Who is more skilled at their best ?... TONEY or HOPKINS ?

That is just insanity bro. Toney was a great counterpuncher...but there are many out there that consider Hopkins one of the GREATEST counter punchers ever. I am ok with saying more power, or stronger (even that is arguable tho)...but counterpunching? Come on bro...

And the only problem I have with anyone saying ANY version of Toney would beat Hopkins is, he was just too inconsistant. We are talking about a guy who put on some absolute clinics, fantastic performances...as well as the man who should have lost to Dave Tiberi. During Hopkins prime, you knew what you were going to get every single night...an absolute monster of a fighter, who could and would do everything extremely well (many things well in an ATG sense)...during Toney's, it was a crapshoot.

 

Most of what he said is true and his post was much more reasonable than your first one and your other one where you copied and pasted an article from Jim Amato. Shut the **** up.

 

edit: Not worth wasting my time.

Thanks JMP!

 

Toney was good, never great. Biggest skill was always Toney's mouth, not so much in the ring. He destroyed his legacy by moving to HW as he can't compete there and just wants to collect paychecks. Very sad. Obviously he wasted his money and tries to talk himself into even more ridiculous HW fights just to pay his bills.

Hopkins is a great. I don't like Hopkins but can't argue with his skill and record. Hopkins is much smarter than Toney, inside the ring and outside.

 

I'd be more confident picking Hopkins over the majority of great middleweights than I would picking JT. It's been said a lot in this thread but he's definitely the more versatile of the two. Toney was great in his own right though -- just couldn't quite do as much.

 

In addition to this
- he has a better jab
- better defense
- 100x more entertaining in and out of the ring

The only reason bernard is even in this conversation is because he is more disciplined than Toney. If Toney would have been able to maintain any degree of self control he would likely be the best or one of the best all time fighters.

 

all my replies are after the --
You didnt give JT half the credit he deserves

 

Hard to say - both are very talented fighters.

 

james toney fan...LMAO! Dude, your a troll...and just because you dont agree with someone, doesnt make them wrong. Please elaborate on what the 80% was?

I have never hated on James Toney, its just I dont lick his balls like yourself. People such as yourself overrate him...his achievements...his skillset...and his resume. I actually consider Toney a top 100 ATG...but because I dont consider him a top 1 ATG like you, I am automatically wrong.

Lets look for a second...

The good!

1. - Insanely athletic and gifted fighter when motivated
2. - One of the best ever inside of the pocket
3. - Fantastic and rolling away from punches and brunting the force of damage
4. - Wins over Mccallum, Griffin, Jirov, Holyfield and Barkley make for a great resume
5. - My favorite fighter ever when it comes to interviews
6. - His rise to HW was very impressive when you consider where he started to where he ended (more on that in a second).

The bad...

1. - Never won a major title outside of the IBF.
2. - Never unified a major title at any weight class.
3. - Never had more than 7 title defenses (and should have lost in between it).
4. - Lost to Drake Thadzi, Sam Peter (tho I had James winning the first fight) and Montell Griffin. Should have clearly lost to Dave Tiberi and arguably lost to Fres Oquendo.
5. -Wildly inconsistant...often fought down to the level of his opponents for no other reason than he just lacked the dedication to stay fit enough to blow them out the water.
6. - Tested positive on two separate occasions for PEDs.
7. - His biggest accomplishment of moving to HW, was not by design, but was as facilitation of his terrible work ethic and lack of dedication

Now james toney fan...please enlighten me on how any of that (or my previous post) was anywhere near incorrect of a product of being a "hater".

Hate to stoop to your level...but you are a clown who doesnt know two shits about the sport. Sorry buddy.

 

If it's pure skills, I almost have to place Toney slightly higher because frankly, what physical advantage did he ever have over Hopkins that got him more higher weight success than Hopkins did? He was shorter, never in shape consistently, didn't have near the mobility...but yet, he was good enough to move up in weight for a much longer period than Bernard did, experiencing more upper weight success and beating bigger fighters than Bernard did. The only thing to explain that is skills.

