Fantasy Fight

Gerald McClellan(USA) vs Bernard Hopkins(USA)


Las Vegas, USA


Super Middleweight



Been on my mind for a while this one. To those whose instant reaction is Hopkins win, I ask you to reconsider. At least pause for thought. McClellan the natural at the weight, but Hopkins has shown he can bulk up. What would happen in the build up? Would they cancel each other out and be respectful? Or would all hell break loose? Both these two a real mean streak. Who would impose their will on the other? And would it take a trilogy before that question could be answered?


Who wins?

For me, prime Hopkins wins. He would be all over McClellan i reckon and his chin was so good at Middle (and beyond) I don't think McClellan could do the necessary prep work in the early rounds to get him out later. Bhop for me

Hopkins, late stoppage or points. In a similar sort of fight to Benn v Watson. Soaks up the early storm, starts to land counters and slowly takes over. McClellan would definately have more than just a punchers chance though, Hopkins would need to be at his best.

'He would be all over McClellan'


Have to be honest, I can't see that Sean. I see McClellan as the aggressor here. Just couldn't see it any other way.


Just wonder if McClellan might be able to apply a sustained pressure, the likes of which no other fighter has ever been able to put Hopkins under.

Hopkins chin and timing take away McClellans power and aggression leaving Hopkins to win a comfortable UD. It is that simple for me.

All over is wrong phrase, i admit. I just think he would have tucked his head in, avoided McClellans best shots and outpointed him with better boxing skill. All over him was a poor choice of words

Hear you sean. I know most would see Hopkins as too slick defensively for Gerald. While Hopkins possessed a solid chin and supreme caginess, he has been hit clean and hurt by lesser punchers and lesser boxer/fighters than McClellan. But it's McClellan's killer instinct that makes this such an interesting fight for me. He had the kind of speed Hopkins never liked dealing with, and he could throw with great technique and considerable accuracy.

I'm with Sean with this one (a great match up by the way OP).

Hopkins would spoil the fight as much as possible and smother McClellan every time he got close. GMan couldn't adapt if he didn't have his own way, Hopkins would grind him down.

McClellan would win the first couple on aggression (Hopkins always loses rounds based on this) but after the 4th/5th rounds, all the hustling and dirty fighting of Hopkins will slow and tire McClellan.

Later in the fight, Hopkins would use the lead Straight Right and circle out of range before getting more aggressive. Outboxing McClellan into the late rounds. Ring savvy would beat aggression.

I would have it Points win by Hopkins.

Cheers Project. For the sake of diplomacy I'm going for McClellan in '94, and Hopkins in '01.

No problem Herman.

Circa 94 McClellan - coming off 2 good wins over Jackson but by 2001 Hopkins had cemented himself highly in P4P ranks after a win over Trinidad (plus Hopkins still had some power at Middleweight during this time).

Whether Hopkins would have the power at Super-Middle is the only determining factor for me as the Hopkins of 2001 had already tuned his craft.

An earlier Hopkins (1994/1995) would have had some more difficulty with McClellan I think as he was a little more "come forward". McClellan certainty wasn't limited, but unless he had his own way, he could be beat by a boxer who could adapt like Hopkins.

The closest image of the fight I have is the first Hopkins vs. Pascal fight. Weather the storm, spoil and take control.

Benn was able to wrestle McClellan and dirty box him to wear him down. Hopkins would have done so with a little more defense in mind I think.

Not sure what you mean, Mcclellan was a natural at the weight? He only fought once at super-middle...the defeat by Benn.

He certainly had the power to mix it up with super-middles, but never shared a ring with someone of Hopkins ability.

Very very hard fight for Hopkins, but ring smarts win out. Lots of holding and spoiling.

In all, I agree with School Project.

Ok Mackem I can explain.

McLellan was near enough a light heavy by fight time, he must have been killing himself to make middleweight. A very big super middleweight.


Now Hopkins might very well fiddle and fartarse his way to a decision, but it's no given, certainly in '94.

