Which was the better Hopkins ? Calzaghe's or Jones' ?

I disagree bernard was a little over his prime when he fought joe, Because several months after he put on the performance of his life against pavlik.

 

i disagree i take it more of a testament to bernard's greatness

 

The Hopkins that lost to Joe gassed extremely badly at 43 - he was a mess. Lesser average fighters have not gassed like that against Joe. Despite all the skills, there is no denying that his body let him down in that fight.

The Hopkins that fought Roy I say.

 

Joe's

 

The Hopkins that Calzaghe fought beats the Hopkins that Jones fought, imo.

But the Hopkins that Jones fought might have had more of a shot of beating the Calzaghe that Hopkins fought.

Make of that what you will.

 

Bernard outsmarted Pavlik and it was a fight of styles. Hopkins has real stamina problems because of his age, Joe exploited it - Pavlik couldn't/didn't.

 

The Hopkins that Roy fought wasn't even good enough to beat an average fighter like Segundo Mercado yet, and went on to have a reign full of sloppy stinkfests with other average fighters like Robert Allen and Antwun Echols. There's a reason he was made the underdog against Tito, despite being a longtime champion already.

The Hopkins that Calzaghe fought was probably past his peak, but he was in the midst of impressive wins against elite fighters like Tarver, Winky, and Pavlik, and was consistently showing better defense and form than he was back in the '90s.

IMO, there really isn't any basis for saying Hopkins was better in the early '90s than he's been in recent fights.

 

Well I find this quite easy to answer, the far more experienced, crafty Hopkins that joe fought
When hopkins fought Roy Jones he was still learning the game.
Even at 43 Hopkins today beats hopkins then
He is technically a far better fighter now and also he didnt look washed up against pavlik did he?
Like hopkins said its probably his best ever performance, and thats saying something

 

But the "lesser average fighters" that were not tired against Joe weren't fighting competitively with him either, so that comparison is a bit flawed IMO.

I won't dispute that Hopkins does show his age at times, but the question is, what did he do/show 10 years ago that makes him better then than he is now?

 

Joe's hopkins was the better version
roy's version was abit green

the current version oh hopkins (the one that fought joe) has not got the same endurance, but his boxing intelligence/ ring generalship is in a world of its own, his experiance makes him a very dangerous fighter for ANYONE
if he had the endurance he would have beaten joe

 

You euro crackhead mother****ers..STFU. Bhop is past it. His performance against Pavlik was not just the same regular old Bhop that fought Joe or JT or Winky etc etc so on and so forth.

 

hopkins that fought rjj was better in terms of physical attributes but still green.

hopkins that fought calz was more intelligent due to his experience but abit deteriorated physically

 

Roy's was better, hands down. Its not even close.

 

That was down to Calzaghe and the way the fight was fought. Hopkins was slipping the punches and constantly on the move all fight. He was throwing punches at Pavlik all night long wasn't he?

I have to say the 43yr old version of Hopkins (over the young version at least) - an incredibly intelligent fighter with supreme defensive skills.