Who should rank higher atg - toney or jones?

The funny thing is although you think Hopkins has a 'fantastic resume' and is an ATG middleweight RJJ actually has a better LHW resume than Hopkins does at MW. BHOPs gets browny points for being obscure, where as RJJ gets minus points for being in the limelight and making it look 'too easy' against elite opponents, maybe not ATGs, but elite opponents for his era

Aside from Benn being on record after retirement as saying he'd lose against Jones and he just wanted the payday I suggest you take a read of this: http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=224734&highlight=jones

As for RJJ ducking Darius, the fight was actually offered to Darius, which was turned down, RJJ beat GOnzalez who went on to beat Darius

 

You have to try really hard to make the case for Toney. It's just not there.

 

2 Reasons

1. The best fighter on the planet and P4P no1, Jones, had entered the division prior to the fight, so 1 and 2, no they weren't, no one in their right mind would rank Maske of Jones. This was apparent when RJJ dispatched Hill in 4 rounds. Historically the 168lb division is also part of the LHW division

2. Traditionally lineal titles had depended on the unification of WBC and WBA, the IBF was a trinket belt established in the 80s and only given kudos because Larry Holmes ducked his WBC mando and picked up the IBF trinket to gain some sort of legitimacy

 

1. Ranking by who?

2. The fact Jones fought in the division before Hill-Maske

3. So what, its about quality of wins. Virgil Hill, Griffin, Reggie Johnson, McCallum, Prime Tarver, Grant, Woods, Gonzalez, Hall, Del Valle, Harding rank over Hopkins MW resume and it isn't close, the LHW division was much more stacked and proven than the MW division at the time and the best MWs moved to LHW anyway

4. Lots of fights should have happened throughout, but lets focus the blame on Jones. Hopkins missed more fights than Jones, he wasn't that keen on facing Reggie Johnson who many thought beat Toney for 1 thing. McClellan and Grant was the WBO MW champ. Then lets ignore Hopkins turned down a very generous 60-40 for a Jones rematch and turned down the money he demanded to fight Calzaghe in 2002-3

Benn/Darius certainly missed a shedload more fights and Darius wouldn't fight Tarver. Benn is down as saying he wouldn't have beat Jones, as is Eubank and Calzaghe who called Jones unbeatable around 02

 

1. The Ring's only a magazine, in the past WBC/WBA were certainly carried much more weight, over the last decade or 2 they've lost their respectability though

2. 'Lost' hmmm in the most liberal sense of the word yes, but isn't this supposed to be about proving who's the best. Anyway Darius doesn't move to no2 to create lineage because Jones loses, because his resume pre-Hill is so **** poor plus he won against Rochiagani by play acting, if anyone moves to no2 it's Griffin, not DM

3. Well Jones beat loads of ranked opponents too so the point is moot. Hopkins beat ranked opponents in a weak division, he didn't beat as good opponents and he established himself as the best man after the better MWs left the division. He didn't risk establishing himself as the best of his era against Prime Jones Jr or Prime Calzaghe

4. Well that's the thing you've admitted to holding fights not happening against Jones, while not doing the same to the likes of Dempsey and others, there is a lack of consistancy there

 

I prefer Toney to Jones as a fighter and as a personality, but in all honesty I don't see a strong argument for him being ranked close to Roy, ATG wise. Jones is a top 40 fighter for me, Toney probably around top 80. Aside from how one-sided their fight was, and although it does pain me to say it a little, James was just too inconsistent throughout his career, he had that lull from around 97 to around 03, and achievement-wise he can't really hold a candle to Roy. In saying that, James's best wins/performances are easily as good as Roy's, if not better, IMO. But it's not enough.

 

Jones by a lot IMO. Lets compare wins:

Roy:
McCallum- Wide UD
Griffin- DQ loss, KO1
Thornton- KO3
Wolfe- TKO1
R. Johnson UD Shutout
G. Thomas TKO8
Sosa TKO2
Toney UD

 

Toney:
McCallum- MD, Draw, and MD loss
Griffin- MD, UD Loss
Thornton- UD (Wide, but competitive)
Wolfe- UD (Wide, but competitive)
R. Johnson SD
G. Thomas UD
Sosa SD
RJJ UD Loss

That may be inconclusive to some, but if you still are unsure, I suggest you watch some tapes.

 

Not really. Hopkins feasted on a lot of mid level guys who were his own size and smaller. Tarver is so overated its sickening. Both Jones and Toney went out and beat comparable opposition on a much more dangerous level. I saw Hopkins have some problems with guys like Allen and Echols, argueably the hardest punching guys he faced, but still not on the level of some of the LH, cruisers and heavies that Jones and Toney faced. Maybe Hopkins accomplished more at middleweight because he stayed there for a long time, but I dont think he comes close to Toney and Jones overall.

 

To be fair, Toney in the first two fights of the trilogy with Mccallum fought a better Mccallum than RJJ did. Toney also fought a better Reggie.

 

why? Jones beat Toney easily when they fought and both were prime and Toney has the excuse like most guys who lose have. Jones won the 175 pound title and had a long reign. Jones was more dominant and beat everyone he had to.

 

luc, don´t discuss anything Jones related with PP, he´ll twist anything around as much as he can to make Jones look as good as possible and isn´t really reading what you write anyway. Waste of time.

lh31, sorry but I disagree. Hopkins resume isn´t the strongest for sure. He has some excellent wins but most of his opposition was mediocre. But this isn´t as much different from Hagler and Monzon as you may think. Jones´ and Hopkins´ resumes are very similar, Jones jumped more through the weights while Hopkins staying at one until late in his career is the main difference. Their opposition is very comparable. Sorry, I don´t see the argument for Jones fighting more dangerous competition. Toney did. He fought better fighters than both. But he also lost to inferior ones. That´s why both are above him IMO. Hopkins and Jones are interchangable for me.
I prefer Hopkins due to him defying old age and the odds again and again. Jones was the fav in all but one fight - Toney if I remember right - Hopkins was the underdog in most of his big fights - Trinidad, Tarver, Pavlik, Calzaghe. And then, Jones was the gifted youngster, the one who everybody knew would ascend to greatness. Hopkins´ on the other hand never had those gifts, he had to work harder for achieving the same. That´s just more admirable IMO.