Roy Jones vs. Bernard Hopkins (2000)

I have seen some of his older fights and he was never a volume puncher but ok I will watch some more of his pre 1998 fights. I am still convinced that against a faster opponent than him he will throw less punches evident by his small volume of punches in the Jones fight.

 

Bhop

 

Its amazing how people can even compare these 2 fighters let alone think that the vastly inferior Hopkins could actually beat a 2000 Jones, memories are short in here or is it perhaps that people get misty eyed and nostalgic for the 'old-school' skills that Hopkins has and it reminds them of a more glorious era in boxing .. Hopkins will always be remembered as an elite fighter but to compare him to the 'naturally gifted' Jones is ridiculous, Jones has his detractors but for almost a decade nobody could even run him close and that includes Hopkins. I admire and respect Hopkins for learning and moulding a style that suited him and he was ultra effective at but if your a true boxing fan you'll realise that Roy Jones Jr was special .. Before he fought Trinidad Hopkins was the biggest 'Spoiler' in boxing, hardly anything was clean, it always invariably ended up in a dirty brawl and for a purist of the sweet science it was awful to watch, it was an intelligent way of fighting but it was the only thing Hopkins could do, has anybody seen those Robert Allen fights and Antwun Echols, absolutely painful and then he had the nerve to moan about how he wasnt getting the credit and money he deserves, after Trinidad there was the farce of the fight with De La Hoya which was a fraudulent business arrangement, 2 defeats to Jermain Taylor, a defeat to Calzaghe, Winky should never have fought at that weight and 2 brilliant wins against Tarver who is average and Pavlik which admittedly was a beautiful masterclass and had me on my feet .... Up until the point were Roy fought Ruiz, Hopkins could have fought Roy 10 times and he wouldnt have won because Hopkins is an inferior fighter on every level .. Its no surprise that Hopkins only dared to step up in weight when Roy was gone from the division, he could have done it sooner, he didnt have to stay at Middle for so long and i actually believe that Hopkins is very lucky that the 90s middleweight scene evolved how it did, imagine if Roy Jones and James Toney's bodies could have stayed at 160/168, imagine if Gerald Mcclellan hadnt of been injured, imagine if Nigel Benn, Eubank or McCallum were a couple of years younger and challenged the Hopkins of the 90s, would Hopkins be remembered now as an all time great, if he'd of had those kind of challenges at that point in his career knowing that he wasnt a particularly good fighter at that point, im guessing Bernard Hopkins would be a mere footnote in middleweight history ......... How one of the previous posters can rate Hopkins as the number 1 middleweight of all time is staggering to me, fan's memories are always short and they're always eager to put today's Champions with other eras but Hopkins would lose against Hagler and he'd certainly lose against Monzon in my humble opinion ..... Light Heavys that could do something with Roy Jones would have to be from the Pantheon of 'True Greats', Archie Moore and Bob Foster, as much as I like Michael Spinks I just cant see him beating Roy ........ I understand people not liking Roy Jones but dont confuse one of the greatest naturally gifted fighters of all time with a guy who was ultimately 'effective stylistically' but was still a fairly average fighter ........... And dont even get me started with Joe Calzaghe, oh man lets see Calzaghe step up to Light Heavy against a 2000 Jones or a Prime Spinks or Foster, Calzaghe is the ultimate boxing Fraud who would have been exposed in earlier era's but in this era he's considered an ATG , the word 'Great' is so over-used .....

 

Take it from someone who has seen ALL of Hopkins fights...many times over (except for his first couple). Hopkins was a BEAST in his younger form. He was an enormous volume puncher.

Go watch some of the fights I recomended, your outlook on what type of fighter Bernard was in his prime (and before) will change dramatically

As for his lower output vs Jones....both fighters workrate was far below their average in that fight. Before the fight, both men stated that each were by far the best opponents that either had faced (Im sure the same still goes)...the announcers were all over this. Go back and watch how many jabs and punches fell far short of their mark...as it was obvious both men had a little "too much" respect for each other (again, the announcers words, not mine).

And as for Roy's speed...I agree its legendary...but so is Hopkins timing. And as the old boxing addage goes...the best weapon against speed is timing.

Just like in the first fight, I doubt either man would get off like they were accustomed to in a rematch.

 

I agree completelly with the points you make about Hopkins and his own use of angles, footwork, timing, etc. He's a genius when it comes to fighting, that's clear.

What this fight comes down to IMO is that Jones' mobility, moving to his left consistently, is going to offset Bernard's attack and keep him from dictating the action.

I just can't see Hopkins having success at containing Roy where he wants him for too long. I do agree that Hopkins' advantage as an inside-fighter is greater than Roy's advantage on the outside, but that isn't the point. The way I see it, more often than not this fight will be at a distance favorable to Jones.

