Who should be rated higher Hopkins or Jones?

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 25 Jul 2007, 11:33

Who deserves the higher ranking for their ability and accomplishments?

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 25 Jul 2007, 13:07

Good question Ezzard. On there best night ever I'd take Roy Jones Jr in a heartbeat, BUT for complete careers I'd rate Bernard Hopkins higher. Therefore if I was voting for HOF induction Hopkins would come first.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 25 Jul 2007, 14:13

'on their best night ever' - and the rub is that what Jones had was athleticism, and Hopkins had and has, undoubted skill - one of them fades A LOT quicker than the other.... If you had a rematch now Hopkins would win hands down

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 25 Jul 2007, 15:47

Jones, but just. He won their fight, and as already stated at his best he was better than BHop, and almost unbeatable. Hopkins best wins were predominantly over smaller guys, Jones beat the best two MWs/SMs of his era in Hopkins and Toney, and beat Ruiz. Both feasted on plenty of muppets as well. Hopkins does score on longevity though, and hed have won a re-match in the last few years.

Borinken25 · Post by **Borinken25** » 25 Jul 2007, 17:44

I would hesitate to rate Hopkins ahead of Jones Jr. at any weight class. Granted Hopkins accomplished a lot more at middleweight, but still he lost to Jones Jr. at that weight. Who was the better all around fighter? Roy Jones Jr. is the better fighter.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 25 Jul 2007, 19:09

Hopkins is my favorite fighter today, and I only partially like Jones, but I would say Jones. Not by that much, but I would give Jones the edge. Hopkins has 20 Middleweight title defenses, but Jones has 6 Super Middleweight defenses and 10 Light Heavyweight defenses so its not that huge a difference to me. Hopkins edges Jones in defenses, Jones edges Hopkins in titles won. Jones' wins over a green Hopkins and over Toney were better than Hopkins' wins over Tito, Oscar and Wright. Jones' win over Ruiz is better than Hopkins' win over Tarver. Jones lost to Tarver, but I acount that to age and weight drain, same with Hopkins' losses to Taylor... though I felt Hopkins deserved those decisions. Hopkins has more longevity, though, he was able to come off those questionable losses and beat two (at the time) top 10 P4P fighters in Tarver and Wright, while Jones coming off his losses to Tarver and Johnson has become something of a side show. So longevity definitely goes to Hopkins. But still, Jones himself was the best fighter in the world for a very long time, so its not like Jones didn't have any longevity. Jones was great for his first 13 or so years, Hopkins was great for his last 13 or so years.

I would say their rankings should be close, I would only rank Jones ahead of Hopkins by one or two slots, but in the end I would still go with Jones.

Hopkins has to be ahead of Jones at Middleweight, though, to say otherwise is crazy. Hopkins to me is #5 at Middleweight all time, Jones only had two championship fights there, the fact that one of those wins was over Hopkins isn't enough to put him ahead of Hopkins at that weight class.

Borinken25 · Post by **Borinken25** » 25 Jul 2007, 20:50

Decagon wrote:
Borinken25 wrote:I would hesitate to rate Hopkins ahead of Jones Jr. at any weight class. Granted Hopkins accomplished a lot more at middleweight, but still he lost to Jones Jr. at that weight. Who was the better all around fighter? Roy Jones Jr. is the better fighter.
Chavez lost to Frankie Randall. Would you rank Randall ahead of Chavez at 140?

Those are two totally different scenarios. Randall was an overall average fighter and Roy Jones Jr on the other hand is an elite fighter at any weight class. Randall was not an elite fighter at any weight class.

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 25 Jul 2007, 21:53

Bernard Hopkins, in my opinion, should be rated higher than Jones.

Why?

#1- Like Jones did at LHW, Hopkins cleaned out the entire MW division. 20+ title defenses irregardless if most were against men who had no prayer to win (same as Jones he never defended the LHW title really against anyone who was any good at all or to begin with) is nothing to sneeze at whatsoever. Hopkins is in a class that has only three other men: Calzaghe, Holmes and Louis, at least when it comes to title defenses.