McClellan, Toney and Hopkins started out about the same time. McLellan and Toney progressed much quicker than Hopkins. It took Hopkins a long time to become the fighter he was .

I'd never heard of issues regarding Mclellan making weight, maybe your right?

That was conjecture on my part. You implied he wasn't a natural super middleweight?

It depends what you mean by natural then? Because if everyone boxed at their natural weight then most people would be about a stone and a half over their fighting weight.

For me, no matter what size, if a boxer can make weight without killing himself then he is fighting in the correct category. Granted, it's always an up hill battle to lose the last 2kg or so but if a fighter is seriously struggling making weight (skipping off with sweat suit, sauna etc in the last few hours before weigh in) then he should be fighting in the weight category above.

I don't know enough about his making weight to be able to say what he was natural at. I won't judge it on height. Frame mainly dictates what weight you can make... but I havn't seen enough of Mclellans wrists or ankles to be able to comment on that either, so i have to judge it on the career i know of.

'Natural' implies to me, not having to undergo excessive strain to achieve the desired goal.

In '94, easier I believe for McClellan to make supermiddle than Hopkins, who would have had to bulk up, rather than grow naturally into the weight.

If you want to get really technical with this:

McClellan sweat himself to death to make Middleweight and by 1994 it is thought the constant dehydration he was suffering to make Middle and Super Middle affected him in the Benn fight (lack of water retention and not being fully rehydrated whilst suffering shots to the head can cause a series of problems).

If you put the weight in to consideration (rather than pure boxing ability that a fantasy match should be based on). Then you could have Hopkins winning by killing the guy if you wanted...

The Hopkins of 2001 would beat any version of McClellan regardless of the weight... Add it into the mix? then the Executioner he would be.

Anyone got a link to a article containing reputable evidence concerning Mclellans weight issues?

Granted he was a big man, and it's perfectly plausable to suggest his tragic accident was a result of rapid weight loss by way of dehydration, but I've tried to search the net for facts and all I can find on the subject is word of mouth and speculation on various boxing forums.

I think it's quite right to require substantiation, and perfectly reasonable not to believe in hearsay.

Juan Manuel Marquez vs Ricky Hatton

TheMackemMawler wrote:Anyone got a link to a article containing reputable evidence concerning Mclellans weight issues?

Granted he was a big man, and it's perfectly plausable to suggest his tragic accident was a result of rapid weight loss by way of dehydration, but I've tried to search the net for facts and all I can find on the subject is word of mouth and speculation on various boxing forums.

I think it's quite right to require substantiation, and perfectly reasonable not to believe in hearsay.

I saw it on that Benn v Mcclellen documentary. One of the Doctors and a sports therepyst mentioned it. Some guys are able to hydrate well. It wasn't really noted in the G-Mans case before (hence the shoddy medicals) but it came to light after the fight. His condition was due to being dehydrated on a regular basis and taking punches... It was a case of when (rather than who) the damage was caused.

Cheers for the reply project,

You'd think weighing in the day before the fight would allow enough time for the brain cavity to become rehydrated. I thought that was the whole point. Granted, performance may dip through an excessive and rapid dehydration/rehydration cycle but I always thought 24-36hrs was enough time for the watery shock absorber in the head to be replished. Hence weigh ins the day before fight night?

A lot of ideas for the good of something are usually perverted/distorted into an advantage for some of the guilty and sometimes there come people like Mclellan who push the boundaries too far

Without wanting to dispute any weight / rehydration issues that he may have had, it seems perfectly plausible to me that his injuries could have nothing to do with it. Benn hit him with numerous left hooks- I haven't checked the stats, but it was a high number of extremely hard shots, and any one of those could have caused the rupture of the blood vessels. There have been too many cases of brain hemorages in boxing for them all to have been a result of failing to rehydrate properly.

It's pretty much given that McClellan had issues with his head prior to the fight as one or two doctors wouldn't pass him for a medical. So I wouldn't put all of it on Benn regarding how McClellan ended up.

