How do you rank Jones, Hopkins, Toney & Calzaghe?

4 - James Toney - a great win versus Nunn but so many question marks about the rest of his career. Even some of his most hyped wins have big question marks about them. The win against Barkley came after Benn had stopped the blade in 1 round and after 38 year old former lightweight had beaten barkley. The Jirov win was another hyped win but when you look back, who did Jirov ever beat in his professional career. Even in Toney's prime, he lost in any neutrals eyes v Dave Tiberi, could only draw in his 1st fight with Sanderline Williams, and scrape a split decision v Sosa. Then there were the Thadzi and Griffin losses, topped off by the fact that he was a proven multiple steroids user. Great talent but theres too many floors throughout his career.

3 - Roy Jones - wonderfull talent, but then again how much was down to steroids? To be found guilty of steroid abuse the 1st time you've been tested in your entire professional career suggests that we are dealing with a fighter who juiced for sustained periods. Why would Roy decide to juice just as a one off versus a bum like Richard Hall - it just doesn't make sense. Its like people stating Lance Armstrong is the greatest cyclist of all time, its bull****, cheats shouldn't be pardoned, they should be punished. Great wins over Hopkins and Toney, and big achievement winning a trinket at heavyweight but spent far too much of his career ducking the best, never dominated a division and could not fight in adversity. Real greats thrive in the face of adversity but Jones was like a rabbit caught in the headlights.

2 - Hopkins - Tricky start to his career and although he fought in perhaps the weakest middleweight era of all time, he still found excellent consistency and went on a great winning run as champion. Hopkins career though will be remembered very much as a smoke and mirrors routine, most of his best wins came when he was dragging his opponents way out of their best weight range before beating them eg Trinidad, Oscar, Winky, Pavlik. Arguably his 2 best wins came late in his career, impressive 2 weight jump to beat a B-level fighter in Tarver and amazing longevity in his victory over another B-level fighter in Pascal. The problem when ranking Hopkins is that though, He doesn't have any victories over A-level fighters at a fair weight in his entire career, his real big challenges came versus Jones, Taylor, Calzaghe and B-hop failed them all. Add to that Hopkins ugly style and his lack of respect for his own fans who he robbed of hard earned cash by cowardly feigning injuries and looking for ways out of fights in Allen 2, Calzaghe, and Dawson 1 and its hard to seriously consider him for the top spot.

1 - Calzaghe - Amazing consistency levels from Calzaghe, added to a head to head victory over Hopkins during the best winning streak of his career edge Calzaghe to the top spot. Calzghe doesn't have defeats / draws on his resume to the likes Thadzi, sanderline williams, griffin, clinton mitchell, mercado, Johnson, etc, His consistency is too much for the others. Calzaghe was unlucky that he was blatantly ducked by Ottke and Hopklins but still won the title versus Eubank and put together 21 defences of his title before taking out the best 2 undefeated fighters in the division in Kessler and Lacy. Not content with that, despite being past his prime, Calzaghe travelled to america and in his 1st 2 fights at the weight beat Hopkins and a clean Roy Jones in their own back yard. What seperates Calzaghe from the others was his amazing ability to thrive in the face of adversity, to stare defeat in the eye and then pull something out of the bag when it matters the most. Combine that with his superb ability to adapt mid-fight and work his opponents out ensures that Calzaghe was top of the pile. 46-0 - never was no blueprint and never will be.

 

well for a start, having not read any posts, it's so incredibly predictable that calzaghe will be the last man on the list. same old, same old.

resume:
calzaghe/hopkins:
joe had the better run at supermiddle than hopkins had at middle. but you could argue that hopkins has the better run at lightheavy... but, calzaghe beat the man who beat those guys. hopkins dominated tarver and pavlik. and well past his best at the time, beat pascal twice (he won the first fight). by the time he met dawson, he was well and truly over. he could still make it hard for you and mess you about, but it's clear that no matter who you are, age will catch up to you. so all in all, i have calzaghe the number 1. hopkins isn't too far behind.

jones:
even though he fought in 4 weight divisions, he was never THE champ at any weight. that's incredibly sad for the so called best fighter on the 90's. at middle he beat a fighter that had no where near the experience that jones had in bernard hopkins. many people think that hopkins had a good amateur back round, when he in fact, didn't. fighting in prison isn't going to compete with the international pedigree that jones had. so he beat a fighter that was good, and obviously tough, but not the fighter that he would become later on in his career. so, good win, nothing more. thomas tate was also a good win at this weight.