And mind you, wasn't until he was 40 that he lost the crown! I can't really name any fighter outside of George Foreman who had such a ridiculously high success rate at such an advanced age for a fighter. Hopkins longetivity should be #2 on this list. Let's look at it this way; Jones who vanquished Hopkins (very close fight) is all washed up and has been after fighting Ruiz, Toney has more or less devolved back into the mindset that he can get as fat as he wants and still make a million dollars (in short he's washed up also)...and it's still Hopkins whose a main player on the world wide boxing scene.

#3- His accomplishments above MW are just as impressive as Jones' one night HW cock tease. Here was Hopkins, supposedly all 'too old' and 'over the hill' and he makes the move to LHW against Antonio Tarver who arguably won all three of his fights with Jones (the first was given to Jones but was controversial, the second was a KO win for Tarver and the third was an easy decision win for Tarver). We all said he was crazy and would lose, that he had no chance. But what happens? Not only does Hopkins win, he wins EASILY. Tarver would have had better chances spitting into the wind and eluding the spit wad when it came back. THEN, Hopkins takes on Winky Wright and we all said the same thing again...but then Hopkins wins EASILY again.

The difference between what Jones did at HW and what Hopkins is doing at LHW is that Jones fought a man who was a solid top ten guy with a trinket title belt, but was certainly no Lennox Lewis---Hopkins more or less fought the Lennox Lewis of the LHW division and then defeated the Wladimir Klitschko (Wright) of the LHW division!

And Hopkins wants Joe Calzaghe now. If Hopkins beats Calzaghe, not only would it mean that Hopkins beat possibly the greatest Super Middleweight in history, it would also show that between MW and LHW, there probably is no better fighter in the last 50 years who has jumped back and forth between those three weight classes---save possibly one: Sugar Ray Robinson, and Robinson never won the LHW title, though he challenged for it against Joe Maxim.

The thing with Jones, that holds him back, least in my mind, is that UNLIKE Hopkins, Jones was mostly about money and hype, rather accepting $10 million dollars to fight two bums such as Ricky Frazier and David Telesco, rather than fight anyone worth anything for less money. Jones didn't give a shit about his legacy, all he cared about was knocking out some hapless third or second tier opponent, collect his millions and then spout off at the mouth that he was 'the greatest of all time'.

Not to say Hopkins didn't fight bums, but then again, who really was there for Hopkins to fight and defend the title against that he already hadn't already defeated? By the time someone new came around (Jermain Taylor) Hopkins was 40 yrs old and done had 20 some championship fights. Not to really make excuses, but there is such things as being the victim of your own dominance---Joe Louis faced the same problems, hence the infamous 'bum of the month' era.

So, therefore, I place Bernard Hopkins well ahead of Roy Jones, Jr.

Marlin · Post by **Marlin** » 26 Jul 2007, 01:29

Roy Jones Jr pretty comfortably. Champion from middle to heavyweight and pretty much dominated everyone he fought (pre Tarver). Plus he has a win over Hopkins (the fact it was early in their careers doesn't matter).

B-Hop is right up there but in an all time accomplishment/ability sense Roy Jones Jr is ahead of him.

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 26 Jul 2007, 01:52

All I was meaning Decagon is that Hopkins fought the NUMBER ONE guy at LHW, while Jones fought a HW who was top ten material, yes, but certainly was no HW champion in anyone's mind, WBA strap or not. Ruiz was the worst possible HW Jones could have fought, and even then still had special treatment in that fight against The Huggy Bear.

And I'm tired of this weight gain BS. It's all an excuse. Sure you could pass that off on the first Tarver fight, but the second, third and the Johnson fight? Come on now! I never heard Jake LaMotta ever blame weight gains or losses for his losses in the ring, and that man lost and gained back probably 10,000 pounds through out his career.

