Jones/Hopkins comparison very similiar to Charles/Moore...take a look

Interesting observation.

They are close in greatness, but i would rank Charles over Moore because he actually won the heavyweight title and defended it quite a few times. I also rank Jones over Hopkins because he was damn near untouchable during his prime. Hopkins is adding nice wins to his legacy, but that also makes Jones' victory over Hopkins more and more impressive, as he's never been beaten as decisively before or since.

I also think Jones took bigger risks. Hopkins stayed at middleweight where he had a size advantage over just about any opponent - whereas Jones went to 168, to lightheavyweight, where he usually was the smaller guy. Not to mention fighting Ruiz. The only time Hopkins was at a size disadvantage was against Tarver, and even there it was marginal. Obviously he did take risks as well (Pavlik the most obvious one), but i don't like how he priced himself out of a Jones rematch when he knew damn well that Jones held all the cards by being attraction, bigger name and he'd won their first meeting.

 

The fact that Charles and Jones moved up allowed Moore and Hopkins to establish a dominance in the lower division that would have been denied them ,had their conquerors stayed put imo.

 

I am not so sure... Moore and Hopkins were guys who learned and improved throughout their careers. Moore was getting closer and closer and would eventually have won a fight versus Charles. I suspect Hopkins would beat Jones in a rematch, or at least make it much closer.

I don't think Jones took bigger risks.

Also Hopkins is much closer to Moore's level than Jones was to Charles.

 

Yep, I agree with that.

Interesting argument but I would dispute that in regards of Jones. He was a natural 168 pounder so he just had to move up.

Jones did not take bigger risk. He´s a natural 168-pounder and he stopped fighting the best above this weight. Especially Ruiz, he was a hand picked opponent who everybody knew that Jones could beat him without much risk.
Hopkins was also at a disadvantage against Holmes and Taylor actually.

Personally, I don´t make lists but like Ezzard I think Hopkins is nearer at Moore´s level as Jones is at Charles´.

 

I don't think I really agree with any of that.

If Moore kept on trucking it's likely that at some point or another he'd have eventually won a fight with Charles, likely catching him cold. But the fact of the matter is they already fought three times, Charles winning them all and stopping Moore in one of them.

As for Jones and Hopkins, I don't think a matchup prime for prime would've played out too much differently than their actual matchup did, given that both fighters were relatively green in comparison to what they'd go on to achieve. Hopkins never had the style to beat Jones either. Also, people like to rag on Jones's opposition all the time without taking into account that Hopkins's lackluster MW opposition throughout most of his reign made Roy's opponents look like a murderer's row.

Hopkins and Moore were the better fighters when past their physical prime, but they were not quite the fighters Charles and Jones were at their peaks, and despite their accomplishments past prime, neither of them IMO have eclipsed or even matched their counterparts overall.

 

Good post!

 

I don;t think Jones v Ruiz was seen as a certain win for Jones quite the contrary ,I read several articles giving Ruiz at least a 50/50 chance ,i think you are using hindsight here.

 

well I'd say that each of the Moore-Charles fights was closer than the previous one, so Moore was catching up.

I think Jones was very close to what he would be, if not already there. Hopkins would improve a lot. he, like Monzon, was also a thinker and IMO would eventually solve the puzzle. Problem is how many fights it would take.

I think Hopkins has eclipsed Jones overall. It depends on how you weight it. I'll accept that Jones 'looked' better in his prime but a longer prime, or far longer prime, and a better level of opponents, takes it for me.

Interesting but 20-25 years most people would have rated Moore over Charles. Moore was regularly in p4p top 10s whereas Charles almost never was. Amazing how times change.

 

I don't see how that's justifiable. Not only was he yet to face any elite opposition, but he was very tight for his first world title fight and hadn't developed the experience and craftiness he'd later gain. Similar to Hopkins IMO, who looked quite good around the time he faced Roy as well.

Jones's opposition was clearly better, especially prime for prime. Hopkins gets brownie points for his work past prime, but it doesn't change the fact that his MW reign was far less productive than Roy's prime reign from MW-LHW. Roy was among the best P4P fighters in the world for about 10 or so years, same as Hopkins has been. The fact that Hopkins aged better than Jones shouldn't give him the edge.

The people who rate Moore over Charles are uneducated IMO. I don't see how it can be justified.

 

But you can´t dispute that they picked Ruiz because they thought he was very beatable for Jones. He never had another fight at hw, he never earned his shot, he never fought the champ there. He beat a beltholder, a mere contender there and people act as if he would have beat Ali. I mean other fighters who started at mw, or even lower, and fought at hw like Fitz, Langford, Greb, Choinsky or Walker did much more and better at hw but don´t get the same praise. Instead they´ve seen just as regular hw contenders. That´s a double standard. If Jones get´s praised because he fought a historically average contender how much praise should those guys get then?

 

Roy was far more what he would become than Hopkins. This was the first fight of his prime while Hopkins was still 4 years removed from his.

Jones opposition was not better. And you have to count it that Roy did make the fights against some of the best people around his weight not happen, while Hopkins cleaned out his. Hopkins reign was as good as Jones. And you just can´t ignore that Hopkins has better longvity, just to justify Jones ranking above him :-(

I agree with that. Both are atgs just like Hopkins ans Jones and making lists and put one above another does them and their work no justice.

 

I've never heard it being called a robbery, I have always read that it was a close decision that could have gone either way, I suspect Charles got the decision due to the fact he knocked Moore down in the 7th and finished stronger.