Joppy, he's got his record 20 title defenses. A lot of people might argue that many of those defenses came against fighters who were sub-par, but in my mind 20 straight title defenses is still a HUGE feat. It just proves the point of how Hopkins always comes in the ring mentally and physically prepared…..how many greats have been burned by looking past their opponents? A lot of them , but not Hopkins…..the guy is ALWAYS prepared, and that is one of the marks of a true champion and professional. One of the other things that I like about Hopkins over someone like pacquiao, is that manny's style comes from his unrelenting offensive onslaught and his punching power. Hopkins on the other hand is a much more balanced fighter, and an incredibly intelligent fighter. Even though he does have some KO power, he wins fights based on smarts, skill, experience and patience, which is what's allowed him to be at the top of his game past the age of 40.  If he manages to beat winky Wright (especially if he does in convincing fashion), he should not only be crowned the best of his generation, but also one of the best to ever lace them up.   Carlos Mendieta… 

Goldstein:  You make a great point about De La Hoya.  If you are going to make a case that Winky actually beat Vargas, than you should say the same thing for De La Hoya; especially against Trinidad.   Yes, some of the challengers to Hopkins 20 middleweight title defenses might have not been P4P fighters but they were the only people available at the time.  I think what is even more impressive for Hopkins is that Oscar De La Hoya was the first fighter in more than 11 years to win 3 rounds against Hopkins on an official scorecard.   That is truly amazing.  Dominance would be an understatement.  You're right Carlos, Manny Pacquiao outguns his opponents while Hopkins uses skill, finesse and ring smarts.   I also agree that if Hopkins beats Winky in decisive fashion, he will be remembered as one of the greatest to ever lace them up.

This is a tough subject because there are a handful of fighters with significant accomplishments in their careers.  My list would also include heavyweights Holyfield and Lewis, and Roy Jones Jr.  I don't believe you can consider PBF just yet because he's nowhere near being finished, and the same for Pacman.  I used to be a Hopkins hater, but have warmed up to him over the years.  His consistency is remarkable, and even at the age of 42 he's still considered near the top of his game.  For his longevity as MW champion, his impressive wins over his biggest foes (Jones notwithstanding), and his consistency and skill even as his career winds down, you have to put Hopkins as the greatest fighter of this generation, regardless of Saturday nights outcome.   Bill Zborowski… 

Goldstein:  You're right Bill, this is a very tough subject and that's why we wanted to do it.   For fighter of the decade, there is no possible way I could consider Holyfield because he has been beaten by virtually unknowns and only has wins against guys that are very beatable.   As well, Lennox Lewis, although he was the last undisputed heavyweight champion, has been retired for 3 years now.  As far as Roy Jones goes, he does not have many marquee wins in this decade and is still trying to recover from 2 devastatingly brutal KO losses.   But you are right about one thing, Hopkins still dominating opponents at this age remarkable.  It might even be his most impressive attribute when it is all said and done.   Hopkins would be the greatest fighter even if he loses tonight?   Interesting…  

Fighter of the decade is a tough one to crack...definitely harder than putting together a top 20 pound for pound list. Logically I would determine who the fighter of the decade is by referring to the current P4P list and see who's at the top of the heap... and I see Floyd Mayweather jr. 
 
I hate to admit it, but I would say Mayweather gets my pick. Not only for his unblemished record, but for his achievements in the ring in such a short time, becoming a champion 5 times in 6 weight classes from 130 to 154 isn't easy. He's been boxing pro since 1996 and I can't think of anybody else more deserving of the crown fighter of the decade. Oh what a good a little over ten years in boxing has done to Mayweather. I do see Hopkins and Wright tied for 2nd if there were any runner ups, and this week end should seal the deal for 2nd place.  

I believe Hopkins and Wright have more illustrious careers, but both fighters in comparison to Mayweather are simply older and have taken them longer to achieve what we can imagine Mayweather can excel at in a shorter time (if he stopped all the drama and came out of retirement). 

Hopkins or Wright? You got Hopkins who has an unbroken record of 20 middle weight defenses, notable wins over Trinidad and De La Hoya. Then you got Wright who won his first major world title in 2001 and has wins over then regarded P4P Mosley twice and Trinidad, finally to be recognized in the U.S. after spending half a decade overseas punching for pay and a name. 

I feel w/o Mayweather in the picture, Hopkins is the Fighter of the decade without even having to fight Wright for that recognition. It's Wright who needs a win over Hopkins and possibly a future match and win over De La Hoya to be considered to me at least the fighter of the decade. 10 years is a long time and we have to consider all the achievements a fighter has done within that time. I'm rooting for Winky to pull a win over Hopkins and a win over De La Hoya if it materializes, but me thinking who is the better fighter is not the question. 

Manny Pacquiao is a force to be reckoned with since being labeled the Mexican assassin with wins over Morales, Barrera, Solis, Larios and a draw to Marquez. But all his significant achievements have come to fruition in the past 3 years. Just like Pacman is a native hero in the Philippines, So is Miguel Cotto to Puerto Rico, with an unblemished record and as a world champion, he still doesn't captivate me by being named fighter of the decade even with a good past 2 years boxing and especially winning his toughest opposition to date, welter weight elite Zab Judah. 

Anybody not mentioned for candidates for fighter of the decade I would look across the pond to the likes of Joe Calzaghe and Ricky Hatton. These guys are serious opposition,  and I believe even though they draw criticism for fighting some tomato cans in Europe, they are fighting now when they're divisions are surging with talent as opposed to when Wright and Hopkins where fighting at a time when the middleweight division was at a decline, much like the Heavy weight division is today. 

All in all, I hate to say Mayweather should deserve the Fighter of the decade title, despite his persona and "business moves" he makes, but I can't be bias and just look at the numbers here. If Mayweather gets a win over Hatton and secure and win a fight over Cotto then who can really argue I know I can't.   Michael S. Rivera… 

 

Goldstein:  Michael, Floyd's unblemished record is very impressive but who has it come against?   Yes, Floyd has become champion in 5 different weight classes but was only undisputed at 147lbs.   The other titles were very good accomplishments, but not great accomplishments.   I also have to disagree with you pointing out that Hopkins and Wright being older is a negative on their accomplishments, but I believe this is a shining example of just how good they really are.   Despite their age, they can still box with the best fighters in the world.  If Winky wins tonight, I do not feel that he would need a win over DLH for fighter of the decade because no one can match a list of Mosley twice, Trinidad and Hopkins.   Calzaghe and Hatton are very good fighters but each only has a win over one marquee name.  Calzaghe's win over Jeff Lacey was a very good win but Lacey was not undisputed, nor did he beat anyone of note.   Hatton's win over Kostya Tszyu was great but since then he has only beaten what seemed to look like a faded Castillo.  Those ring wars most certainly take their toll.   Michael, if Floyd Mayweather secures a win over the unbeaten Hatton and the unbeaten Cotto, it will most definitely be hard to argue against him being fighter of the decade.   But for now, Mayweather is retired, LOL.  (At least he's retired until November.)  Tonight is happening and the only the winner of Ronald "Winky" Wright and Bernard "The Executioner" Hopkins can stake their claim.            

Send comments to boxingtalk@gmail.com