Hopkins isn't fast enough to implement his style on Jones. I believe that this is a fight where Jones has the upper hand, he'd know it and Hopkins would know it. All Jones has to do is keep it at a distance where his faster hands and feet (and everything else, as Jones had more to his game than just athleticism. Excellent at feinting with his whole body and knowing when and where to move) make him the superior fighter. It isn't so easy given Hopkins ability, as you alluded to, at cutting off the ring, his own ability to work angles and feint. However, it will be easier than what Hopkins has to do. Trying to not just keep up with Jones, but to get the better of his movement. Even for a brilliant tactician like Hopkins that will be difficult. Then, he has to get himself inside on one of the most elusive fighters in history who is just as excellent at keeping the fight on his terms and who has a combinaton of speed and power beyond all but a very select few ever. To top it off, he has to maintain that. He has to constantly be looking to track Jones down, get inside, and try to contain an expolsive offensive force.

As to who would be more prepared for the other, I think your selling Roy a bit short here. He probably wasn't as calculating or meticulous as Hopkins in preparation, but he'd know the essentials. He would analyse Hopkins and would know where he wants to be and where not to be, and would know what to do in certain situations.

As I said in my first post, I just don't think Hopkins is the fighter to beat prime Jones. As well-rounded as he is, as tactically and technically brilliant as he is, the odds are still stacked against him in this match-up IMO. He'll test Jones all the way and make it tough for him, but he won't win.

And I truly believe this, as I'm much more of a fan of Hopkins and would like to think that he has the upper hand prime for prime. I just can't see it.

 

You speak of nostalgia, yet you use so many "what if's" in this post, its staggering. "If" my mom had a *****, shed be my dad...doesnt mean she is getting a present of fathers day.

You said Roy Jones was more naturally gifted than Bernard...which was just about the only valid point you had.

You mention Toney, who is one of the more overrated fighters in the past 20+ years, then you state Hopkins is overrated. Toney at MW? The same guy who should have lost to Dave Tiberi? You ever see Hopkins losing, or even fighting close with Dave FREAKING Tiberi? Toney was a great fighter...but his lack of consistancy and love for Burger King make it tough to ever think he could have stayed at or been great at MW (he held one belt and never should have had more than 4 defenses due to the Tiberi fiasco).

As for me mentioning Hopkins as #1 amongst MWs...I can argue my point, but your bias against Hopkins is so clear (I could really pick this whole post to peices, but why waste my time....), it would be a waste of a post.

Oh yeah...and next time, please use punctuation and paragraphs...hate to be a grammer nazi, but damn that was a tough read.

 

Hopkins essentially would not be able to make Roy Jones fight his fight.

Jones's atheltic ability negates the vast vast majority of Hopkins use of angles or ability to cut off the ring and make the fight an inside fight.

There is no way and this is directed to my good man Sues, that Hopkins timing would matter one iota as a regular thing in the fight, sure could he time Roy a couple of times with good shots. But there is noway for any fighter to regularly time Roy Jones, he is simply too fast and his reflex's just too good.

Jones is simply to mobile too fast and too hard to hit for Hopkins to get a handle on regulalry enough to win 7 rounds, it would not happen.

Jones UD 8-4

 

Your clearly lacking self esteem, and dont have the debating skills to make your point correctly firstly you say, ' Toney is the most over-rated fighter of the last 20 years', then 2 sentences later you say 'Toney was a great fighter' .. This completely shows you up, you also say 'I could pick this whole post apart' and then you dont bother making any clear points to pick it apart because its clear you dont have the knowledge .. Then like a child you tell me to use puntuation and paragraphs like an angry child who cant get his point across .. If i felt a moron like you deserved proper paragraphs and puntuation i'd use them but i have no respect for you or your points, in fact i think you know nothing, your just trying to be 'Clever' by making a case that Hopkins would beat a 2000 Jones .... Nobody thinks your clever and you've just exposed yourself as a total moron in your last post .... Can i give you a tip? If somebody disagrees with you dont take it personally, we all have an opinion and we are not attacking you just for the sake of it, dont get angry because angry people are not in control and they sound stupid ..

 

im sorry guys ima have to go with BHOP right now, roy is washed up and BHOP has evolved as he has aged and in doing so has become a very dangerous fight for someone like roy at this point
a phew years back different story

 

You're the one who is acting like a child. Everything he said in that post was valid, and you resorted to insults.

His argument is well-made, but you just went on a rant and chose to call him a moron and say he lacks self-esteem for some reason. If you're going to keep posting like this (and that includes the poor grammer and even more lame excuse for it) than you might as well stop posting and log out.

 

Hopkins not only 'improved details', but completely changed up his style after their fight.

He was a puncher entering the first fight, he was a counterpunching boxer circa 2000.