Who ranks higher in the All-Time Great List - Roy Jones Jr. or Bernard Hopkins?

I got roy

 

Of course Shumenov, Murat, and Pascal are among the world's best. They all were champions or top contenders. Were they the cream of the crop? Of course not, but they were among the best.

Ali's injury didn't come from his ring experience. Thousands of boxers who fought 100 fights and took 10x the punishment of Ali have no parkinsons. That Ali, the one who people wanted to silence having Parkinsons is no coincidence.

Longevity is a great aspect to add to a fighter's ability. Archie Moore is still great today because of it. George Foreman is in the record books because of it and the tried and true Glen Johnson is still considered a viable opponent due to his enurance as a fighter.

 

I think Roy was more formidable at his peak and could have won more hypothetical H2H's against the best of history. Funk resume...ha ha
You da man Roidy! They musta forgot!

 

I agree with this if he beats one of these two guys or fights past 50 at this level I give him the edge. His resume is overrated but he is still writing it.

 

I never denied that longevity wasn't to be admired what Bhops is doing is incredible at his age but he's never held a win over a guy as talented as Roy ..Hell he lost to Dawson,Calzaghe and Taylor ..Seems pure boxers with good hand speed are his Achilles heel and right now there is no one at LHW that has all those tools so it's much easier for Hopkins to exploit these guys ..But it's still amazing that a 49 yr old can compete on such a high level.

 

I agree there is nothing special about hopkins' resume (or jones in their prime). but they were easily the best of their era

what Hopkins is doing now is impressive to say the least, but it won't put him above jones in ATG - jones was a man in his own zone in his prime

 

I think this thread may have come about after a thread I made asking fans about resumes.
I think sometimes fans need to look at who they fought, where that fighter was in his career, if he had done anything at the weight he was fighting in and not worry about what happened after as its where they were when it happened.

An example is how many would rate Hopkins win over Trinidad as his big MW win, but Tito had little MW pedigree and was a former WW champ who had been knocked down several times, so I think K Holmes was a greater win as an established MW champ. Thats not to say Tito wasnt a very good win.

Equally when Jones beat Hopkins, Hopkins hadnt done much at MW then and wasnt then considered a great win, although was a fair win as title contender.

I guess Tarver may be Hopkins biggest win, possibly Toney for Jones, but Toney hadnt done much at SMW.
I guess it can come down to interpretation

 

everybody who knocked tito down early got KO'd - go check
and tito bullied joppy who was the top contender to Hopkins

 

Cant see how Toney was the man at SMW when Eubank and Benn had far greater resumes, done so much more and Toneys SMW win was a fighter Benn had blasted out

 

Fair play, its an interesting debate

I know many knocked Tito down and tito got up, but Hopkins was possibly the first time he was fighting a fighter who turned pro as a CW also with Joppy there were glove wrapping queries

 

I thought Hopkins turned pro at HW?
don't quote me on that though....
not that it should factor in...unless you are looking for those little things :good

 

Usually your take is completely wrong but I agree the tito win was nothingness. However, since toney didnt do much at the second rate Smw division at the time he did more than enough before and after to be considered probably the best win on anyone's resume at that weight.

 

couldn't disagree more about the tito win
it was a masterclass

not only that, tito made his comeback at MW too and won by TKO