Back on topic: Hopkins would beat McLellan

The man was cruel to animals

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:The man was cruel to animals

....and you eat meat?

TheMackemMawler wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:The man was cruel to animals

....and you eat meat?

I think the difference is that eating a burger is legal and beating rottweilers and feeding them labradors is considered somewhat evil to a normal human being. The guy had some issues to say the least.

School Project wrote:It's pretty much given that McClellan had issues with his head prior to the fight as one or two doctors wouldn't pass him for a medical. So I wouldn't put all of it on Benn regarding how McClellan ended up.

Back on topic: Hopkins would beat McLellan

I 've heard all the rumours about McClellan having issues with his head, but have never found anything to substanciate it, could anyone point me in the right direct? There seems to be lots of speculation but not much solid evidence. I didn't see the documentary on the fight, so forgive me if there's stuff on it that covers it.

Check out Scotts post (page 2).

https://www.606v2.com/t19451p50-benn-v-mcclellan-what-happened

Great article by Scott there. But I dont think for one second that Gman was hurt prior to the Benn fight. Boxers for world title fights have MRI and CAT scans which would have picked up any brain anomolies. Several boxers were barred from fighting because things were picked up. If any issues were with Gman, it would have been picked up.

Unfortunately boxing is a dangerous sport and will remain so as long as people are willing to beat each other up for our entertainment. Thats why it irks me when posters refer to boxers as cowards or similar words. Or claiming that boxer X ran like a little girl etc. They are so far removed from cowards and those who describe boxers in those terms are the cowards themselves.

azania wrote:Great article by Scott there. But I dont think for one second that Gman was hurt prior to the Benn fight. Boxers for world title fights have MRI and CAT scans which would have picked up any brain anomolies. Several boxers were barred from fighting because things were picked up. If any issues were with Gman, it would have been picked up.

Unfortunately boxing is a dangerous sport and will remain so as long as people are willing to beat each other up for our entertainment. Thats why it irks me when posters refer to boxers as cowards or similar words. Or claiming that boxer X ran like a little girl etc. They are so far removed from cowards and those who describe boxers in those terms are the cowards themselves.

You would probably know better than me, but I thought that the scans were only done annually for British boxers, and possibly less in the US, but again whilst I enjoyed Scott's article, it still falls into the hearsay category for me- were there any doctors reports or anything more concrete to support the idea that he had a pre existing condition?

azania wrote:Great article by Scott there. But I dont think for one second that Gman was hurt prior to the Benn fight. Boxers for world title fights have MRI and CAT scans which would have picked up any brain anomolies. Several boxers were barred from fighting because things were picked up. If any issues were with Gman, it would have been picked up.

Unfortunately boxing is a dangerous sport and will remain so as long as people are willing to beat each other up for our entertainment. Thats why it irks me when posters refer to boxers as cowards or similar words. Or claiming that boxer X ran like a little girl etc. They are so far removed from cowards and those who describe boxers in those terms are the cowards themselves.

I called someone a coward during one of my rants ages ago took loads of flak (I don't remember who it was? I think it was donaire! ).

Everything depends on context. I don't think the word coward is an absolute term.

When it's used with respect to a boxer it tends to be used loosely and in relative terms (as compared to his peers), normally, for avoiding certain opponents, bullying, biting, sly punches at the end of a fight etc etc....... It's not used as a comparison to the normal guy on the street who lacks the kahunas fight.

alma wrote:McClellan only ever had one fight at SMW didn't he? And that was at 165.

Has Hopkins ever fought at SMW?

Apologies if these issues have been covered, but I haven't got time to read all the threads.

Anyway McClellan overrated for me, clear stamina issues, so if he didn't knock Hopkins out early, Bernard would win late.

Hey Alma,

The OP pitted the 1994 version of Mcclellan and the 2001 version of Hopkins.

Hopkins coming off one of the biggest wins of his career vs. Trinidad no less.

