Bernard Hopkins - Roy Jones Jr. Who is better All Time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxQw-MwdQ-Y

Note 2:12 you fuking morons and then tell me hopkins didnt get knocked on his ass. Question is why was the ref running in there to break it up, and what wasnt shown was hopkins doing a mini version of the judah dance.

 

1lehudson - that was embarrassing.

The ref had forced both of Hopkins' hands down, and that means he could not defend himself against a clean right hand from Echols. Instead of moaning and whining, he just proceeded to whip Echols' ass.

And in the other fight, instead of quitting with the shoulder injury, Hopkins continued fighting and destroyed Echols.

I'm actually glad you pointed out that youtube video, because it shows just how much heart and will Hopkins had. In that second fight, Hop was 35 years old! And he still DESTROYED Echols even though his shoulder was damaged and he had a way out of the fight if he wanted!

That is, Hopkins was OLDER than when RJJ got KTFO twice and he fought through an injury he didn't have to and still KTFO of one of the premiere punchers in the division.

RJJ was a great frontrunner, but not good at digging down deep when he needed to. Contrast that with BHop, who was outstanding at closing the show when he needed to and could come from behind as necessary. Just like he did against Winky last night. Even on Lederman's biased card, Hop won, what, the last 3+ rounds?

RJJ was a great talent, but his heart and will isn't close to Hopkins.' Maybe it didn't need to be, given his talent, but it wasn't. Not close.

Sues, Evisc and Sweet Pea -- great job. Sues, excellent breakdown and objectivity. Look, I'm a Hops fan, and I don't hide that, but I have full appreciation for RJJ's talents. That said, just looking at that highlight that 1le linked it is incredible how much Hopkins' style has evolved. RJJ never has shown any of that ability, and that is just one reason why, IMO, Hopkins is the better fighter. Not athlete, fighter.

Props to all mentioned above. :good

 

You've made a terrible mistake here in that you are putting serious *effort* into making some kind of inexplicable "Roy faded" excuse to explain the end of his career, when in fact his career ended when he encountered an extremely difficult loss and was crushed mentally. Let's take a look at what REALLY happened to Roy.

Don't forget that Roy was on top of the world when he was called an excuse-making little ***** in the middle of the ring by Tarver, and then promptly ***** SLAPPED to the canvas in one of the most humiliating/memorable defeats in boxing history. Many great champs suffer KO's and it's a testament to their greatness and mental toughness that they are able to bounce back quickly and avenge their losses. Roy never recovered mentally, but instead, was crushed. An ATG would have immediately made the Tarver 3 fight, not go fight Glenn Johnson. A sure sign that he wasn't right mentally after getting pimp slapped by Tarver. Our suspicions of his mental defeat became actualized when we saw him inexplicably afraid to throw any punches against Glenn Johnson, and then get KO'ed again in a very sad and telling fight. Still fighting with his mental demons, he made the Tarver 3 fight, but couldn't bring himself to try to win. He couldn't recover from that first *****-slapping. Couldn't shake it from his mind. Not like an ATG would have. You'll notice he talked about "God" during this period of his career even more than he usually does, in desparation. Running to the fake daddy in the sky during a time of crisis, a sure sign of weakness! In the end, he was just a loser who cried in vain at night for "God" to win his fights for him, and it didn't happen.

Conclusion: Roy sure was fun to watch (albeit hard as hell to listen to) for several years. But we find out what we're really made of when we encounter our toughest test. And we all found out what Roy was made of, didn't we?

 

Jones was fading long before that. It's very easy to insert his first loss in the ring as his toughest test, but in fact it wasn't. Jones was on top for a decade. He faded at the same age most fighters fade....comparing him to exceptions to the rule certainly doesn't change that fact.

 

Sorry, Sugar Ray Robinson has nothing to do with Roy Jones, different person, different, circumstances, different eras, and I won't allow you to make a strawman fallacy. So that's thrown out. As for the point you did try (but fail) to make, ask yourself: How long before the first Tarver fight was it that Roy was totally dominating a man who out-weighed him by 25-30 lbs.? That was the pinnacle of Roy's career and it was felt by EVERYONE in the boxing community everywhere, without exception. He then struggles with Tarver, and suddenly it's not b/c he's against a fighter who matches up well with him stylistically, but b/c he magically is just "not prime anymore, even though the pinnacle of his career was just a few months ago." Please, that's just pathetic. You're going to have to do better than this. :nono

 

This one is actually too ridiculous for comment. Facing the aftermath of that devestating and humiliating knock out WASN'T the toughest test Roy faced? :yikes

I guess I should have specified that I was referring to the Roy jones here on Planet EARTH, what planet were you referring to?

 

It was the pinnacle ACCOMPLISHMENT beating Ruiz. Your prime has nothing at all to do with your accomplishments. Foreman's greatest accomplishment was winning the HW title in his comeback in his 40's. But he wasn't prime.

Jones kept winning past his prime, much like Hopkins is now. But that should not ever be confused for his prime. Just because you keep winning, doesn't mean you were as good as you were at your peak.

Hopkins and Jones prime were in the mid to late 90's. Hopkins simply didn't get the proper recognition until he beat Trinidad.

 

If it's too ridiculous to comment, why are you responding?

Your logic is lacking. You are guessing that this was Jones worst moment. You don't know what Jones considered his hardest or toughest moment. Jones for years had said he had lost his desire to fight....things have relativity attached to them.

You only say things that fit your theory.

 

You did not respond to my argument, were you just hoping I wouldn't notice? :tong

You incorrectly said that Roys KO loss to Tarver was NOT the biggest challenge/test he faced. On what grounds do you make such a ridiculous conclusion?

I'll also fallacy you made above, even though you didn't make a proper response. The fallacy is this: He dominated John Ruiz and was on top of the world, period. You would have said this then, in fact you were saying it then. Do you deny this? There was NO reason to believe he was in decline in anyway until he struggled against Tarver. Because Tarver was the first person he ever failed to not just beat, but DOMINATE, proves that it is Tarver who is responsible for Jones' defeat - not some mysterious force of old age that coincidentally hit jones the second he stepped in the ring with Tarver.

Try again, and be honest with us and yourself this time.