By John Hively

Do Calzaghe and Jones Block Hopkins Quest for Legendary Status?

 

Bernard “the Executioner” Hopkins may have received psychological redemption when he beat Kelly Pavlik a few weeks ago. The victory also enhanced his all-time status, but for some fans and pundits of boxing, it may still have left him playing historical and perhaps psychological second fiddle to Joe Calzaghe and Roy Jones. Perhaps that’s why the Executioner is making a big stink about wanting to fight either one. Maybe Bernard thinks he still has something to prove.

Pavlik defeated Jermain Taylor twice. Taylor had come away the victor over Hopkins two times, albeit via razor thin decisions. Perhaps Bernard’s easy win over the current middleweight champion gave him some kind of psychological redemption vis-à-vis Taylor, since Kelly proved himself superior to Jermain. You know the thinking; I Hopkins beat the man who beat me, so it proves I am really better than Taylor.

As a middleweight champion, Hopkin’s achievements were not up there with Marvin Hagler, Carlos Monzon, Harry Greb, Mickey Walker, Sugar Ray Robinson, Stanley Ketchel and others, no matter what Max Kellerman says. That’s because the Executioner fought in an extremely weak middleweight era. And unlike Ketchell, Greb, Walker and Robinson - Bernard took no chances by climbing into the squared circle with slightly bigger men.

Think about this: In January 2001, the Ring magazine came out with a list of their top twenty middleweights of all time. They placed Hopkins at number sixteen and listed John Jackson, Robert Allen, Antwun Echols, Glen Johnson and John David Jackson as the guys he beat that were most gifted. All five were good middleweights; none are going to the hall of fame based on their accomplishments at 160 pounds. The Executioner’s title opponents were so weak when compared with other great middleweight champions that William Dettloff, the author of the article wrote, “But Joe Lipsey…was a legitimate prospect.” In other words, Bernard’s title contenders were so inferior compared to other 160 pound champs, an unproven prospect had to be considered one of his better challengers.

Praise came in Hopkins direction after he stopped Felix Trinidad and Oscar De La Hoya, but those two guys were great welterweights who proved to be mediocre middleweights. Notice both came up in weight to face the bigger guy, a risk Hopkins had an aversion to.

Then Taylor took the measure of Hopkins twice; and Bernard had to live with the fact that he was zero for three against the two best middleweights he had fought: Taylor and Roy Jones. It’s hard to be a legend when you’re only the third best fighter during your career at middleweight; especially considering that nobody was rating Taylor a great champion; and Jones will never rate as a top-twenty middleweight because of the short amount of time he spent there.

After the losses to Taylor, Hopkins finally moved up to light heavyweight and won the title by spanking Antonio Tarver over twelve. He whipped Winky Wright, but then he lost a competitive decision to Joe Calzaghe. Joe out hit his opponent two to one and forced Bernard to fake a low blow in order to get a badly needed rest because of the pounding he was taking. One judge did score the fight for Bernard. She must have left her very thick glasses at home that night. The other two judges correctly gave the fight to Joe, 115-112 and 116 to 111.

Despite that loss, all of the Executioner’s post-middleweight fights show something about Hopkins that all of his victories combined at middleweight have never shown.

Bernard is truly one of the great boxers of his era; he fights with the skills, knowledge, ability to learn and adapt, and the ring intelligence of a forty-three year old veteran in a body that looks and acts fifteen-years younger. Pavlik discovered all of these things are a dangerous combination.

For Kelly, Hopkins looked like he had borrowed the Joe Calzaghe’s playbook against Jeff Lacy. The Executioner maneuvered around the ring, mostly within punching range, and hit Kelly whenever he felt like it while avoiding most of the heavy artillery of his opponent. I wouldn’t doubt Bernard studied Calzaghe vs. Lacy and realized his speed and skill advantage could be used in the same way against Pavlik as Joe used his abilities against Lacy. 

Hopkins is already a legend. He’s proven it with wins over Tarver, Pavlik and others. But when the historical dust settles, people may suggest he wasn’t as good as Roy Jones or Joe Calzaghe because he lost to both. That’s hogwash. Archie Moore lost his only bout against Charley Burley and he was zero for three against Ezzard Charles. Did that diminish Moore’s legendary status? I say not one iota because Archie is regarded by all as a legend in the sport.

Maybe Hopkins is thinking he needs a triumph over Roy or Joe to secure a legendary spot alongside them in the minds of experts and fans alike, or perhaps in his own mind; maybe that’s why it’s so important for him to climb into the ring with either one, to prove that he’s as good as they are. But Hopkins doesn’t need to do anything else to prove his legendary status.

Maybe now, or maybe ten-years from now when everybody makes up their minds, he’ll be a legend, and not just a half step or so behind Calzaghe and Jones; Bernard will be rated alongside them, with or without a win against one or the other.

Forty-years from now, when I’m in my nineties, some snot-nosed punk is going to tell me just how great the fighters of his era are. Then I’ll say something positive about the boxers he’s talking about; and then I’m going to say, “but you didn’t see Monzon fight, or Hagler, Duran, Ali, Sugar Ray Leonard, Sugar Ray Robinson, Joe Calzaghe, Roy Jones or Bernard Hopkins. Those guys were great fighters, and that Hopkins was forty-three years old when he knocked Pavlik around the ring. Your guy isn’t going to beat that performance.”

Bernard, you’ve got nothing to prove. And if you’re not a legend in everybody’s eyes now, time and the things you’ve done in the ring will make you one, sooner than later.