Just watched Roy Jones-Bernard Hopkins again

Roy Jones was hands down better than Hopkins at any point up to when he was shot.
Jones is actually becoming as underrated and Hopkins is overrated these days. Jones beat some elite fighters in their prime......Hopkins feasted on bums and smaller men.

 

Good post. This was the undercard bout for the historic Bowe/Ferguson fight. Larry hated the fight as you would expect, and at one point he compared it to a debate on C-Span, which was sort of a cable tv novelty at the time.

You know you are a real fan if you enjoy this fight. I think it's fascinating and watch it frequently. Such a shame they couldn't have hooked up later, although I think the result was inevitable.

Both guys were terrified of each other, it was obvious. Gil Clancy started talking about the "jabbing short" from the very opening of the bout.

The real beauty in this fight is watching their feet. Not much is happening with their hands, but the competition for real estate was being conducted at such a high athletic level, it's really fun to watch in retrospect.

Hopkins was the only guy for many years who moved toward Roy so aggressively, and Jones was bothered by it, but Roy never stayed in one spot long enough for Hopkins to get comfortable enough to throw, and he was in awe of Roy's handspeed.

So, the pattern of the fight was Hopkins would push forward using his quick feet, and if Roy felt compromised, he would make a dazzling move to escape. Meanwhile, a punch did occasionally get thrown, but very few landed cleanly.

I scored it 8-4 based on Roy's coasting a little late and Hopkins finally starting to throw combos against Jones on the ropes. He waited too long to do this, and even then he never truly committed. Bernard may have been green and far more aggressive in those days, but he never was going to be a face-first kind of guy.

Anyway, I'm mostly just happy that there's one more person out there who enjoys this fight, which is almost universally considered a stinker.

 

It sucks that they fought each other so early. After every time I watch it, it's pretty disappointing because both of them weren't very comfortable and didn't seem to have much of a plan. The match should have happened a few years later. Roy just won because of his speed and natural talent. I'm a bigger Hopkins fan than a Jones fan and I think Bernard could have fought a better fight with a better gameplan, but I don't think he could have ever beaten Jones. Roy just has too much talent for anybody in history at MW. His quickness and awkward angled punches would always trouble Hopkins.

 

For the sake of argument, how about Hagler? Hopkins' work in that fight has me thinking that Marvin would have been able to push Roy similarly, and Marvin would have thrown punches. I think I'd favor Hagler slightly over Jones at 160, but Roy by a moderate margin at 168.

 

I had Jones clearly winning it 119-110 (ie. 10-1-1). The rounds were close because neither boxer wanted to do anything aggressive, but at no point did I feel that Hopkins did enough to win a round except in the 8th. Jones, on the other hand, put on one of the poorer performances of his career and only did just enough to win rounds. I think I scored one of the rounds even due to total deadlock.

What this fight did show to me, somewhat like Jones-Toney, was that this was a case of a world class boxer falling short against a great boxer. I've never understood why anyone thinks that Hopkins could have beaten a peak Roy, but I suppose the Philadelphia appeal is a seductive one.

 

Not only would he lose, but I think Hagler has a smaller chance against Jones than Hopkins. He was bothered by speed even more than Hopkins and he would be more frustrated by Jones' running/exploding style.

It's very hard to imagine anybody beating Roy Jones at MW (not considering the tiny chance of landing a KO punch on him). He was just the perfect fighter and he was physically huge at that weight too.. there has never been anybody like him really. There is no style to beat him. At 175 he only loses to some ATG's because of size disadvantages. A MW version of Bob Foster would get knocked out by Jones.

 

You gotta keep in mind Jones claims he beat Hopkins basically with one hand.. May not be true but he was obviously favoring one during the fight (can't remember which)
I also agree that Hopkins made it a closer fight then you see it, he landed a lot more on Jones in his prime then most fighters can on todays Jones..

 

2 words: Meldrick taylor

fastest ever hands i have ever seen on a fighter. just a blur watching him throw at close range

however rjj was a more effective puncher than meldrick, due to the power he had and the angles that he attacked from, coupled with his deadly speed.

 

The Vinny Pazienza fight was brilliant to watch.. **** was **** though..

 

Hopkins was still progressing as a fighter at that time, Roy beat up a green Hopkins. Compare that fight with Hopkins-Johnson, and you will see a totally different Hopkins.

 

Monzon is another fighter (as well as hagler.) who would rough up peak 160 jones,moreso than hagler.

 

Noone thinks that Hopkins would have been favoured to beat a peak Roy. But Hopkins remained at the very top level of boxing for a longer time than Roy was able to, and to take away credit from that is just stupid. Could a 34 year old Roy beat a 38 year old Hopkins? Surely you'd have to pick Hopkins.