It's Hopkins who turned out the better performances in a more advanced age, not Jones. It's Hopkins whose still a main player in the sport, not Jones. It's Hopkins who was more impressive at MW than Jones was at LHW. Jones might have been faster and had the bigger mouth (dont see how being a big blow hole makes you entertaining but w/e), but it's Hopkins who had the heart, longetivity, perseverance and skills to still be a P4P world class fighter in his early to mid 40's and solidified himself as one of the ATG division jumpers.

I mean come on now, Billy Conn beat better LHW's and HW's than Jones did against Ruiz, yet I don't hear people talk up Billy Conn as much as Jones. Archie Moore fought the best MW's, LHW's and HW's of his time, yet Jones is somehow magically better or just as impressive---Jones side stepped alot of opponents either for money, BS about never fighting in Europe or like I said earlier, being a dick tease to the sport.

Like one boxing article once said, Jones might have the skills to have been something, but if he had the chance to fight Moore, Conn, Charles and Foster he wouldn't. He's the most over-rated fighter I have ever seen in my life. He's a man who could have been, but chose not to, despite having all the skills and all the attention.

Boxing ain't based on what if's but by records, and Hopkins is clearly done more for his legacy than Jones ever did. Period.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 26 Jul 2007, 02:13

Hopkins is not a top 5 MW of all time. Come'on get real.......

And Jones beat Hopkins handly, and Hopkins admits to it. So it is pretty obvious who is better than who.

HomicideHenry · Post by **HomicideHenry** » 26 Jul 2007, 02:21

never said he was a top 5 MW....and as for ur logic that Jones beat him, true, but it was rather close. BUT, I bet if the rematch happened now, it would be Hopkins, not Jones, who would win it. Jones is washed up piece of shit right now, and Hopkins would knock him out just like Tarver did.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 26 Jul 2007, 03:08

Hopkins really isn't that good. His style is he has no style. Marvin Hagler would have killed him, and we know how I feel about Hagler's abilities. Hearns would have beaten him at MW, Jones did beat him easily. Monzon would have killed him. Lamotta beats him. SRL at MW would have beaten him. SRR beats him, and so do most of the MW of the 50's who were trading the MW title. I think even a fat Duran would wax him at MW. Hopkins fought a lot of nobodies who nobody ever heard of at MW even though they were the top somebodys of the MW division at the time.....they weren't that good.

Neither is Hopkins.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 26 Jul 2007, 03:47

I actually think it's very close. They are/were both great fighters but are both overrated but that's the way with active fighters.

Jones beat Hopkins fair and square but Hopkins is a thinker and rematches would have got closer and closer.

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 26 Jul 2007, 04:01

On the face of it it's pretty close although on closer inspection of their opponents, accomplishments and careers, Jones leaves Hopkins in his wake

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 26 Jul 2007, 06:17

ringsider wrote:Hopkins is not a top 5 MW of all time. Come'on get real.......

To quote Robert Ebert "I'm comfortable with your opinion, and I won't even tell you where you can stick it."

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 26 Jul 2007, 06:24

I Feel Fine wrote:
ringsider wrote:Hopkins is not a top 5 MW of all time. Come'on get real.......
To quote Robert Ebert "I'm comfortable with your opinion, and I won't even tell you where you can stick it."

Fine

5 seems a bit too high for me but he is a great one. What does your MW top 10 look like?

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 26 Jul 2007, 09:31

So then Decagon you are saying because Bruce Lee, a movie actor who never fought inside a ring in a real full contact fight said the same thing, that somehow makes Hopkins a great one? Well then I guess Rocky Balboa is really a heavyweight champion then.......and here all this time I thought the movies were just movies.

JCS · Post by **JCS** » 26 Jul 2007, 09:40

Jones probably had a slight edge, but in the long run, having Wright on Hopkins' ledger as a win really makes it close, if not tied.

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 26 Jul 2007, 09:48

Hopkins over Roy.

Hopkins win over Tarver is akin to Jones's over Ruiz.

Come on, Hopkins couldn't have moved up and beat Ruiz also??

And Bernard and Jones both ruled over fairly weak divisions, but Hopkin's opponents (Eastman, Oscar, Vanderpool, Johnson, Taylor, Trinidad) were a little better than Jones's opponents in his light HW wins (washed up McCallum, Williams, Hill, Woods) Jones does get points up for his close win over Hopkins and a weight drained Toney.

