Hopkins is the most complete fighter of our era for me. Toney is technically fantastic at his own game but Hopkins has pretty much mastered boxing flat out from a technical standpoint.
I just told I have watched the whole fight, at least once. Not at any time that I've watched it (in full or in parts) have Toney come off as the superior technician, quite the opposite.
What about Reggie Johnson and John David Jackson? They are more of stylists and technicians than Taylor and arguably Jones - who I personally don´t see as such, he relied on physical attributes and ring intelligence. The best was Wright though and Hopkins won that one. Ugly fight as it was. And yes, it was 170 but Wright was an established fighter at 160 at the time and would rehydrate in his 160-pound fight to roughly that weight nayway, so this shouldn´t be as much of an issue. It wasn´t that much of a technical battle though, more of a tactic one. :thumbsup
too bad this is one fight that never got made. both are great technicians. the difference is that one is disciplined and the other isn't. this why hopkins will be higher on the all-time great fighter list than toney.
I know this was not meant for me. Toney I think reached his peak early but kept it long 1993 and Hopkins 2001.
Combine Toney and Hopkins and we would have one ugly motherF****r But I get your point, Toney with Hopkins discipline and focus would've been a top 5 ATG
Based on pure boxing skills, Toney was above Hopkins no doubt. So Toney was the better technician. People who say that Toney could only do one thing - sit in the pocket and counter - don't know boxing. Watch his old fights, Toney did it all. At the beginning of his career he was even considered an aggressive pressure fighter, and a good one because he had great defense already back then. Hopkins, however, possesses the better boxing mind - boxing intelligence. Meaning that Hopkins can adapt better, to any style, and that he is a master of executing a gameplan. Hopkins tops Toney in that department. Considering their careers, it's obvious that Toney is an underachiever while Hopkins is an overachiever.
Overachiever, Underachiever. Excuses. Every fighter is credited with what they did in the ring, and anything else is speculation.
Complete. He is well versed in every aspect of boxing. Even more so than Mayweather, obviously consistency comes into how you measure that though. If a fighter shows he can apply educated pressure perfectly once in his career and never does it again, I wouldn't be quick to label him with the 'great educated pressure fighter' tag. Just getting out of the way so we are clear on my rationale, before we go any further. Hopkins is not as good as Mayweather, but he has shown more completenss far more than Hopkins. Mayweather is very versatile, can slug, can box in the pocket and laterally, and is great inside. Hopkins has also showed more of actually forcing the fight in terms of going inside and using his physical strength to push a man backwards, and has done so with technical profficicency too. Nobody's saying he is ultimately better than Floyd or more effective, he definitely is not. This thread is concerned with the technical aspect of the game, yes? Hopkins is the most complete in that sense of our era for me, yes.