ATG - Whos highest RJJ or Hopkins?

hopkins by a fair margin and as aram said jones got caught cheating which should put him in his own ATGC league along with toney, holyfield and the other scum

 

As great as Hopkins is he will never be as brilliant as Roy was at his peak. But Hopkins has never been decisively defeated, save for Roy Jones.
It all depends on how one goes about comparing fighters. Are we comparing bodies of work(Hopkins). Or are we comparing them at the peak of greatness(Roy).

 

RJJ top 20 ATG Hopkins top 45 ATG

 

He never took steroids he did fail a drug test for ephedrine he apparently took ripped fuel. While it is a banned substance it is not a steroid. It just helped him make the weight.

I rank Hopkins higher based on his resume and longevity.

 

1. Hopkins NEVER was as brilliant as RJ's peak
2. Hopkins was never decisively beaten EXCEPT for Jones

And how again is BHOP ranked ahead of Roy...atschatsch

 

There we go , an intelligent Thread spoiled with someone who has probably been watching boxing for what looks like 20 years max. Neither men live in the top 50 .

 

Although Hopkins obviously has greater longevity, I don't think his body of work is better than Roy's - his great wins since he left 160 have obscured the fact that his resume wasn't really that great beforehand.

I think Roy was clearly better in his prime and beat Hopkins handily when they first fought.

 

I've been watching Boxing for 6 years. What you got to say about it?

 

It means that from the response saying that Roy is top 20 and Bernard is top 45 , then the statement means they need to see more boxing history. If you have been watching boxing for 6 years do you watch just current boxers or do you look back to great fighters such as Joe Louis from the 30's, Ray Robinson from the 50's/60's and Wilfred Benitez from the 70's/80's?

 

:good Just as long you weren't dismissing all of the young fans, robinson.

I've been watching a bit of Luis Manuel Rodriguez today, and spent last week watching Carmen Basilio's fights with Chuck Davey and Carmen Basilio.

The main reason I think I'm in love with Boxing is due to it's storied history, and all of the remarkable fighters that have came and went over the last 60-70 years.

 

I feel you on this. It's impossible to make a blanket statement about all of boxing history when you only starting watching boxing when bush II was prez. That being said it is also impossible to compare champions who defended their titles against meat slabs who boxed part just to make ends meet, against champions who fought guys who had been boxing since before they could read and who trained in top notch facilities with top notch trainers and nutritionists. Comparing Roy Jones to anybody that fought in the thirties is redundent. It's oranges and apples. Two different sports. Today's more polished super athletes vs. The hardened tough guys of the depression.

 

Can someone please explain to me how Bernard Hopkins has a better resume then Roy Jones Jr?


Hopkins won titles in 2 weight divisions. Roy Jones won titles in 4. Hopkins only became middleweight champion because Roy Jones jumped weight classes. Hopkins lost to Roy. Hopkins reign at middleweight was mediocre. His 2 best wins are against 2 welterweights. Winky Wright was forced to move up 3 wieght classes when Hopkins fought him. Kelly Pavlik was forced to move up 2 weight classes when he fought him. After that who has he beaten? Tarver? Who Roy Jones defeated earlier?

Roy Jones is more talented then Hopkins, better fighter in his prime, won more titles and had the better resume period.

Bernard Hopkins has nobody on his resume as good as a prime James Toney.

 

I stayed up all night last night watching ESPN classic which was showing Ray Robinson, Basilio and Fulmer. I watch classic fights whenever I get the chance. I read up on greats we dont even have tape of like Greb.

And Roy Jones Jr is the still the most gifted fighter I've ever seen on film.

 

Roy Jones: Toney, Hopkins, Ruiz, Hill, Tarver
Hopkins: Trinidad, Wright, Pavlik, Tarver, Johnson

Fairly comparable, but some fans will be inclined to put a lot more stock in Hopkins victories considering the age in which he acquired a lot of them. It's alright people saying Trinidad was small, but he went into the fight a heavy favorite and had destroyed and devastated William Joppy, who was a respectable opponent who'd never been treated like that before. Trinidad was thoroughly out-boxed, threaten like a second rate sparring partner at times. It's dismissed by a fair few fans today, but the odds tell a different tale.

It's alright saying Kelly Pavlik was small, but the majority of fans and sports writers thought this was a mismatch, and felt Kelly would be the first man to stop Hopkins. We're not talking about a young, prime Bernard Hopkins beating this caliber of fighter, the man is old, and has been for a number of years now. In boxing terms, he's an antique. A remarkable performance, a wonderful achievement.

The same criticisms will be voiced about his win over Winky Wright, but his most notable victories came against smaller opposition, also. Where does it end? Size never seemed to be such a factor before the bell rang, only when Hopkins would do the impossible do we have people dismissing the achievements. I don't buy it. Hopkins is an extra-ordinary fighter, and for him to be fighting at the top level today is nothing short of spellbinding.

I give Roy Jones the edge up to this point, but a win over Pascal would change that.

 

I agree , there was a time around 97 when Roy truely was the best i had ever seen , if he had retired after Ruiz or maybe fought Lewis then Roy would have been lock stock a true great, but a career is measured from start to finish . His highs have been unbelieveable , against James Toney , but his lows have been so much lower than expected of a great.