How great is Bernard Hopkins?

Discussion in 'Boxing News and Discussion' started by Rebel, Dec 22, 2010.

  1. The Hitman

    The Hitman Hitman

    I don't think anyone in this thread is arguing at all that Ruiz was the champion. It's a matter of Jones moving up and beating a very credible heavyweight, and how much credit do you think he should get for doing this? And also debating it's historical relevance and it's merits vs. wins that Hopkins has on his own resume.
  2. Valentino

    Valentino Member

    Jones did what MANY fighters have done throughout history...beat mediocre Hwys...regardless of size differential. Considering RJJ career greater than Hopkins is laughable at best...pretty pathetic at worst.
  3. witton_lane

    witton_lane Boxing Fanatics All-Time Great

    I never said it was. Having said that, Spinks did get Holmes at the optimum time and on many peoples cards, lost the fight.

    I think Holmes was either 35 or 36 when he fought Spinks. Name me any MEANINGFUL Klitschko opponent that has been younger than that and I'll send you a bun.
  4. TysonFan

    TysonFan Sensei

    I never said you did. Spink was a 8-1 underdog. Holmes was 48-0 one win away from Marciano's record. I do see your point though that Spinks did catch Holmes at the tail end. Although that didn't seem to matter at what the oddsmakers thought. Spinks won regardless.
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2011
  5. witton_lane

    witton_lane Boxing Fanatics All-Time Great

    Yet Jones started his career at 154, Hopkins started his career at 175....and only Jones has dared to venture up to HW, and he beat the living shit out of Bernard when it mattered :slap:

    Yeah, I'm retarded and I consider Hopkins P4P to be the best of the 2.....:24:

    Unbelievable hate. You give Hopkins kudos for beating a blown up guys like Trinidad and DLH yet hate on Jones for beating guys that were bigger than him his whole career, and then go on to give Hopkins credit for beating shells of fighters in his later years. It's sickening, it really is.

    You can hate on Jones because he got old, just like Sugar Ray....but there's no denying how damn good the man was in his prime. He barely lost rounds, never mind fights. Can you say the same about Bernard? Nope.....didn't think so.
  6. witton_lane

    witton_lane Boxing Fanatics All-Time Great

    So you basically agree with me then? All good my friend :thumb:
  7. TysonFan

    TysonFan Sensei

    You make a good case for Jones Jr. No doubt about it. IMO I think both Hopkins and Jones Jr. are at least equal. Don't think one is better than the other even though I like Hopkins better. Think it's pretty much a stalemate.
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2011
  8. Rebel

    Rebel Admin

    It's definitely not a stalemate. Hopkins is the greater fighter. Period.

    Hopkins holds the all-time record for defenses at middleweight.

    Hopkins holds a victory over RJJ's father.

    Hopkins has had unreal longevity.

    Hopkins has been able to come back from losses, unlike RJJ, whose career totally crumbled after one convincing loss.

    Hopkins > RJJ
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2011
  9. TysonFan

    TysonFan Sensei

    I guess you don't buy the Roy beat Hopkins with one hand. Neither do I
  10. Ringside

    Ringside Retiree

    Agreed. I did not read this thread cause it is obvious...Ringo
  11. Jack1000

    Jack1000 Boxing Fanatic

    Me neither,

    The fight was close. Closer and more competitive than many remember. Jones comes out as the better athlete. But Hopkins comes out as the better fighter.

  12. Administrator Staff Member

    Stop rewriting history Jack! Jones Jr. just about white washed Hopkins with only one good hand after playing basketball for 7 days straight. In fact, objective folks only had Hopkins winning 1 round in that fight, but it doesn't count because he won that round after Jones Jr. injured his hand. Roid for President!
  13. Jack1000

    Jack1000 Boxing Fanatic

    LOL!!!! I want Hopkins for President! Well.........actually Manny! But this thread is about "How Great is Hopkins?" and my answer has to be a "damn good fighter." You just can't discount his competitiveness at his age. And the fact that he still has the ability to fight well at his age. I have not seen that type of a Geezer's Run of success since Foreman's second comeback.

    Yes, Big George's KO win over Moorer is still a bigger upset than any type of upset Hopkins had. (Although his dismantling of Trinidad was amazing.) But like Foreman's comeback, there is no doubt at least that Hopkins in terms of competitiveness and still looking good in fights, is that TYPE of fighter.

