Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who ranks higher at 160 lbs: Freddie Steele or Bernard Hopkins?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Who ranks higher at 160 lbs: Freddie Steele or Bernard Hopkins?

    Freddie Steele fought in a deep middleweight division during the 1930’s and was a powerful boxer-puncher with dynamite in his fists, especially his right-hand, and possessed very good footwork.

    He beat such men as future champion Ceferino Garcia twice by knockout, broke former champion Vince Dundee’s jaw in three places before eventually stopping him, Gus Lesnevich, Gorilla Jones three times, Ken Overlin, a then-inexperienced Fred Apostoli, Solly Krieger and beat Babe Risko thrice, the first time in a non-title bout, the second time to be crowned as the middleweight champion of the world by both the NBA and New York Athletic Commission and the third time when Steele defended his title.

    After being battered by Fred Apostoli before the referee stopped the contest in the ninth-round in a non-title bout in 1938, Steele would defend his title once more with a seventh-round knockout of Carmen Barth.

    He was later stripped of the New York Athletic Commission crown for not agreeing to give Fred Apostoli a shot at the title.

    Steele was still recognized by the NBA as the world middleweight champion when he stepped into the ring to face the murderous punching Al Hostak on July 28, 1938.

    For the first time, Steele didn't have his long-time manager Dave Miller in the corner, who had died suddenly. Whether or not that could have contributed to the result is up for debate, Hostak won after knocking Steele out at 1:43 of the first round.

    After this loss, Steele retired from boxing at the young age of 25. For those who are unfamiliar with what age he debuted as a professional it may seem like a very short career but the fact is that Steele had turned pro at the age of 13!

    Yes, you saw it right. He turned pro at the age of 13!

    He did a brief comeback attempt three years later in 1941, but was sent back into retirement immediately with a five-round knockout loss.

    When everything was set and done, Freddie Steele had defended his middleweight title five times in a very deep era

    On the other side is Bernard Hopkins, who ruled a weak middleweight era with an iron fist. His most notable victories at the weight were over two fighters which did their best work at 147 lbs.

    With that said, his longevity was/is impressive and is the biggest reason for him being in these kinds of discussions.

    I’ve seen quite a few people that places Hopkins in the Top 5 when the best middleweights of all-time are being discussed, a view that I necessarily don’t agree with.

    So my question is: who do you think should be ranked higher as a middleweight, Freddie Steele or Bernard Hopkins?

    #2
    Good question.

    Steele's one of those underrated forgotten fighters.

    I have Hopkins at #10 I think I had Steele #12 one behind Marcel Cerdan.

    I could easily interchange those 3.

    Comment


      #3
      Good question,, honestly i havent watched any of Steele's fights, only have read about him... Seems to be a pretty good puncher from what ive read...

      Not really sure about hopkins,, h2h i rate him highly but in terms of resume at 160 it is alittle weak, but he did clean out the division,,, 20 defenses is pretty remarkable but it was against very mediocre competition. Mercado, johnson, echols, allen, eastman, joppy, holmes were all legit fighters when hopkins beat them but nothing special about the wins either,, His reign is similar to the klitchkos or Calzaghe in that they beat everyone around but no opponents were exactly great legacy wins....


      If i had to choose one, i guess i would lean towards Steele, simply for the fact that he had much better competition,, Hopkins i rate higher if you take the whole totality of his career, but if its just MW career, then Steele is probably ahead of hopkins

      Very good question, eager to see other posters thoughts on this

      Comment


        #4
        The video evidence is relatively scarce on all the top 1930s middleweights but there is some footage on pretty much all the top guys. The 1930s middleweights were not particularly impressive, the best one was probably Marcel Thil. Hopkins was/is not only a lot better than Freddie Steele but his middleweight reign was a lot more impressive. Take Vince Dundee for instance, he was one of the very best middleweights of the early to mid 1930s. The only things going for him were that he had a pretty solid chin and fought in a very weak era. His skill level was extremely low and he had very little speed and power. The quintessential hard man who could became champion in those days. Steele knocked him out showing he did have good power, an era when stopping 48% of your defeated opponents was one of the indicators of having good punching power. However knocking out Vince Dundee is not really all that impressive.