at super middle he would beat the likes of malinga, toney, thorton, lucas (who at the time was just a solid, tough guy. he would later become WBC champ) sosa. the likes of pazienza, byrd, and brannon, are not worth pissing on. pazienza was a former lightweight who was well past his best. anyone who thinks this has any worth is deluded. the americans, maybe? yeah, they fit the mould perfectly. toney was known to be struggling with his weight and discipline before jones had had even got to him. he was there for the taking. and jones took him.

at lightheavyweight, jones beat the likes of a shot to **** mcCallum, griffin (he lost the first by DQ. it was an even fight at the time of the DQ) de valle, grant( a former middleweight) hill, reggie johnson (another former middleweight) telesco, harding, woods, harmon, gonzales.

this was easily the best run at any the weights he was in with some very good wins. but, he lost all three of his fights with tarver ( the first fight was a clear robbery) lost to johnson, lost to calzaghe, lost the hopkins rematch. he didn't fight the lineal champ at the weight in DM. didn't fight calzaghe in his prime. didn't fight hopkins when it mattered. so there are a few black marks here.

the list of fighters between middle and lightheavy he failed to get in the ring with is huge. all the big fights that the so called fighter of the 90's should of fought... he refused. no one claims to be the very best but then manages to avoid all the best fighters out there. that's ridiculous. it happened time and time again for roy. so many excuses.

he beat john ruiz for the WBA heavyweight title, which is a very good win. great performance. but very predictable from roy. when the news came out that he was fighting at heavy, i knew it would be ruiz. he was WBA champ, but had a style that was made for jones. i predicted that jones would win a wide UD with a possible late stoppage happening. that's what happened. some morons actually believed that ruiz had a chance. like mike katz. he never did.

why didn't jones want to fight his fellow country man, chris byrd? he was the IBF champ, wasn't a natural heavy, was the much better fighter. he would of proven more by beating him. but no, jones would never take a risk. and that's the huge problem i have with roy. great fighter, but never had the heart to get in there with the best and actually prove himself. he just let the american media and all the american boxing fans shout from the roof top that he was the best without doing the job in the ring. he had the talent, but not the heart and will it seems.

he also joined a lot of his fellow country men and women by cheating with drugs. this also counts against him. hugely.

toney:

beat some very good fighters, but also lost to fighters that weren't really that good. he was far too inconsistent. when he was on top of his game, he was a great fighter. but when he wasn't (and this happened far too much) he didn't impress very well. he clearly has the weakest resume out of the four. he was also caught doing drugs. there are so many black marks against him.

H2H:

calzaghe
jones
hopkins
toney

jones vs toney: toney struggles with fighters that move or keep him at a distance. it would end up like their fight did back in 94.

jones vs hopkins: it would be a harder fight for roy had he fought hopkins when at his very best, but i can't see him losing that fight. it would just end up a very cagey and boring UD for roy.

calzaghe vs hopkins: it wouldn't be as technical as when they did fight. this would be a lot more of a fight. if hopkins stands with joe, (which he would do at times) he would come off second best. his best chance would be to go on the back foot and try to pick calzaghe off. this wouldn't work anywhere near as well as it did when they fought. calzaghe had all his tools in his prime, so would end up being far too hot for hopkins. wide UD.

calzaghe vs toney: i see this as being pretty even after six or seven rounds, with joe just nicking it. but after that, it's joe all the way. too much stamina for toney down the stretch. his southpaw jab would cause toney too many problems as well.
toney likes his fighters to be real close to him for him to have success, but joe wouldn't have this problem i feel if he fought at close range. joe tucks up real nice and looks to his opponent to lead before opening up with his own shots. if they keep their guard up, joe will just let his shots go anyway picking up the rounds. like the hopkins fight, joe just proves to be too hot in all departments. calzaghe UD.

toney vs hopkins: straight forward win for hopkins. toney doesn't do well with fighters that use the ring a lot. and hopkins WILL use the ring a lot. he'd make toney come forward where he's not at his best and just pick him apart on the back foot. wide UD hopkins.

