Is Bernard Hopkins the best technical defensive fighter in middleweight history?

IF RJJ had better infighting skills then Hopkins and Toney as you claim then he would have been able to keep Glenn johnson of him.

 

Pardon me? So if, say, Henry Armstrong had excellent in-fighting skills he had to be able to keep his opponents off to prove that?

 

Why was RJJ KO'd when he was no longer prime if he was better then Hopkins and Toney technically as you claim.

You will probably never see Hopkins or Toney KO'd even today being at least a decade past their primes. The instant RJJ had to rely on skills alone he was brutally ko'd TWICE .

 

Read my "claim" more attentively, if I word something this or that way, there's a reason for that.

 

I've seen all of Toney's fights. Watch McCallum I. He's on a spring, he's bending in every direction while angling around, he is more agile, as in flexible. Hopkins isn't nearly as agile -he's economical, efficient, highly skilled, with superb balance, but as agile/flexible as Toney? Perish the thought!

 

When Jones was cornered or against the ropes he put his gloves in front of his face and got off the ropes when he could. That's not infighting. Whether Jones could fight on the inside or not, he simply didn't, he was however, very good at avoiding having to fight on the inside.

 

You confused Jones with Ali, it was him just putting his gloves in front of his face and doing nothing else.

 

I think from account Holman Williams was the best defensive fighter in middleweight history unfortunately there is no footage of him, personally I feel Toney had a better defence and is a greater fighter.

 

Techically speaking, RJJ was great defensively ONLY BECAUSE OF HIS REFLEXES like Ali in his prime. Look at RJJ now. He gets hit, he covers up, etc. Techincally, James Toney, Holman Williams, BHop and Mike McCallum are tops in no particular order.

 

How can you be sure Toney has better defence if you haven't watched Williams?.

Unless you are comparing Toney to Hopkins.