Bob Fosters LHW Reign Vs Bernard Hopkins MW Reign. Overrated?

[IronDanHamza]

The question I'm asking isn't who's reign was better. More to state how similar they are.

I often to see Bob Foster ranked amongst the Top 5 LHW's. Often considered common knowledge to some.

But how good is his reign? Certainly overrated IMO.

Much like Hopkins reign, Foster's fought pretty much every contender during the late 60's and early 70's. Beat a long list of solid, good, top ranked contenders in what was a relatively weak era for LHW's.

His best win likely being the ATG MW, **** Tiger, who whilst very good and a legit LHW and the Champion there, was small for the weight class.

Similar again to Hopkins, with his best win coming over Felix Trinidad moving up from WW to become considered the best MW in the world by most.

As you can see, very similar reigns yet Hopkins usually get's ranked in the lower half of the Top 10 at MW (I have him at #10) yet Foster get's ranked Top 5 minimum usually.

When there's fighters like Harold Johnson who IMO has a much superior resume and much superior skills who on pretty much every list I see is ranked beneath him.

What do you think? Bob Foster's reign overrated?

[Ray Corso]

Its great to have superior skills and be far above average in talent but theres one thing that keeps you in fights and can make the difference!!!

Its called POWER!! Bob Foster at 175 had incredible power and when you got caught you were captured! He was built to be the perfect physical 175er. Tall lean and long muscled, tapered legs and broad backed.

I know something about this fellow known as the "Sheriff" I trained with the late great Mr. Pat Nappi in New Mexico SW Alb. gym for two summers. Bob Foster was folding heavy bags like Joe Louis could and he had all the punchres too!

I like Bernard at middleweight more so than LtHvy but I don't put Bernard high up like others do. I appreciate his thought proccesses and his ability but his current style is a bore and he's surviving in boxing by carefully navigating his way to bout to bout. There was a time when promoters wouldn't allow this crap but todays another day with fans who are on the net instead of in the seats at local shows to learn how its done! No big deal!!
I'll watch Foster all day long over Bernard. Ray.

[IronDanHamza]

Talking reigns really.

Not ability.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Both reigns were when the divisions were really weak,,

I would have liked to see foster handle the lhw that came right after him, spinks, eddie mustafa, marvin, etc i think foster would do quite well but would be nowhere near as dominant

Same with hopkins, would have liked to seen him in the era before his when the division had benn, G-man, nunn, toney, mccallum, roy etc No doubt that hopkins wouldnt reign over that time period,,,

Same can be said about roy jones lhw reign,, it was very weak IMO

[Ray Corso]

opponents; Fosters main comp.
D.Jones
W.Besmanoff
E. Terrel (Hvy)
H. Hank
E. Cotton
D. Tiger
V. Rondon
M. Quarry
P. Fourie
.............all ot these men came to fight, no soft touches here!

Hopkins at middleweight; G. Johnson
R. Jones (lost)
S. Brown (welter)
A. Echols
F. Trinidad (welter)
W. Joppy
J. Taylor (2) loswt

...............when Bernard stepped up he got beat, his wins came from fellows who moved up from welter where they were at their best.
Foster beat competition amnd when he fought the excitement was in the air because he could punch!! If you want to sell tickets find a guy who can punch!! Hopefully you can teach him some boxing but people love to see a puncher!!! Ray

[Sugar Adam Ali]

I hate this myth that hopkins only fought blownup welters,,, oscar and simon fit that descrpition

but holmes was a legit mw,, and frankly i thought tito was too, yes he started at welter, but he moved up just like many great fighters have done,, I think tito was a full fledged mw when he fought hopkins,,

echols, mercado, allen, johnson, eastman, joppy were all top ranked mw when hopkins fought them,,

It may have been a weak era, but i cant name any mw that hopkins didnt fight, except for maybe julio ceasar green??

like i said before, hopkins and foster were both in relative weak eras of the division, which was a major factor in their dominance,,

Much like the klits at heavy now,, weak division in historic terms,

It doesnt mean that guys like hopkins or foster werent great fighters, they were but the era was weak

[IronDanHamza]

Both reigns were when the divisions were really weak,,

I would have liked to see foster handle the lhw that came right after him, spinks, eddie mustafa, marvin, etc i think foster would do quite well but would be nowhere near as dominant

Same with hopkins, would have liked to seen him in the era before his when the division had benn, G-man, nunn, toney, mccallum, roy etc No doubt that hopkins wouldnt reign over that time period,,,

Same can be said about roy jones lhw reign,, it was very weak IMO

Pretty much exactly what I'm saying.

Yet Foster is always rated so highly at LHW.

[IronDanHamza]

opponents; Fosters main comp.
D.Jones
W.Besmanoff
E. Terrel (Hvy)
H. Hank
E. Cotton
D. Tiger
V. Rondon
M. Quarry
P. Fourie
.............all ot these men came to fight, no soft touches here!

Hopkins at middleweight; G. Johnson
R. Jones (lost)
S. Brown (welter)
A. Echols
F. Trinidad (welter)
W. Joppy
J. Taylor (2) loswt

...............when Bernard stepped up he got beat, his wins came from fellows who moved up from welter where they were at their best.
Foster beat competition amnd when he fought the excitement was in the air because he could punch!! If you want to sell tickets find a guy who can punch!! Hopefully you can teach him some boxing but people love to see a puncher!!! Ray

Read the first sentence in the OP again. I'm not comparing their resumes more using Hopkins reign as an example to why Foster's is overrated.

As for the actual breakdown. Pretty clear Bias there on your part.

Why are you highlighting the fights Hopkins lost and not Foster? He lost to Jones and Terrel in the fights you listed.

Why aren't you highlighting Tiger was a smaller man much like you are for Hopkins? And the size differential between Tiger and Foster was as vast, if not vaster than any of Hopkins fights with smaller men.

You can't really be including Besmanoff for Foster? And not include, Allen, Eastman, Holmes for Hopkins? All solid wins against top contenders like a lot of Foster's wins.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Pretty much exactly what I'm saying.

Yet Foster is always rated so highly at LHW.

I still think foster was a great fighter, but in terms of ATG ranking at lhw i always have him 6-10 somewhere,,,

I rate him higher than jones, but lower than spinks, charles, moore etc..

Same way with hopkins,, great fighter but never fought the elite competition and when he did he usually came up short ie jones, calzaghe

[IronDanHamza]

I still think foster was a great fighter, but in terms of ATG ranking at lhw i always have him 6-10 somewhere,,,

I rate him higher than jones, but lower than spinks, charles, moore etc..

Same way with hopkins,, great fighter but never fought the elite competition and when he did he usually came up short ie jones, calzaghe

Yeah he was a great fighter for sure. ATG LHW. Think I had him #8 or #9.

I can't see how the likes of Charles, Moore, Spinks, Conn, Tunney, Johnson etc could be ranked below him.

I just think he's overrated or atleast his resume is. H2H he's higher but even think I think he's overrated in that regard aswell.

Resume wise I can't see any logical way you could rank him over the likes of Harold Johnson for example who on pretty much every list I see he's ranked higher.