Bernard Hopkins or James Toney...who ranks higher All-Time???

James Toney.

 

That was a clinic? Hopkins was a better Middleweight than McCallum as well.

He is a better combination puncher and a taller fighter as well than the stocky Griffin. Griffin was a slickster with his unorthodox style, Hopkins was more of a textbook fighter. The styles don't really stack up when comparing to Toney. What does stack up is, once again, the fact that Toney, stationary counter-puncher at his best(as shown against Barkley) does not respond as well to movement, and Hopkins had a much better outside game and jab than Toney, which would limit Toney's style, as it did with Nunn. Unlike Nunn however, Hopkins has an iron chin and a more protected defense. The way I see it, Toney's not going to counter and outwork Hopkins on the inside, and he's outclassed on the outside.

 

hard one. hopkins edges it. both beat RRJ in my books.

 

whos rrj? if ya trying to say they both beat roy jones junior then you really must be blind.

 

Hopkins has had the better career, as far as I am concerned they are on two different levels. Hopkins used superior training and dedication to stay at 160 and campaign there as champion for a decade. While Toney kept eating himself out of weight classes. Anybody who thought he went up in weight classes for glory like Roy Jones, is stupid, Toney ate himself out of weight classes.

Hopkins by far.

 

You are an idiot.

 

I remember HBO saying that Bernard's fights are boring. I believe he fought to the level of the opponent. Jones beat him with a bad hand. Toney would have won by UD. Bernard is a very good fighter, but it seemed like he got better years later after possibly the Jones fight. Toney adapted to all styles except for Jones. It still would have been an PPV type of fight.

 

Marion Wilson fought tougher competition than Toney, does that make him greater?

 

Hopkins, by a fair margin.

Hopkins is a legend and an ATG whose achivements are superior to the less disciplined Toney.


Neither one approaches Jones.

 

I saw that fight and Tiberi won, but as far as great? Toney had trouble making the weight and should have not taken the fight. He did offer Tiberi a rematch, but Tiberi I believe after not accepting the fight, retired. Don't get me wrong, Tiberi was robbed of winning the fight, but most importantly a title.

 

Looking at their records, Toney faced and beat the overall better competition, but he also had more off-nights than B-Hop. B-Hop also did better than Toney against RJJ. Toney fought at the top from MW to HW, while B-Hop kept fighting many mediocre opponents at MW and made a (so far successfull) move up to LHW just a couple years ago. Let's see how B-Hop fares against Calzaghe in two weeks...

I think Toney is the more talented and better fighter between these two. Don't get me wrong here, I think B-Hop is a great fighter, but an in-shape Toney beats B-Hop on points. Those who claim that Toney is only good at countering slow opponents are wrong, Toney is of course a master-counterpuncher but he can also be the aggressor if needed, and I think he'd outwork Hopkins at MW to LHW. An in-shape and focused Toney is just too much. On an off-night, Hopkins might have a chance. Hopkins has the edge in consistency, discipline and staying focused ouside the ring tho...

BTW, to those constantly bringing up the Tiberi fight against Toney, Toney was dead-sick for that fight but he didn't want to pull out. Yes I think that Tiberi won that night, but Toney wasn't even able to walk properly for the last couple rounds but he still kept on his feet, it shows how tough he is, I mean how many fighters would have made it to the final bell in such a state? And Toney got robbed a good couple times himself, so I think that makes up for it...

 

I've always contended that RJJ > B-Hop > Toney (> Calzaghe, seems to be the new addition).

The margin between RJJ and B-Hop, however, is much larger than that between B-Hop and those below (namely Toney, which is what this thread is asking).

 

It wasn't a clinic, it was a tight fight. Both fought superbly. It was one of the best technical displays of skill that I have seen in the middleweight division.

And whilst I agree with you that Hopkins was a better middleweight than McCallum, I'm not sure Hopkins beats THAT McCallum. I'd favour him to for sure, but if he lost I wouldn't be surprised.

In any case, I feel confident in saying that the McCallum of the first Toney fight is a better fighter at middleweight than anyone Hopkins ever beat at middleweight by a LONG way. (As are a few other opponents Toney fought at middleweight for that matter, i.e. Nunn, Johnson).

Why has Griffin been brought up? I brought up McCallum, and not because McCallum is like Hopkins, but only to counter your point about Toney struggling with movers and only looking good against tailor made fighters. McCallum did do a good amount of moving, and he is not tailor made for Toney. Toney still fought probably his best fighter ever against him.

Re Hopkins-Toney: Hopkins movement and jab will serve him well no doubt, but he does not have the fluidity and movment of a Michael Nunn and he does like to mix it up a lot more. Hopkins has never been hard to track down in the ring (tagging him cleanly is another story). Many average opponents (e.g. Echols) have been able to pressure him and make him uncomfortable. I don't see him fighting too much of an outside fight against Toney. I see Toney getting to him and forcing Hopkins to scrap and fight on the inside. I think James will be landing the more telling blows there and punishing Hopkins with uppercuts and hooks to the body and head and would take a close decision - at his best, of course.

 

What Brooklyn said.

 

Hopkins by far, the Toney could have should have stuff just does not matter.