On the other hand, Hopkins proved once he got out of his comfort zone at MW that he could really rely on his skills and wasn't just taking advantage of being able to out-physical his opponents.

So, it's a tough call for me because Hopkins was a more versatile all around fighter...but Toney tested his skills with practically no physical advantages for all his career over 175 yet still had a considerable amount of success.

I'm gonna take the coward's way out and call it a draw. It all boils down to what the individual fan prefers.

 

Hopkins

 

The fact that we are discussing a PRIME Bernard Hopkins and you used as one of your arguements that he "doesnt throw hardly any punches" exposes your lack of actually seeing a PRIME Hopkins fight. You dont get the nickname "The Executioner" by outpointing people bro.



Go back and research a PRIME Bernard Hopkins...then come back and post again.

And BTW, controlling the distance doesnt mean you control the fight inside...its that you decide if the fight is fought inside or out. You make the fighter fight your fight and dont allow him to stay away from you if your an inside fighter (much like Tiberi was able to do) or vice versa...not that your good at a particular distance.

You know what...like I said, go watch some Bernard Hopkins, then come back and we will debate some of those points. Because honestly, there were some things that you were LAUGHABLY off base with...sorry man, you seem alot more level headed then that james toney fan clown...just do the research like I said, because its obvious you havent.

 

It is likely I have way more boxing experience in and out of the ring than you and I have seen a fair amount of Bhops fights. The fact that you say bernard has more stamina, better defense and more accuracy punching is laughable.

James Toney accomplishes all of this on natural talent and isnt even dedicated. He admits he doesnt even train for many figths other than some light sparring. Bhop trains like a madman and is strict in his discipline.

Now, switch these roles. Imagine Bhop working just off his talent and Toney with Bhops discipline. We wouldnt even be having this coversation, because when it comes to natural boxing talent james in way mroe fighter than bernard.

BTW "bro" there isnt an E in argument. If you are gonna debate you should at least know that.

 

The thread reads 'WHO IS MORE SKILLED AT THEIR BEST', not 'who is more athletic', 'who had the better game plans', 'who never got fat' or 'who beat the better opposition' (not implying that B-HOP beat better opposition than Toney here). The question of who is more athletic or a smarter fighter is irrelevant here.

This is not about who was the better fighter out of these two, or who had the better career, this is about pure skills only, at their respective peaks, and here the answer can only be James Toney. This man never learned how to box, he was born to box. He was at home in the ring, and he could do it all, he was very versatile. Toney is the most naturally gifted fighter from MW upwards that we've seen in the last 20 years. He's more gifted than Roy Jones (but Roy was much more athletic than Toney). Toney never had to rely on holding or rough house tactics (like B-HOP did) in order to impose his game plan. How do you think B-HOP would do in the ring against HWs being 50lbs overweight and not prepared? Toney can still handle himself then, based on his natural skills ALONE.
Again, no disrespect whatsoever to Bernard Hopkins here, he's a great, great fighter who I respect a lot. But in terms of pure skills he's behind Toney.

About the issue of Toney having bad footwork and only being able to fight in the pocket, I can only say that this is nonsense. Remember that we're talking about a prime Toney here in this thread, the MW and SMW version of Toney. And not the Toney of the Roy Jones and Tiberi fights, he was sick and weight-drained there, and far away from his best. Watch his old fights closely, I've seen them all, and you will notice that he was a master at CUTTING OFF THE RING and placing his feet in order to deliver his powerful punches. He was such a powerful puncher at that time because he knew how to plant his feet. And he was very able to attack aggressively and come forward. You can even see it in the Michael Nunn fight, where he was still green. Or just watch the McCallum fights. Maybe Toney never had the fastest feet, and maybe he never showed off by doing flashy Ali shuffles in the ring, but Toney had very EFFECTIVE footwork in his day, on par with B-HOPs footwork. Again, we're not talking about the HW James Toney here, who indeed has been off-balance and unable to chase an opponent (like we saw it in the Oquendo fight), and who prefers to let his opponent come to him and just slip n' counter.

 

This is the bottom line truth. You cannot say this about Bhop.