Who's greater all time? Bhop or RJJ?

Aren't you long enough in here to know how to make polls public ?

 

As a fan of 2 legend. I say RJJ. Cause his prime.

 

Jones Jr.

 

When 1 was 28 and the other 24 but yea yea the 28yo hadn't figured out how to throw a punch yet and he'd be much better past his physical prime and for some reason looked better against Robert Allen than he did against Jones, I mean its not like Allen was any a worse opponent was it?

 

Sooo, desperate ...

 

Jones beat a young green Hopkins - Hopkins beat an old Jones

Pretty much evens itself out

Why is Jones given so much credit for beating Ruiz - a very ordinary fighter
Is it due to the fact that Jones was at a handicap in that fight due to his naturally smaller build?
If that passes as part of the criteria then Hopkins should be given massive kudo's for every fight he had over 40, because he was severely handicapped age wise, something he had no control over.

 

Meh, though I know he got a late start, Hopkins is a few years older than Jones and both had the same number of pro fights when they first fought. If Hopkins was a bit green, so was Jones. They sure were a hell of a lot closer to their primes that time than the next. And don't let the Pascal fight fool you, Hopkins is and has been well on the decline. Pascal is just custom-made and tailored to his strengths.

 

Jones had a ton of international amateur experience though. I know Im gonna hear that amateur and pro are two different beasts, but just look at the success rate for Olympians in comparison to some guy off the street, or just out of prison.

 

I is aware... and yeah, they are two different worlds.

 

60-40 Jones Jr.

Y'ALL MUST'VE FORGOT

 

Depends what you like.

A Middle/LightHeavyweight beating Light Heavy and Heavyweights.

Or a Middle/LightHeavyweight beating Lightweights and Welterweights.

 

:tired

 

Hypothetical H2H aren't measurable. Therefore determining all-time greatness based on H2H makes zero sense. Jones beating Hopkins means that Jones's had the style to beat Hopkins. It doesn't necessarily mean that he was greater than Hopkins.

I think prime Jones would whip any version of Hopkins all week and twice on Tuesday... but I'm just as convinced that Angott would whip Pep again and again too. Angott ain't near Pep on a greatness list. You see the point.

 

Damn right. Hopkins was damn good when he first faced Jones and was not "green." There seems to be some revisionism going on about Bernard in the boxing world -it says that he more or less hit prime with Trinidad. It ain't so.

Hopkins is devolving into a mauler with tricks; though that is enough to beat most of what's out there.

 

this is a good point but it goes to the heart of the question: what does greater mean? i certainly see a case for ranking hopkins above jones based on what he's achieved. but hopkins never was and will ever be as good as jones to me.

all hypothetical as noted but for me: you take the best 20 middleweights, supermiddles, and lightheavies against jones and hopkins, jones beats more of them than does hopkins in their prime.

greatness is a tough concept to define