James Toney vs. Bernard Hopkins @ 160 pounds

Hopkins SD.

 

I lean towards Hopkins especially at 160 pounds. I do understand the Toney arguments and they could be right but I'll stick with Bernard by UD in a very interesting fight.

 

Not a fan of either of these guys but Hopkins has always been more consistent and in my view the more solid all round fighter. Toney's highs were higher in a fight as he'd have moments of brilliance and then admire his work for a while. Hopkins tended to chug along steadily and build a win. A good version of Toney could for sure beat a bad or middling Hopkins, but you would be much more likely to get Hopkins fighting fit on the night than Toney.

 

It is best version vs best version.so what you wrote is irrelevant

 

good call. The judges liked Toney at 160.They did not like Hopkins in close fights at 160

 

This is it. Decision fight every time out with Hopkins the victor by say 2-4 points.

 

These guys were gonna mix it up in the boxing talk Greg Leon days at cruiserweight, but it never came to fruition.

 

Bhop's discipline and methodical nature gets him a close win on the cards 7 of 10 times.

 

do you think he was past prime against Taylor? He did went on to beat Pavlik and Tarver

 

not even sure about such things. "prime"? does it mean that every fighter experiences an ever improving series of peak performances every time out from point "a" to point "b"? can it be expressed with arithmetic? can a peak performance occur outside the envelope? how often? what of "styles make fights"? what value may be assigned to that variable and how do you come up with it? weight classes before and after same day weigh in? 12 rounds or 15?

see? unless you're some next level genius boxing nerd with an encyclopedic knowledge ready to hand or quantum hosted ai, you just gotta eyeball it and hope for the best. wtf do i know?

based on my own perceptions, Bernard was more consistent in all facets of the game throughout his career. like somebody else said, Toney exhibited flashes of brilliance that were awe inspiring. given those 2 opinions and considering that the skill gap was probably not great at any stage (intending to say that, at this level excellence is determined by very small movements of the needle under particular circumstances at particular times), most times, Bhop beats Toney. but it's close and once in a great while Toney just makes Bhop look silly.

all that said, i am quite ready to be swayed. both guys are legit boxing heroes.

forgive my wordiness. just started typing and as i find this to be an interesting topic, i just let it roll.

 

Right but mythical match ups should always feature the best version of each fighter. Because you want to find out who truly is the better fighter. The whole consistency argument is more something to take into account for legacy but not head to head in my opinion.

For argument's sake, let's take the Toney (Mc Callum I) vs Hopkins (Trinidad). Who wins in your view?

 

MCCallum may have been tired for that one

 

both were in terrific shape by all accounts

 

are you sure

 

yes