But here is the BIG DIFFFERENCE.

Both were dominant. But when they got past their prime and they could no longer be so physically dominant over their opponents, and they finally have to pull from their skill-set and heart to beat opponents, what happens?

Bernard beats Eastman, Oscar, and loses two highly controversial fights to Taylor, goes up and beats Tarver, then beats Winky Wright.

Jones Jr wins a close fight vs Tarver, than gets STARCHED by Tarver and Glen Johnson (both whom Hopkins dominated), beaten by Tarver again, and then goes to the bottom depths of the lower Mississippi to face no-name opponents on bad PPVs.

THAT is why Hopkins is the greater fighter and better in an all-time sense.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 26 Jul 2007, 15:25

How can you be greater than a man who beat you soundly at what you are supposed to be great at?

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 26 Jul 2007, 15:40

Everything that happens after a fighters' prime is to be ignored when discussing them in this context

I'm stunned that some think that Hopkins was a better fighter and / or achieved more in his career

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 26 Jul 2007, 15:50

Are either of these guys boxers of the past?
Anyway, this is a tough call. The head to head fight was way before Hopkins became the fighter that he would eventually be.

Hopkins was a late bloomer. He had a draw with the legendary Segundo Mercado after he lost to Jones. It would be about 4 years after the Jones fight before Hopkins would gradually reached his best.

Jones dominated an incredibly weak lightheavyweight division (except for Michalczewski) for several years.
Hopkins was the champion of the almost as weak middleweight division for even longer.

I used to give Jones a slight edge because at least he had beaten Toney. However, since Hopkins has beaten Tarver and Wright, it's about even.

jimmy the gent · Post by **jimmy the gent** » 26 Jul 2007, 16:24

Hopkins is one of the greatest fighters to ever grace the middleweight division, but a greater fighter than jones, come on.
we are talking about a man that was untouchable(and i dont care who he fought) for 15 years, hardly getting touched, and who picked up seven world titles in four weight divisions including the big one. now you can say whatever you want about the quality of opposition at heavyweight but i don't see anyone else taking the risk to pick up the most lucrative prize in world sport in a straight one off fight at that weight.

markl · Post by **markl** » 26 Jul 2007, 17:18

I Feel Fine wrote:Hopkins is my favorite fighter today, and I only partially like Jones, but I would say Jones. Not by that much, but I would give Jones the edge. Hopkins has 20 Middleweight title defenses, but Jones has 6 Super Middleweight defenses and 10 Light Heavyweight defenses so its not that huge a difference to me. Hopkins edges Jones in defenses, Jones edges Hopkins in titles won. Jones' wins over a green Hopkins and over Toney were better than Hopkins' wins over Tito, Oscar and Wright. Jones' win over Ruiz is better than Hopkins' win over Tarver. Jones lost to Tarver, but I acount that to age and weight drain, same with Hopkins' losses to Taylor... though I felt Hopkins deserved those decisions. Hopkins has more longevity, though, he was able to come off those questionable losses and beat two (at the time) top 10 P4P fighters in Tarver and Wright, while Jones coming off his losses to Tarver and Johnson has become something of a side show. So longevity definitely goes to Hopkins. But still, Jones himself was the best fighter in the world for a very long time, so its not like Jones didn't have any longevity. Jones was great for his first 13 or so years, Hopkins was great for his last 13 or so years.

I would say their rankings should be close, I would only rank Jones ahead of Hopkins by one or two slots, but in the end I would still go with Jones.

Hopkins has to be ahead of Jones at Middleweight, though, to say otherwise is crazy. Hopkins to me is #5 at Middleweight all time, Jones only had two championship fights there, the fact that one of those wins was over Hopkins isn't enough to put him ahead of Hopkins at that weight class.

I agree with all of this. Except for Hops being my favorite fighter.

1.Hagler
2. Greb
3. Monzon
4. SRR
5. Hopkins