What makes Roy Jones Jr's Achivements much better than calzaghe's?

..

 

I'd rather be called a drone than believe he was a better fighter in 93 than 01 or 08.

Thats borderline ******ed.


And to Snakefist,Achilles and yourself, i have seen all three of you moan about Calzaghe not fighting Hop in his prime, could you possibly tell me how this could have been achieved seeing as you three experts believe his prime was in his 20's.

atsch

 

Roy sought out all of the belts in the light heavyweight division. He didnt hide in Wales behind the WBO crown for years and then decide to come and only fight the top guys when they were 40 or older. Thats what makes his achievements better. Plus he held belts at middlweight, super middle, light heavy, and heavy.

 

Add in the way that Jones beat some of his opponents and it's again not close. forget calzaghe

 

What are you Joe's mom? You really should just dump that avatar because I really like McClellan as a fighter and you really have a twisted mindset about JC that doesn't fit with that type of representation.

BHOP was nowhere NEAR prime by 2001. He was still talented enough as an ATG to perform at the highest level but the 90s version would have been that much more aggressive, powerful, and sadistic in the ring. Joe would have never contemplated facing Bernard in his prime. Look at Joe's fights immediately after struggling against a very non-peak Eubank (where he had three or maybe four good early rounds and he didn't land **** for the remainder - and was actually hurt and holding as the seconds ran out in the 12th - remember?). He would never have thought about Hop while Hop was in the last years of his physical prime though he may have been opening his whisper hole (at fighting the champion BELOW him in weight) as the guy hit mainstream at 36 1/2 ****ing years of age (versus Trinidad). Hardly braveheart stuff.

Fighting Sobot, Ferreyra, and then Reid (who he REALLY struggled against) is hardly the kind of comp that suggests he had become some confident killer after his Eubank win (though I will acknowledge that Joe was in the right place at the right time in that a multitude of great fighters basically hung up their gloves (in the US & UK) all at the relative same time from '95 or so). I don't believe he would have EVER entertained fighting an animal like prime BHOP. And certainly FW wouldn't have thrown them together if it had even been possible. When looking at Joe's career it is not for me to find the way, but fans to wonder the outcome when their career's overlap (I have never believed Joe would have fought prime Hopkins and know he would have gotten destroyed if he had - Joe is inferior to the real elites and it is clear by watching just three fights: Eubank, Hopkins, & Jones). BHOP was an American IBF champ. He wasn't some mystery to Joe as Hop had already fought RJJ in '93 and you can be certain that Joe had watched that fight (when it happened) or long before the end of the 90s (don't you think?).

Hop was managing his own career and making choices accordingly. But, I assure you that with the lack of decent "white" fighters for generations, BHOP would have laughed (and we know his mindset even today about that subject) and then jumped on any opportunity to receive an adequate (not substantive merely ADEQUATE) payday for entering the ring against a white SMW titleholder (that was unknown to him and (yes) with a bogus belt) if he was bold enough to shoot his ****ing mouth off and question publicly BHOP's ability or manhood (and especially after watching tape of him and seeing that he had very little upper body strength and power - if Chris Eubank could find Joe's mug with right hands (the same punch over and over) then prime Hopkins would have known he would have absolutely killed Calzaghe). SO, theoretically, Joe could have found a way (albeit an unlikely path knowing Joe's career and status as a "risk-taker") to fly to the US, add one discretionary fight to his schedule, and meet BHOP in '98 or '99 (instead of those thrilling fights against SOBOT and FERREYRA or his struggle against REID).

But, none of that is the point. Joe was never looking to fight BHOP. Joe was lucky that so many great fighters left the scene as he came to the top of a (comparatively new and) weak division in '97. Frank and Joe picked carefully and were the flip side to the unimportant SMW division coin along with Ottke. The great talent was above at LHW and in one case, below in Hopkins. ONLY a kid or a fool would believe that Hopkins was better overall at almost 37 (and thereafter) against Trinidad. You can actually convince yourself that BHOP wakes up at 36 and is SUDDENLY a superior boxer and only then becomes a great fighter (ATG). LMAO. Middleweight was a weak division for much of Bernard's reign but that has nothing to do with his standing at the time or the excellence that comes from combining one's physical prime with great athleticism, skill, and ability. He was already less powerful and quick by Echols if not Allen.

As I said in the prior post:

He is a great example for staying fit, living like a spartan, and maintaining excellence into relative old age (for a fighter) but his prime years were in the 90s. Hop was already having trouble balancing middle age against the 160 limit by Echols. He was losing some of his quickness as he got to 34/35 and couldn't compensate by putting on the extra pounds to increase his power because then he couldn't make 160 with his frame. He was pushing 37 when he met Trinidad and was way past his physical prime (or peak). He needed to move up and instead became even craftier to make up for his comparative disadvantages against younger fighters. That is why Taylor proved such a problem - he was too young and strong (prime) while Hop wasn't as quick (as in his own prime) and was actually weaker at 160 in 2005 than he had been a near decade earlier at the same weight.

