Hopkins Jones Jr II is on

OK.........I made the mistake of not reading the thread thoroughly. I see lot of has been discussed.


But my question to you Scientist.

When do you think Hopkins could have fought Jones but avoided him?


I see that you're criticizing Hopkin's for not moving up in weight sooner......I always though he stayed at 160 lbs for three reasons.
.........instead of moving up in weight to 168 lbs, why would he when the money fights for him were below his weight class, not above????
Felix Trinidad and Oscar DLH.

......and then you factor in that Hopkins badly wanted to surpass Monzon's record of middleweight title defenses.




When Hopkins beat Trinidad, Jones was on a tour of fighting nothing but county and city workers.

........Jones at this time was fighting strictly on free HBO, he was not a PPV star. I see no reason why Jones deserved the better end of a 60/40 split at this stage.

When Hopkins beat Trinidad, Jones was undefeated but fighting a very low caliber of opposition.
......at this stage, you have to make it lucrative for Hopkins to want to make the jump up in weight and compensate Hopkins for the risk.

Looking at it in hindsight, financially Hopkins made the right choice by sticking around 160 lbs and waiting for DLH to move up.

Legacy wise at the time, sure the Jones fight meant more than DLH, but finanicially, hindsight tells us that Hopkins got better paid and got a partnership with GBP out of it for sticking around and waiting for DLH than he would have had he risked it and moved up to fight Jones at that time.




I dont recall the specific year when it was that Hopkins and Jones went back and forth with negotiations, Hopkins wanted 50/50 but Jones would take nothing less than 60% in his favor.
I recall at the time siding with Hopkins demands.....
.....does anyone remember the year this went about???

 

Bernard made the right financial decisions for sure. If you've read the whole thread you'll see that I acknowledge that Bernard is a good businessman. He knows his limits very well and gets the most dollar he can in light of them. Of course it made economic sense to fight DLH rather than move up in weight. The fact that Oscar had the **** beat out of him the fight before meant nothing monetarily.

I have to entirely, wholeheartedly disagree with you though that Hopkins deserved a 50/50 split with Jones. No way known did he deserve a 50/50 split.

They had been talking about a fight quite seriously since the late 90's but the issue came to a head after Hopkins beat Tito in 2001. That's when the '60/40 I kick yo ass' dust up happened.

Now sure, Roy hadn't fought anyone that was very good for a while (the Montell Griffin, Virgil Hill and Reggie Johnson fights were all back in 1997, 1998 and 1999), but if you look at their career accomplishments at that time, Jones by far outstripped what Hopkins had done.

Jones may not have been bringing in large ppv numbers but his fights WERE being put out their on ppv (at least here in Australia they were) and to say he was a bigger star than Hopkins would be a joke of an understatement.

Jones had been arguably p4p the best in the sport for a good 8 years, and Hopkins in that time had been fighting for notoriety, and not getting much until the late 90's because of the average middleweights he kept on beating.

Now, to add to this, Jones had ALREADY beaten Hopkins. Easily. With one hand hurt.

So..... tell me again why Hopkins deserved a 50/50 split?

 

My feeling was that after Hopkins beat Trinidad, it put him on the map as a legit P4P.......he outboxed and he KO'd a very popular fighter with the fightfans.......


Now, Jones may have been viewed as the best p4p in the sport at the time, but like we both agreed on, he was'nt fighting anyone of real note, and here in the US my friend, I dont believe Jones ever headlined a PPV event before the John Ruiz fight.

Not a single PPV event in the US, has'nt faced anyone of note for years, and he wants 60/40 against a Hopkins who as an underdog had just knocked out Tito Trinidad?????

My way of thinking is that because Jones was one up on Hopkins from a decade earlier, made it a 50/50 fight at the money table.

Had Jones been a commodity as a PPV star, I would agree with you that 60/40 Jones was the fair way to go.

.....but that was'nt happening.....in fact I believe at the time Jones was having issues with Larry Merchant on the air because of Jones handpicking of these county workers for himself to fight.


I could see the point that Jones having already beaten Hopkins much earlier, and that he was regarded by many boxing writers as the best, that he deserved more than Hopkiins.......I could definitely understand that mentallity Scientist.

......but at this point Jones needed to do something to land a big fight.....and since Hopkins had the option of still being able to make middleweight and waiting for the established PPV star in DLH.......I dont think it was a hard decision at all for Hopkins to make.

Jones at the time I felt should have just agreed to the 50/50 in light that Hopkins had other options than just fight him......

....at the end, it worked out OK for both of them, Jones fought Ruiz, and Hopkins fought DLH......both of them getting good enough paydays.

......but I must say that boxing in itself did suffer for that. Both Hopkins and Jones were pretty close to naturally being the same size.
It would have been nice for history to show who was better, and how it would have turned out against eacother when they were not so young and closer to primes.


.

 

Bernard had been on the p4p charts before the Tito fight too, but the Tito win put him right near the top.

I'm not sure about ppv fights in the states, but I'd be SHOCKED if the Jones-Toney, Jones-Hill, Jones-Griffin and Jones-Johnson fights AT the VERY LEAST weren't ppv fights. In Australia just about every Roy fight was ppv, even his civil servants tour was getting ppv status here.

And I should mention, it's not just that Jones was viewed as the best in the world at the time, he had been arguably the best fighter in the sport since way back in 1994. Hence his way, way bigger profile than Bernard Hopkins.

Roy was fighting average fighters and making them look less than average, and he was starting to get some negative press with it, with people calling for a 'Roycott' and what not, but he still was a bigger star than Hopkins quite clearly.

If both guys were interested in pushing their legacies instead of their egos, the fight would have been made, but unfortunately that didn't happen. I can understand Roy more for walking away from the fight than i can Bernard, given what they had achieved at that stage of their careers, but both should take blame for the fight not happening. Bernard moreso imo.

 

The James Toney fight is the only fight I'm not 100% sure was PPV or not.....

I googled it, and there is no indication through google that it was a PPV.....

.....but here in the US scientist, I guess we're a little more lucky......every Roy Jones fight prior to his fight with Ruiz, was on regular HBO, not on PPV.


I understand your position Scientist, but when you're constantly getting criticized for fighting guys that were absolutely no threat to you......my belief is that its up to the bigger name (which Jones certainly was) to land a big fight where people talk about it.

When Hopkins was'nt biting on 40%, my thinking in these types of situations considering Jones lack of real opposition at the time, was that it was on Jones to ensure the fight be made.

Jones back then and even now has always been a talker, but not a do'er.
He talks the talk, but does'nt walk the walk.

 

Jones Jr -Toney was on pay-per-view, TVKO.

 

I will not be watching, **** that , just retire? , maybe Hopkins can take up one more challange but not Jones.

 

Are you sure it was PPV in the US????

PPV in the UK does'nt mean PPV in the US.

Its possible that it was, but I just dont remember paying for that fight, and I know I saw it when it was shown live.