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

Ruiz a handpicked opponent?? The odds going into the fight were even! You're trying to re-write history.

I suggest you watch this short documentary made by fellow poster John Garfield here, before Jones-Ruiz:

[YT]g0_HOWlGD6o&feature=user[/YT]

Hopkins' MW opposition was **** or much smaller, and while Jones' opposition wasn't great, it was a lot better and several of them were bigger or at least as big. Jones didn't nearly get stopped by a relatively unknown Mercado in or near his prime, either.

Like i said, Hopkins has better longetivity by far, but everything in between goes in Roy's favor by a landslide, including their actual fight, where Hopkins, by the way, had more pro fights than Jones.

 

So, you say he also would have fought Lennox Lewis if he had the chance? That´s what I mean with hand picked. He took on a beltholder because he knew he would have a good chance at beating him instead of taking on the champ.

You are exagerating it very much. Johnson, Vanderpool and Echols all had some success at higher weights, Holmes was bigger than him, Taylor was bigger than him. Eastman was as big, Joppy was as big, Allen was as big. Hopkins facing smaller opposition is a myth imo. Yeah he was taller than most but so was Hearns and I see nobody claiming Herans was bigger.
His opposition was nothing special yeah but ****? Sorry but that´s just wrong and very disrespectful towards his opponents. His opposition wasn´t much worse than Haglers when you leave out Hearns and Leonard. And it wasn´t smaller either. In fact he took bigger opponents on than Hagler. Why does he get no **** for that?
Right Joned did not get nearly stopped by Mercado but neither did Hopkins, he got floored yeah but Jones did get knocked out in just his second fight after one of his biggest win. So, if you say Hopkins was near his prime against Mercado - who was thought of very similar as Tarver was before he knocked out Jones - than Jones was near his prime against Tarver.
You should balance your view a bit.

I disagree. It´s not a landslide not by far. Their careers and opponents are very comparable with not much between it. Jones should get credit for constantly moving up but he also should get knocked for not fighting the best opposition available above 168. Jones also had a good longvity imo, he was a top10 p4p from 1993 to 2003. That´s 10 years. Talking about longvity. Hopkins should get credit for hir record title defences, moving up in wieght late in his career and his even better longvity but you can knock him for not moving up earlier. Their opposition is very comparable with perhaps a slight edge to Jones but Hopkins makes up with a superior longvity. They are very close imo.

 

I guess we'll just have to disagree. Jones was fighting such superior opponents that the boxing fraternity introduced Roycott to try and shame him into having a fight. Thta's unprecedented. These people make a living off superstars of the sport and generally always support them...

Hopkins' career IMO has been better. He has faced better opponents. And shouldn't beating better opponents in the winter of your career put you at a disadvantage? Shouldn't it make the wins stand out?

I agree on Ruiz. Jones never campaigned at the weight and never took a second fight. He hand picked a guy he could beat, used who knows what to bulk up and made sure that the ref wouldn't allow Ruiz any of the tactics that were in Ruiz's favour. I rate it as a top win but I wouldn't get carried away.

I can accept people thinking it's close, but a landslide? Jones-Hopkins means something but its not the definitive answer. And Hopkins having more fights? They've now had the same number of fights so by that logic shouldn't Hopkins and Jones current fights be judged evenly?

 

Ah, forgot writing something to this. Yeah Hopkins had more fights but Jones had a far superior amateur career and even though it´s a different sport nowadays. It´s some experience he had over Hopkins. You have also to consider that Jones was an early bloomer and he had the biggest win of his career one year later while Hopkins was a late bloomer and the biggest win of his career was 8 years later. Should count for something.

 

That is true, but considering he came from 154 and was fighting a heavyweight title holder, even if it wasn't the best one, i would hardly call it "handpicking". This is what i mean when i think some people are too hard on him. The only way you would've been satisfied is when he challenged Lennox Lewis, who is one of the greatest heavyweights of all time. Jones was a damn middleweight! The fact that he beat a highly ranked contender in Ruiz at heavyweight is almost unprecedented in the modern era since heavyweights have grown larger.

It was a huge accomplishment and a bigger risk than anything Hopkins ever took.

Yeah well, "when you leave out Hearns and Leonard" is quit an important detail wouldn't you say? Ali's opposition isn't that great if you leave out Foreman, Frazier and Liston either, but who cares?

On a sidenote, i do think Hagler and Hopkins are very close in legacy. I would have to weigh both sides to decide who i rate higher, but i wouldn't be surprised if Hopkins ends up the better fighter.

