How Good Was Bernard Hopkins In His 1993 Loss To Roy Jones?

Fair enough he was still a massive MW and if past prime Johnson is pushing Tarver, Hops beats him, we saw what happened when they fought. as for needing 'experience to beat southpaws', he was dominant against all of them from the beggining from what I remember, his great right hand and timing always handled them really well.

 

Yes desperate to insult someone who says 'Old Hill, Midget Griffin and Tarver would beat Hopkins' Anything to discredit Jones aye Bodhi, everyone knows what your game is :yep Keep pleading innocence

 

He didn't do so great against Allen in the first fight, but made great adjustments in the second fight.

2003 Tarver vs 1993 Hopkins is sheer speculation. Can't say I'd be too certain about any outcome in that match-up.

 

So, you think that a Hopkins who wasn´t even prime was better than Hill, Tarver and Griffin? This means either you rate Hopkins amongst the very greatest mws of all time, probably above Monzon and Hagler even, or that Jones resume was very shitty. Which is it?

 

Well I think your fibbing a little here with where you were going with your post, but I dont really care to get into a pissing match over it.

Why do you dislike Jones as a person? Too arrogant? Hes actually a really nice guy and very nice to his fans and generally humble in public. Ive met a lot of fighters and hes near the top of my list as one of the cooler guys.

 

Well one thing for certain was Jones did not think Hopkins was at his peak. In one of Hopkins fights they had Jones as a guest commentator, he stated that Hopkins improved since they fought.

Hopkins is a thinking fighter. 28 fights is a good base but his game kept improving.

 

Believe me I don´t, simply because I don´t care what some people in an internet board think of me.

From the interviews and docs I´ve seen I liked the younger Jones - outside of the cockfighting thing. But later on he became an arrogant loudmouth - a bit like Tyson, who seems to have been a much better person in his early. I don´t like people like that in general. But I´m a bit of a hypocrite here because I love Jack Johnson and Bernard Hopkins.
Normally, I like more fighters who behave like Virgil Hill or Floyd Patterson. Real gentleman. Of course I never met Jones, he maybe a nice person but I only can go by what I know. Btw. I love when he commentates a fight, he really knows his sh*t and is great at explaining things. You could say I like him when it comes to boxing related things.

 

Yes Im sure he did improve, but when discussing this matchup a lot of people are under the impression Jones stayed exactly the same and only Hopkins improved, and thats not the case. Jones was also relatively green as a pro and was as a champion. Personally I saw a lot of improvements in both fighters overall games.

 

Yeah any way you look at it very impressive win on his resume. If Hopkins could have beat him a few laters no one will ever know.

 

I think with Jones that was just his gameface just talking trash not even close to what Tyson was after jail. Some people I guess dont think he should have talked that kind of trash for what he did but alot of it was gamesmanship.
Tyson did become a total *****, and walked around with scary violent people that were in his entourage and training camps after prison. I didnt care much for Tyson after prison.

 

Which improvements did you see in Jones'?

 

Lets get down to your real agenda, EXPOSED Why don't you spend post after post analysing how close to prime Monzons opponents were? Because they weren't near, you ignore that don't you?

Why wasn't Hopkins prime or near it? He arguably has never lost since Jones beat him and he did become more ring savy and improved technically a little but physically he was at his peak, he would only get slower and his stamina would decrease. So in some ways he improved, in some ways he faded - certainly his stamina/workrate did. Yes I rate Hopkins over Hagler/Monzon

 

Griffin made Roy look terrible before winning by DQ, and if Jones was infront on the cards at the time the fight was stopped, it was probably due to the fact he'd had Griffin down not long before the DQ came, thus getting a 10-8.


Who's to say Hopkins couldn't follow that blue print and execute it ? Hopkins in his later years did'nt care if he bored the pants off you, so long as he implemented his game plan, got you fighting the fight he wanted you to.

I dont think Jones's speed was as effective when he had to take the lead, not when he was drawn out of the center of the ring where a speed advantage always shows up most.

Roy (backfoot)was great when you came to him, cause he could either set up counters of your leads, or if you came foward and waited on him, did'nt throw him many leads, he was quick enough to get off first on you and move away.

In the middle of the ring Roy's speed advantage would show up big time, as is the case with most quick handed fighters, but on the front foot, Griffin showed my something, that when you draw Roy foward and ask him to fetch you out the corners or off the ropes whilst waiting to counter, that he can be too reluctant to let his hands go, due to his defensive nature, and that he has no jab to set up his offense, a jab he ordinarily doesn't need to set up his offense cause the opponent is usually the one coming foward leading to him, allowing Roy to set up his offense off their leads.


I would probably still run with Roy, but it's more 55/45, than 60/40 imo.

 

Positioning mainly. He used his movement at close range for defense and setting up shots and counters. Shot selection, becoming more of a set powerpuncher than a pitty pat combination puncher. His style became less textbook boxing from the amatuer style and took on more of a style that was enhanced by his natural abilities. His speed allowed him not have to use a jab so much and he became very accurate with counters and offensive power shots which were very effective in creating some explosive stoppages.

 

That´s the difference. I have no agenda. An agenda poster like yourself probably can´t understand that.. I call it how I see it. You don´t like it? Your problem, not mine.

You don´t get it, right? Hopkins is an experience based fighter. Not a physical one. Or at least that´s what made him great. He needed learning experience like the Jones and the first Mercado fight to become what he would. He was in his prime between 1997 and 2003/4.

At mw?