-

It can be argued or speculated that BHOP had the frame to go to LHW much earlier but recognized he would lose his advantages and decided to cut weight to stay at middle (which meant not having to run into the obstacle of RJJ and bigger stronger fighters). But, arguing to elongate BHOP's prime to make JC's win look better is an absurdity. There could come a time when the SMW division is very highly respected (perhaps it is more so at this very moment (some think so in terms of competitive depth) than at any other time since its establishment) but it has been a joke of a divison during the near entirety of Joe's and Sven's so-called reign(s). BHOP may well have wanted to avoid the challenge at LHW. He wouldn't have blinked at the prospect of facing down Joe ****ING Calzaghe in his prime in the 90s. The only thing that can be said is this, "well, Joe was just a young runt in '92 -'96 while BHOP was a man so of course Joe would have gotten destroyed in BHOP's athletic prime years". And, in '97 to '99 Frank Warren would have never allowed it. Joe would never have wanted it. Not after the physical pain he had felt in squeaking by Chris in '97 even with an entire kingdom cheering him on to his narrow (more than generously attributed) victory. His hibernation and timidity tells the tale about Joe's boldness. His willingness to cherry pick at the end completes the story.

 

As a massive Hopkins fan, who has seen every fight of his career, Hopkins was at his absolute peak in the 2nd Echols fight and against Trinidad, and up to his battering of Joppy. There was no visable decline in handspeed against Trinidad, more aggressive doesn't mean better. He developed his craft to technical perfection by the time he fought Trinidad, and was able to maintain the vast majority of his phsyical capabilities. The Hopkins who tore apart Glen Johnson (probably the best performance he had in the 90's), was still making technical errors. By the time of Trinidad, he had honed his craft to perfection.

Late 90's-2003, is what I call Hopkins prime. That was the period of his longest streak of top performances against top opposition. Trinidad, Echols, Holmes, Joppy, Johnson, etc. And all things taken into consideration - his physical ability and his technical craft - he never looked better before than he did against Trinidad. That was as perfect a display of boxing as any other. It's absurd to suggest that he wasn't prime for the fight against Trinidad.

It has nothing to do with Calzaghe. He outclassed Trinidad 7 years before that fight. His decline as a complete fighter visably started after Joppy, but he was at his overall best against Tito. I don't see how anyone can honestly deny that.

 

LOL. Sorry, no. As a guy watching BHOP from the early 90s he wasn't at his peak for Trinidad at all. He was past prime, not as quick, with less power. He looked weaker than I had ever seen him when he fought Felix. When that fight came about, I gave Trinidad zero chance and thought it a joke that anyone thought it would be competitive as Felix was basically a thin rail of a guy when he began. He was much stronger in the mid-90s (from his late 20s to early 30s) than the period you are attributing. Joppy and Holmes had been ducking and avoiding BHOP for years so he fought them after his real prime (and still dismantled them easily). He would have been stronger if he could have put the pounds on in that period but he would have had to move up (which is a normal thing to do in middle age). So, instead, he was not as physically strong. It was most pronounced and apparent to all by the time he got to Taylor (when he was 40). But, it started much, much earlier.

 

Hops was physically as good as I had ever seen him when he fought Roy, Hall and Mercado the second time.

But clearly he wasnt the technician he became..somethings were subtlely absent, some things a little more obvious.

He looked just about the best Ive seen him in 97-99 when he dominated some well known but mostly past it or green opposition.
BUT he looked just as good in about 2000-2002 against a higher calibre of opposition.

Johnson was not what he became when Hops fought him, he was basically a nobody, a very tough nobody.

I really felt the series of fights starting with Vanderpool, then Echols 2, Holmes(underrated win), then finishing with Tito he was near flawless. Whilst still being quick, responsive, physically dominant and able to deal with a world class pace.

Depends on what your prefer, when how you want to look at it but when I think of fantasy H2H matches involving Hopkins I put that version of X in them.

 

The only twisted midset belongs to anyone who believes the highlighted part.

And that has nothing to do with Calzaghe or McClellan.

You are a strange person.

 

Dominance is a strong word, agreed. But he utterly schooled a top ten contender with a nightmarish style.

He was at least as "dominant" as PBF at 154 and 147.

I've got way more respect for the Bernard Joe fought than the one Roy did.

 

Excellent post. Bang on.

 

BHop's prime is difficult to nail down , but I believe it's reasonable to place it between 1997 and 2003. (Johnson to Joppy).

That might seem a tad old and a tad long, but he was very late getting into the game and had a long apprenticeship before reaching masters level.

His physical peak would have run from 1988-1994, and if he had boxed from a younger age, that might have also been his boxing peak.

But he was still learning his craft (and craftiness) long after that.

(Another similar example that comes to mind is Antonio Tarver who was also a late bloomer. Lennox Lewis' prime ran from when he was 31-37)

Making very ****ing poor choices and missing out on a wealth of chances as he knew nearly **** all about promotion and negotiation. He also suffered from a bit of greed, which prevented him getting a rematch with RJJ.

In short, he was on nearly no ones's radar as a mega star till after he beat Trinidad.

Ironic, as, given his talent and skill, with proper management, he should have been a bigger star going into that fight and not the betting under-dog.

Why folks thought Trinidad was going to win that one, I don't know.

Sure he would.

This content is protected

In 98, Joe had just won his title and was a relative nobody.

Bernard had a piece of the title one division lower and was nearly as much of a nobody as Joe.

Hindsight is great but in 1998, nobody would have given a **** about this fight nor paid much to watch it. It only has significance looking backwards.

See the Jay Larkin quote above. He was actively seeking out Hopkins, who blatantly ducked him.

Not because Bernard he was scared of him but because he was GREEEEEEDY !

Less powerful, slower, yes.

But craftier and more skilled.

And that was more important than any slight decline in his physical attributes.

 

[/quote]


Best post i've seen for a while. Cheers:good