Who was the better boxer in your opinion.Its tough i feel Hopkins reached his potential wheres Toney may have feel short.Use specific bouts to support your claim.
James Toney is a superior boxer. Toney can sit in the pocket and not get hit and never resort to clinching. hopkins has to clinch; maul his opponent; he deliberately hits his opponent low while the referee is on the opposite side of him. Come on! Is this really a serious question?
Hopkins yes, reached his potential. Very disciplined man. Toney didn't, COULD have been a lot greater than B-hop. Instead, I rate them about even, gotta respect what Hops did. Toney was the better fighter though.
You have done a great job proving that you've seen an old Hopkins in action. The prime one? Not so much.
To answer this question, Hopkins was better in my opinion. Comparable defense, same amount of technical skills, both could fight great on the inside and take little punishment in return, but the thing that tips this in Hopkins' favor is the versatility. He had better movement and could therefore win fights in a wider variety of ways and was also less susceptible to certain styles.
The question is, was that really a serious post? Just curious, brother, how many Hopkins fights have you seen?
maybe, but even then he still did more and fought better opposition than Hopkins IMO. Hopkins has always spent too much time bitching about money, rights etc while Toney just got in there every couple of months taking on allcomers. you can't totally write off his heavyweight campaign, he tested clean in the other fights. Could Hopkins stand toe to toe with a beast like Peters over 24 rounds and fight like a man? (i.e without holding and fouling). Could any other ex-middle go toe to toe with those big guys and at least hold their own? Monzon? Hagler? Hopkins? Jones? Doubt it.
Prime hopkins is not equal to Toney! Toney as I said, could sit in the pocket and not get hit. Prime hopkins defense wasn't equal to Toney's. Toney threw better combinations! Prime Toney vs. Prime Hopkins and Toney wins hands down.
The fact that Toney was able to last with Peter twice just shows that he was able to carry 200 pounds better than Hopkins, Hagler, and Monzon. Doesn't make him the better overall fighter.
Fine, if you want to say Toney was better in the pocket, I'll negate that by saying Hopkins was far better with his lateral movement. Hopkins barely got hit with a clean punch in the fights I've seen him in, much like Toney. They have very comparable defenses. Watch Hopkins' fight against Glen Johnson. He was fighting in the pocket and on the inside and hardly got hit. His defense was more fundamental than Toney's who employed the shoulder roll technique, so in that sense, Toney's defense was flashier, but no more effective than Hopkins' defense. Prime for prime at 160, Hopkins wins a decision.
of course and I'm not saying that, and by the way saying he was 'able to last' doesn't tell the whole story....almost everyone had him winning the first one. Overall Toney was better than Hopkins.
