Bernhard Hopkins vs. James Toney

Your logic reminds me of a 6 armed lumberjack made out of Pepperjack cheese I met out in the desert of southern Canada.

 

Hopkins. His much better footwork would be the key in a battle of technically skilled fighters, one of them at his best when opponents came to him, the other at his best from mid to long range. Hopkins was just overall more technically well rounded than Toney.

 

When exactly was Hopkins's prime?

 

Late 90's I'd say.

 

Watch his fight with Glen Johnson and you see a prime Hopkins.

Hm, not that sure about that. I´m a big Hopkins fan, i think Hopkins was the better and greater fighter but a prime Hopkins while beeing very good with his defence was a come forward fighter who throws many hard punches. If he fights like that i think Toney beats him. But, well, he proved he knows how to adept to another fighters style and nullify it - actually his total game based on this from 2005 onwards - so if he does he beats Toney. Would be high-class fights i think.

 

Hopkins vs. Toney is an interesting match. I may change my mind on the outcome if you ask me again later.

Mike McCallum was not capable of outboxing Toney at middleweight, so Hopkins is going to have a tough time as well. Hopkins is also a capable pressure fighter, but that is the wrong tactic against Toney.

Back to the McCallum fights. The first fight was a draw, but Toney should have gotten the decision there. The 2nd fight was closer to being a draw than the 1st. McCallum was outboxing Toney at times. Toney's punches were heavier and more crisp than those of McCallum's. Those heavier shots were the difference in those fights.

Hopkins may not have been the heaviest of punchers at 160, put it seems as though he had more pop than the mid 30's McCallum that faced Toney. If Hopkins tries to out box Toney, his size advantage and the fact that he's stronger than McCallum could be enough.

I'll take Hopkins by razor thin decision.

 

I'd say late 90's up until the Trinidad fight. That was pretty much his peak performance. Trinidad was limited, but Hopkins showed the full arsenal that night.

 

Hopkins was a very technically skilled fighter with great defense, who showed the ability on many occasions to fight using lateral movement. He was more versatile than Toney, and he would know this.

And when I said come forward fighters, I meant it more in the sense of the swarming, pressure types who left themselves open to Toney's counters like Barkley, which many consider his best performance. McCallum came forward often in their fight, but did so with technically sound jabs, body shots, right hands, etc. Hopkins had better movement than did McCallum, so I see him having an easier time with Toney and winning a Decision.

 

I feel that this match-up is anything but one-sided. Hopkins is probably the more rounded defensively, especially with his fleet-footed movement around the perimeter of the ring. Hopkins was good inside, but IMO his long range boxing and the ability to draw leads then counter in return were his main weapons. Toney would be getting hit more than Hopkins, although some of the punches coming his way would hit gloves, hips, and elbows. Hopkins IMO would be making Toney miss altogether. I don't see this as a barnburner.

 

Toney UD.

 

Well, sure Hopkins was good with his defence when he came forward but it still plays Toney in the cards and i wouldnßt underestimate him. Perhaps Hopkins could beat Toney coming forward but Toney has a very good chance at beating Hopkins also. If Hopkins himself uses his ability to nullify his opponents biggest assets like he did in all his big fights he would win a comfortable decision with Toney having nearly no chance of winning.

Care to explain?

 

Honestly, take the Hopkin's of the Glen Johnson fight and I'd bet on him STOPPING Toney.

He was a absolute machine that night. Beautiful.

If anything Glen's chin is better than Tony's.

 

Yeah, I don't know about all that.