It was clear that Jones wasn't the same after he lost 20 lbs of muscle and then went up against Tarver, who is lightyears ahead of Mercado. And he still won their first fight. Jones deteriorated fast. Look at Byrd if you want to see the effect of losing that amount of muscle does to you.

Don't get me wrong, i don't think the total picture is a landslide, i said that if you consider Jones' prime, let's say 1993-2003, and compare that to what Hopkins did between 1993 and 2003, then i think it's a landslide in Jones' favor. Obviously, the fact that Jones got knocked out twice where Hopkins added his career best wins balances things.

But overal i think Jones has the edge because he was untouchable for 10 full years against bigger opponents.

 

I think it seems all about parameters... 1993-2003 may suit Jones more than Hopkins. Extend it to to 2008 and you get a different picture. It's just an arbitrary time span after all.

As for the losing 20 lbs of muscle... (1) How do you gain 20 lbs of muscle when you've already grown to your best weight and you have a very tough regime as a pro-fighter? and (2) Why is this an excuse when Toney's isn't? After all take a look at the trim Toney who beat Nunn and the softer guy who fought Jones. I don't think you can have it both ways.

Roy lost, he was past his best, but the losses were all devestating.

 

If you don't know what you are talking about, don't speak about it. Jones challenged Lewis and was negotiating for a fight with him after his win over Ruiz, it was Lewis who broke out of negotiations.

 

No, I would also have been satisfied if he would have taken on a few other hws who were ranked top10-15. Than I would say he was a legitimate hw contender but not like this. It was a good win and a good accomlishment but not as good some make it out to be. And I think coming of two losses, moving up two weightclasses to fight the man there and handing him a beating is as good of an accomplishment as what Jones did against Ruiz.

Well, Hagler lost to Leonard, remember? And then we were talking mw, if you take into consideration what Hopkins did after his mw reign I think his resume is slightly superior. It´s close though.

So, it´s okay to use that as an excuse for Jones but not okay to knock his win over Toney using the same excuse? Double standard? Also it´s hindsight, nobody thought so before the first fight.
Jones was past his prime for the Tarver fight just as Hopkins had not entered his against Mercado. And on hindsight Tarver is the better fighter, at the time Hopkins fought Mercado that guy was seen as the next champ. Very similar to Tarver before he fought Jones. Also, we could say Hopkins ended Mercado´s career as a world class fighter.

Still not a landslide but it´s certainly in Jones favour.

Well, I disagree here. Jones looked special but he did not back it up in quality - and there were fighters against he could have proven his talent.

 

What about wins head-head best wins, I personally won't comment, judge for yourself.

Hopkins - Jones Jr

1. Trinidad 1. Toney
2. Pavlik 2. Hopkins
3. Tarver 3. Tarver
4. Winky 4. McCallum
5. G Johnson 5. Ruiz
6. Delahoya 6. Virgil Hill
7. Keith Holmes 7. Reggie Johnson
8. Echols 8. Montel Griffin
9. Joppy 9. Otis Grant
10. S Brown 10. Mallinger
11. Robert Allen 11. Richard Hall
12. Lipsey 12. Clinton Woods
13. John Jackson 13. Gonzalez
14. Vanderpool 14. Trinidad


Succesfully Championship Wins

Hopkins 23 (including Tarver-Winky)
Jones Jr 24

Wins over World Champions (Current/Past/Future)

Jones - 16
Hopkins - 10

 

Very nice insight Suzie, if Jones wins his next one (and you never know), B-Hop might just get that chance at Jones that Archie never got at Charles in the later part of their careers when (as you put it), their peaks where reversed somewhat.

If so, I think Bernard should wear a shirt that says on it 'this one's for Archie', on his way down to the ring!!

Haha, kidding, not a serious post (except for the part saying good observation Suzie)

 

Ruiz was obviously hand-picked, but at the same time he was a natural heavyweight with a substantial size advantage. I mean the guy weighed 228 pounds! Jones was a bulked up 193 yet he toyed with Ruiz, who as it's been pointed out already, was favoured by many to win.
So, in a 50/50 fight and with a 35 pound weight disadvantage, Jones toys with his man and wins a landslide decision. How many times in history has this been done?

Say what you want about Ruiz, but he's a decent heavyweight. He was never THE MAN at the weight of course, but it's still a damn impressive win.

 

Quite a few actually. Fitz, Langford, Greb, Walker beat even better hws. It´s a good accomplishment, I wrote that but not a huge one.

 

But that's a very elite circle wouldn't you say? I personally think you're being too hard on him.

 

Burley also beat one or two heavyeights but still...it's a very elite circle like I said.

 

Sure it is but Jones had the talent to be rated among them and blew it. Why am I hard in him? I said it´s a good accomplishment but it´s not earth shattering.