calzaghe vs jones: the big one. both have never been in the ring with anyone as good as each other. that much can't be disputed. both are fast of hand and foot. jones has more power, but joe has the much better chin. joe has better stamina, and has shown that he's willing to get in there and have a fight, jones hasn't. people look for jones' fight with tarver to think he's capable of really getting in there but, tarver refused to let his hands go most of the time, and when he did, all jones did was let tarver open up on him while he put his guard up. only when tarver wasn't throwing back did jones let his hands go. calzaghe never let anyone open up on him without him throwing back. and his opponents always came off second best.

the first few rounds i would give to jones as calzaghe looks to warm up in there. jones wouldn't dominate, but would would do enough to just take them. after this though, i see joe really bring it as he takes it to jones. bringing a pressure that he's never had to deal with. now the fight is warming up. calzaghe would look to back jones up against the ropes and let his hands go, but look for jones to throw back and leave himself open where joe would then whack in a shot at jones' exposed head. after a few rounds of this jones will have to answer a serious question about himself. does he fight back and risk getting knocked out, or does he hope that joe would tire where he can come back later in the fight? i don't think jones would be so stupid to think joe gets tired, he always goes for the full twelve rounds at a high pace if needs be. so, jones would have to fight back to win this one. and this would be his undoing. i always said that the left hook of joe would be a great weapon. that if he were to knock jones out it would come from this punch. this is the shot that tarver knocked him out with. jones always liked to throw the lead right, which wouldn't be a good idea against a southpaw. tarver knocked him out, devalle put him down. both were southpaw. so is joe. if calzaghe didn't knock him out, i definitely could see him dropping jones once or twice. if it goes to points i see a calzaghe win. too tough for jones. also, joe would mostly fight on the inside and not allow jones to keep at range the way he likes to. joe is a great inside fighter, jones isn't. joe by KO, or UD.

 

Hopkins
Calzaghe
Jones
Toney

 

Wait so you ranked Hopkins higher than Jones @ Lt Heavy :huh

 

Jones
Hopkins
Toney


Reggie Strickland

Calzaghe

 

Calzaghe has no legitimate case to rate ahead of James Toney. Are you people ****ing kidding me?

 

Jones
Hopkins
Toney
Calzaghe

Jones has the best wins, and is the best H2H. So he takes the lead. Hopkins has had the most longevity and has put together a strong resume as well. Toney has been very inconsistent over the years, but still found the time to pick up some big wins and be a world champion in multiple weight classes. Calzaghe finished undefeated, but the two best wins on his resume are an aged Hopkins and a washed-up Roy. He might have been very good, but it's hard to tell how good when you spend your prime years chilling in Wales while Roy and others were tearing it up in the US.

 

Overall I rate them as follows

Jones : Most impressive skillset by far. When you get compared to the likes of robinson you know you were damn good.
Toney : beat big names such as Holyfield as what would appear to be a useless blob. His defensive skills were prety ingenious, almost along the lines of a mayweather jr.
Hopkins : Boring ass rough style, did anything to win. MW reign was over weak comp but his level of success was impressive nonetheless
Calzaghe : Hardest to rate objectively as he only fought on the big stage against washed up versions of his contemporaries. My biased opinion is that his style was horrible to watch, and if he had of come to the states earlier, and been successful with it he could have made a ton of money. This would be due purely to people wanting to see him get destroyed. Again Calslappy shouldn't make anyone happy.

Edited to add that the only two I switch around in my head ever are Hokpins and Toney. The other two positions are almost unquestionable imo.

 

No case can be made for Calzaghe being above Toney.

 

:good Great post.

I would add for Jones being top, he beat Hopkins and Toney when it mattered closer to their primes.

Toney for me was the most exciting to watch, when he came to fight in shape man it was something else, the fight against Barkley was a display of fighting in the pocket every upcoming fighter should watch!

 

Obviously discipline was a factor for toney but I think his activity helped wear him out.

 

I give everyone the benefit of the doubt even though Hopkins did go mad when asked to take a test.
Its for those reasons that I dont rate Toney or Jones.
Thats why Calzaghe is number one for a far better resume than Hopkins.
Then Hopkins and Jones and Toney not rated

 

I've already accepted my error in judgement from the venerable poster knockout artist so my bad

 

Jones was caught on steroids so gets knocked down a point, and Bhop's longevity and never being stopped adds up to him pipped RJJ in terms of legacy. H2h if prime RJJ has his steroids I'd have him first