    Roy is now shot. He can't do what Bernard has done, because his body at this stage of the game won't let him. Hopkins' body has not really shown that kind of wear out that Roy's has. I think Bernard's a tougher fighter. Roy beat him the first time because of his better faïence and ring generalship. Hopkins was still pretty green back than. But Roy's safety first attitude in not fighting big punchers for fear of getting hurt, has always hurt his greatness. And maybe yes, he COULD have beaten Gerald Mcclellan, Nigel Benn, Chris Eubank. and a prime Mike McCallum, (whom I thought never got the respect he was due.) But because Roy never fought those guys, other than a faded McCallum, we never saw the best of Roy, or at least what Roy could have done.

    Roy Jones made a career out of hand picked opposition and will aways face criticism for that. Could you see Hagler, Lamotta, or Robinson doing that, (to whom Jones is often compared?) I can't either-case closed.

  14. The Hitman

    The Hitman Hitman

    and Big George had 10 years away from boxing. makes Hopkins run even more impressive.

    the only real case i see for ranking jones ahead of him is a fantasy "I think at his best he beats him head to head" argument (again based on "what-if" logic) and the ludicrous glorification of John Ruiz. Pretty flimsy
  15. witton_lane

    witton_lane Boxing Fanatics All-Time Great

    That's just nonsense.

    Who was the better fighter out of Hagler and Leonard? Duran and Leonard? Hagler and Duran?

    Think about it.....Jones and Hopkins met while both were close to prime, Jones won easily. They met again years later when Jones was shot, no significance. It's like saying Holmes was actually better than Ali.
  16. witton_lane

    witton_lane Boxing Fanatics All-Time Great

    Why does it?
  17. Jack1000

    Jack1000 Boxing Fanatic

    I don't think that Bernard was in prime years in the first fight with Jones. I think he still had a couple of years to go before he was prime.

    It's funny with these threads, cuz as some have already pointed out, everytime the greatness of Hopkins comes up, Jones is always thrown into the mix! LOL!

    And how can people dismiss the fact that Jones was KTFO but Tarver, Johnson, and Danny Green! I mean, sure obviously Roy got the third fight with Tarver and was certainly shot against Green. But the point is, Hopkins has not been KO'd senseless like Jones has. And sorry, but as Bernard and Roy are both active fighters, and as long as they generate good discussion, you can't just dismiss those KO losses. Those have to still be negatives. Roy was old, Roy was shot, it still matters that Roy was KO'd brutally, and Bernard hasn't been.

    No Jones fans can dispute that. They say, Roy was shot. But just because Roy was shot, the KO's still have to count against him. They happened, and they have to be accessed when discussing any fighters career. All the fights that are a composite of a fighter's career are a reflection of his successes, failures, and controversies. No boxing purist can just take a fight result that he didn't like, and sweep it under the rug, and pretend like it never happened. Jones KO losses cannot be minimized because Roy was too old. The age excuse may work for some. But I am not one of them.

    Last edited: Jan 7, 2011
  18. mikE

    mikE Member

    Bernard has accomplished a lot, perhaps more than Roy, but there is a reason that Roy was rated P4P #1 for about a decade and Bernard has been rated P4P #1 about never.
  19. Rebel

    Rebel Admin

    People are more impressed by flash than substance. In this case, "flash" made a living handpicking his opposition to further fool the public.

    I won't deny RJJ is one of the greatest talents I've ever seen. My problem with him has always been several things.

    1. He consistently faced more fodder than quality fighters during his prime, thus giving the impression he was an invincible super human.

    2. His fall from the top was extremely devastating. It's one of the most historic falls of all-time. He went from being considered the best in boxing to shot overnight all courtesy of one punch.

    3. Some of the greatest fighters have shown flashes of greatness once their prime talent has significantly faded (Ali & Duran yesterday. JMM and Hopkins today). RJJ has morphed into a journeyman since the Tarver KO loss.
  20. witton_lane

    witton_lane Boxing Fanatics All-Time Great

    Do you think Jones was prime in that fight too? He was a few years away from peak himself, but it's still the best indication we have as to who was the better fighter, and Jones owned him.

Share This Page