        By the standards of their own eras Hopkins was the greater and by the standards of the relative quality of both fighters then Hopkins was/is significantly better.
        Last edited by Humean; 01-12-2014, 04:39 PM.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Humean View Post
          The video evidence is relatively scarce on all the top 1930s middleweights but there is some footage on pretty much all the top guys. The 1930s middleweights were not particularly impressive, the best one was probably Marcel Thil. Hopkins was/is not only a lot better than Freddie Steele but his middleweight reign was a lot more impressive. Take Vince Dundee for instance, he was one of the very best middleweights of the early to mid 1930s. The only things going for him were that he had a pretty solid chin and fought in a very weak era. His skill level was extremely low and he had very little speed and power. The quintessential hard man who could became champion in those days. Steele knocked him out showing he did have good power, an era when stopping 48% of your defeated opponents was one of the indicators of having good punching power. However knocking out Vince Dundee is not really all that impressive.

          By the standards of their own eras Hopkins was the greater and by the standards of the relative quality of both fighters then Hopkins was/is significantly better.
          First of all, you must confuse me with someone who gives a **** about your opinion. Stick to your rants about Edwin Valero being one of the hardest punchers of all-time.

          Or even better, get the **** out of the history section.

          To be totally honest with you, your opinion means **** to me, absolutely nothing. You are just tiresome with your biased and delusional nonsense, and doesn’t seem to understand that you most of the time looks like a friggin?idiot.

          This is the only reply you will get from me, because you can’t even take into consideration that your view of things has major flaws and may very well be wrong.

          Friggin?mong?

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by greeh View Post
            First of all, you must confuse me with someone who gives a **** about your opinion. Stick to your rants about Edwin Valero being one of the hardest punchers of all-time.

            Or even better, get the **** out of the history section.

            To be totally honest with you, your opinion means **** to me, absolutely nothing. You are just tiresome with your biased and delusional nonsense, and doesn’t seem to understand that you most of the time looks like a friggin?idiot.

            This is the only reply you will get from me, because you can’t even take into consideration that your view of things has major flaws and may very well be wrong.

            Friggin?mong?/div>
            ??????? So you ask a question here in the History section, and someone takes the time to offer his honest opinion, without offending anyone... and this is what you think he deserves?
            Last edited by Bundana; 12-31-2015, 04:28 AM.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by greeh View Post
              First of all, you must confuse me with someone who gives a **** about your opinion. Stick to your rants about Edwin Valero being one of the hardest punchers of all-time.

              Or even better, get the **** out of the history section.

              To be totally honest with you, your opinion means **** to me, absolutely nothing. You are just tiresome with your biased and delusional nonsense, and doesn’t seem to understand that you most of the time looks like a friggin?idiot.

              This is the only reply you will get from me, because you can’t even take into consideration that your view of things has major flaws and may very well be wrong.

              Friggin?mong?/div>
              Ease up on him,, his posts on this thread was fine,, you may disagree with him and he may annoy you but he is an active poster, has passion for the sport we all love, and if we all agreed then the forum would be boring.. Your a really good poster, so dont let humean get under your skin

              Originally posted by Bundana View Post
              ??????? So you ask a question here in the History section, and someone takes the time to offer his honest opinion, without offending anyone... and this is what you think he deserves?
              My thoughts exactly, but there is alot of back in forth in another thread that caused this reaction.
              But yes we should just ignore someone if you dont like them, instead of the flame wars,,,
              I honestly like all the posters in the history, and everyone brings something different to the discussion.. Humean is the outside-the-box type poster but i enjoy reading his posts, they can be entertaining, we dont have to agree with everything he says, but i dont want him to stop posting,,, if i get into a mindless argument with him, i will just ignore his posts, but i dont suggest trying to run anyone off

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Sugar Adam Ali View Post
                Ease up on him,, his posts on this thread was fine,, you may disagree with him and he may annoy you but he is an active poster, has passion for the sport we all love, and if we all agreed then the forum would be boring.. Your a really good poster, so dont let humean get under your skin
                To be honest, this forum can use the traffic. I'm satisfied if we can keep the racists and the agenda driven fanboys out.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Sugar Ray Robinson?
                  Last edited by MDPopescu; 01-13-2014, 07:37 AM.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Scott9945 View Post
                    To be honest, this forum can use the traffic. I'm satisfied if we can keep the racists and the agenda driven fanboys out.

                    totally agree,, i cant stand the sneaky racists and the agenda guys,,, i just want to talk boxing, drop my 2 cents, read others opinions, maybe learn something,,,

                    I get enough of that crap in NSB,, i prefer the nice sanctuary of the history section

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP