Roy Jones vs. Bernard Hopkins (2000)

Cobra you and Sue are on a mission to elevate Bernard Hopkins to a prime Roy Jones and its ridiculous .... I dont rate Hopkins that highly, Sue does, i respect that, you have Hopkins on your avator, i respect that too but dont tell me that he compares to Roy Jones because he doesnt .... Sue rates Hopkins higher than Hagler, Monzon and Ketchel at middleweight, its ridiculous and you and your little mate can talk about my puntuation all day long but if you dont answer my original Hopkins points then its clear that my points are correct .... You and Sue dont like my posts because they disagree with yours, you dont like it and you want me to log out . If your going to post things like 'Hopkins would beat a 2000 Roy Jones', be prepared for people with more knowledge than you to disagree .. You must understand, I have watched thousands of fights from the last 100 years stretching back to Jack Johnson so im not going to be overwhelmed with modern day hype on Champions like Hopkins although i really respect the man and think he is a great 'modern day' fighter ......... But if you elevate Hopkins above Monzon in the middleweight rankings, its clear that you dont know what your talking about ....

 

Thats a very good point, Hopkins was essentially a counter puncher and a brilliant punch picker, his ability to back-off and then launch the over-hand right was a beautiful thing but the point is, he didnt do it against an Elite fighter like a 2000 Roy Jones and he wouldnt be able to do it against Jones .... a 2000 Jones wouldnt just follow Hopkins with a stationary guard. Jones's reflex's would hit Hopkins all day long for a comfortable points win like they're first fight, i can envisage it now, how it would play out .. Hopkins is a really good fighter in an era with no 'Truly Great' opposition. Roy Jones of 2000 is a truly great fighter and Hopkins would always lose against the 'Very Best'. He lost against Jermain Taylor twice, how in gods name can he beat a 2000 Roy, Monzon or Hagler. The people who are pro Hopkins in this individual thread are so ignorant to his status in history. Sue and Cobra tell me how you think Hopkins would beat Monzon, and please dont base it on his victories over Pavlik or Trinidad. I struggle to think of a strategy that Hagler could employ with Monzon, let alone a guy like Hopkins .....

 

If you read my posts you'll see that I said Hopkins isn't going to beat Jones. It's as simple as that. Sues and I were breaking the fight down and I was explaining why I feel Jones would always win a prime for prime match-up. I'm not elevating Hopkins to anyone's level that he doesn't belong on. I rate Monzon higher than Hopkins, the more accomplished fighter and a better fighter IMO. I also consider Hagler the more accomplished fighter. However, Hopkins is most certainly on both of their levels.

The point about the punctuation is that it makes it difficult to read. Look at your original post in this thread, I'm sorry but not everyone is going to take the time to read through that. You're perfectly free to express your thoughts. My comment was based on how you reacted to sues. You called him a moron, said he lacked self-esteem, and said you don't care about his opinion on your grammer because you don't respect him. There's no need for that and if you're going to keep posting like that than it would be best if you just logged out.

Yet you continue to do it. You claim without knowing hardly anything about me that your are more knowledgable than I am because you've seen fights dating back to Jack Johnson. So have I, even further back than Johnson. Perhaps I'm more knowledgable about this sport than you, perhaps not. Either way, neither of us know enough about the other to make any claim that we know more about boxing, but you go ahead and do it anyway.

You've yet to even try to explain how this fight would happen, even try at a detailed breakdown of the match-up. All you've said is that Jones was on a different level. Maybe it's you who is underrating Hopkins' ability.

The fact that Hopkins is in my avatar means little more than I am a fan and that I recognize his greatness. Just a few days ago I had a picture of Ezzard Charles in my avatar and last week it was Monzon.

I have no probelms with you expressing your opinion on Hopkins, but your reaction to sues' post was idiotic and uncalled for. That's all I was saying.

 

Cobra you've made some very good points and i apologize wholeheartedly for presuming that you know nothing .. We are all boxing fans but to critisize my punctuation in my original post is somewhat churlish, im new to computers and its taking me a little time to get used to the way people 'post'. Ive re-read my original post on Hopkins and it makes 'perfect sense' in my opinion, and the people who critisize punctuation or spelling are trying to divert away from the issues that are being spoken about .. Sue didnt know what he was talking about on this issue, its as simple as that. He doesnt realise the difference between a guy like Hopkins and a guy like Jones, if your experienced in watching boxing then the difference is obvious. I respect everyone's opinion on here but if people try and make a case for Hopkins beating Jones 2000, i must speak up and when Sue rates Hopkins above Monzon then im going to argue the case ......... But i must repeat, that i absolutely respect everyone's opinion on here, and i only attacked Sue after he attacked me Cobra. If you read my original post on this thread i didnt attack anybody, it was only when Sue responded like an angry child that i put him in his place ......... The point is, that as a boxing fan, you cannot compare Jones, Monzon, Hagler or Ketchel to Hopkins because your dealing with different levels and Hopkins doesnt compare

 

Ezzard Charles was without a doubt in the top 20 fighters of all time, change your avator back from Hopkins to Charles ........ Why the hell would you have your avator as Monzon, then Charles, then Hopkins ?????? .... Buddy put it back to Monzon or Charles, those 2 guys were 'True Greats'

 

First, I apoligize for my criticism of how you made your post. I was only saying that it could be difficult for some people to read through, some may not take the time to do it. That is all.

As for Charles, he's a top 10 all-time great IMO. The list of great fighters he beat is unreal, only matched by Greb, Langford, and Robinson throughout history IMO.

I consider Hopkins a great fighter. Obviously not to the degree that Charles is, or Monzon. But he is a truly great fighter IMO. I've seen the vast majority of his fights and feel that he is a brilliant fighter. One of the best ring generals in history and very versatile, a superb tactictian and all-around boxer. I wouldn't favor him over someone like Monzon, but he would be damn competitive in that fight. I appreciate his skills and his dedication.

That is why he is in my avatar at the moment.

 

Ok, I was going to allow you to slide. But now I dont know anything on the subject? Why, because my opinion...to which I actually gave legitimate reasons for (others in this post, even when not agreeing at least respect that I know of what I talk about)...other than your counter arguement about Jones just being "better"? I have yet to hear you give one example of how the fight would look...how the styles would match...etc. Yet you are extremely more knowledgable than I?

I will not delve into the extent of my boxing knowledge, as my track record on this forum speaks for itself. I am WELL known on here as someone who is VERY knowledgable on the sport, as well for the most part unbiased (I do believe we all have our biases...but in this post, I have given reasons for my thoughts...not childish insults and sweeping generalizations). I invite you to click on my name and go through a couple of posts in my history, then come back and respond to me...like a fan of the sport, rather than a fan of a fighter (there is a difference).

As for my avatar...I lost a lifetime avatar bet to a poster named Decebal, who chose one of a fighter I liked out of respect for me as a poster. Before this I have sported a Diego Corrales avatar since his passing...and before that, a Pernell Whitaker one (my actual favorite fighter...followed by Hopkins and Jones respectfully). And guess what, I believe that many at LW beat Chico...and Duran and Ike Williams give Whitaker hell. An avatar does not pledge allegiance.

As for Toney...

A fighter CAN be both overrated and great at the same time. I can think of many who fit that bill right off the top of my head. But lets delve into his career for a second and see why I feel that way.

You mentioned Toney at MW...to which I responded that his MW reign was not all its cracked up to be. He held one title (IBF) and only defended it 4 times (with a draw to Mccallum mixed in) before getting a gift vs the immortal Dave Tiberi. Toney should have mopped the floor with him, but because he came into the fight out of shape and disinterested (something that plagued him his whole career), he was not able to.

He then, after a few more defenses, he moved up to SMW...not to just contend for a title right away, but because he could no longer make MW (remember the BURGER KING BURGER KING interview after the Mccallum fight?). He won the IBF title with a great performance over Barkley...fighting noone else of worth until losing to Roy Jones.

After this loss, this time unable to make 168, he moved up to 175...to very mixed results. Losing to Griffin twice and the immortal Drake Tadzi, where, SUPRISE, Toney couldnt make weight. He did beat Mccallum again and later won a WONDERFUL fight vs Jirov to win the IBF title. But never defended it, again because he could not make weight anymore.

His stint at HW has been both underwhelming (see everything of late) and amazing (see his fight vs Holyfield).

Fact is, Toney is one of the most talented fighters of the past 20-30 years (go read my post on the thread about comparing his chin and defense with Hopkins chin and defense)...but because of poor conditioning and poor mental makeup (preparation wise mostly, as I feel his ring intellect is quite good), he never became what he should have.

So again....Toney is both an ATG...and SEVERELY overrated.

And go back and read your original post...it was biased (whether you meant it to be or not). And the grammer thing, I only pointed it out because it was tough to read.

 

Speed kills Hopkins, and Roy has too much of it.

 

It was fun breaking down this fight and hearing your case for Hopkins sues.

Good debate :good

 

As always...:good

 

Jones' speed and athleticism would've always been too much for Hopkins to overcome IMO.

 

Prime for prime??????????????? No one beats Roy.

 

Agreed. RJJ is just all wrong for Hopkins. The rounds Hopkins won when they fought were the rounds when he was in RJJ's face and made it an in-fight. If there is distance, he has no chance. I'd say 8-4 maybe 7-5 due to Hopkin's tenacity and heart of a champion.

 

RJJ would've whipped Hopkin's ass He knew it and Bhops knew it, which is why this fight didn't happen after Hopkins had beat Trinidad, he was willing to do whatever it took to fight DLH, Tito, and Taylor but wouldn't take a 40% purse from a man who had

1. Already beat him.
2. Was the P4P #1 guy in the world
3. Was a far bigger name and financial draw.

Do the math Bhops would've got handled once again.