Oddly enough, Hopkins started his career in the Super-Middle area and dropped in weight in 1993/1994. Though he fought regularly at 165-173lbs (Hopkins would have the legs at the weight against Mclellen to start with).

The odd thing about Hopkins is how he was able to jump from fighting guys like De La Hoya to fighting Antonio Tarver and never have it affect his performance... the man was a freak in terms of how he could jump between any weight class and still maintain a high level - Not once has he ever blamed weight issues either.

TheMackemMawler wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:The man was cruel to animals

....and you eat meat?

Yip, that is exactly the same and buying a dog, taping its mouth shut and letting your pitbull loose on it.

He is a horrible individual and got what he deserved.

The key with Hopkins SP is his dedication, when he moved to light heavy he worked with the top nutrition and weight guy in the states who has worked with some of the top sports people in the world across a range of sports (name escapes me) and he said he has never worked with anyone as committed and dedicated in his life, said with Hopkins if you tell him to eat 200g of something at a set time he does it to the gram and on the absolute dot, sticks to whatver regime he is given completely, would guess you would have to be still doing what he does at nearly 50

Hopkins to outsmart him every time as far as I can see

Eating meat's not cruel but I bet a fair few abatoirs are.

The advancement of of civilization relies on animal cruelty. Cosmetic companies and science labs for example. Pouring bleach into puppies eyes or severing the spinal chord of animal is quite cruel. For the benefit of mankind, perhaps, but cruelty all the same.

Close your eyes and no one can see you.

I don't think he got what he deserved.

Anyway this is a boxing forum and topics like this will always stimulate debate but are best left for the dinner table.

TheMackemMawler wrote:Eating meat's not cruel but I bet a fair few abatoirs are.

The advancement of of civilization relies on animal cruelty. Cosmetic companies and science labs for example. Pouring bleach into puppies eyes or severing the spinal chord of animal is quite cruel. For the benefit of mankind, perhaps, but cruelty all the same.

Close your eyes and no one can see you.

I don't think he got what he deserved.

Anyway this is a boxing forum and topics like this will always stimulate debate but are best left for the dinner table.

Who exactly pours bleach into a puppies eyes for the 'advancement of civilization'.

Anyway... Hoppo out smarts him in every sense. I actually see a dominant performance resulting in a wide UD. The straight right would land with alarming regularity as the fight progressed.

TheMackemMawler wrote:Eating meat's not cruel but I bet a fair few abatoirs are.

The advancement of of civilization relies on animal cruelty. Cosmetic companies and science labs for example. Pouring bleach into puppies eyes or severing the spinal chord of animal is quite cruel. For the benefit of mankind, perhaps, but cruelty all the same.

Close your eyes and no one can see you.

I don't think he got what he deserved.

Anyway this is a boxing forum and topics like this will always stimulate debate but are best left for the dinner table.

Not sure who you have dinner with but I personally don't discuss animals having their backs broken at said dinner table.....

And only 'quite cruel'?!

Anyway, BHop frustrates Gman who drops a wide UD.

rowley wrote:As a general warning I appreciate there are occasions where we have discovered or been told people’s real names, however I would thank people not to use them on here.

Who was that aimed at? Did someone say my name?

The post has been deleted, but no they didn't, there was a specific post but would be grateful if we could all avoid using peoples correct names on here as am guessing none of us would particularly appreciate it

Imagine if we couldn't use real names.

In 1989 we all witnessed a brilliant war of attrition between frank and john. While it was even early on Frank battered him from pillar to post in the later rounds..... But do 606v2 posters think that Frank could beat a 1994 version of David?


(to protect the anonymity of the fighters all names have been changed)

TheMackemMawler wrote:Imagine if we couldn't use real names.

In 1989 we all witnessed a brilliant war of attrition between frank and john. While it was even early on Frank battered him from pillar to post in the later rounds..... But do 606v2 posters think that Frank could beat a 1994 version of David?


(to protect the anonymity of the fighters all names have been changed)

Hahahaha