James Toney vs. Bernard Hopkins.

Which Hopkins are we talking about here? The MW Hopkins was more aggressive and traded punches frequently, which would make Toney the favorite. A seasoned post-Tito Hopkins would be more cautious and bore us to a 12 rd decision win.

 

The ONLY Guy to Ever LUNGE @ James Toney w/Any Degree of Success was a YOUNG Roy Jones...NO Version of Bernard Hopkins, that EVER Existed, Approaches Young Roy's ATHLETIC Prowess OR LUNGES @ James Toney for 12 Rounds & WINS...

If Bernard LUNGES 1nce or 2wice, he Eventually Gets Met w/UPPERCUTS on his Way In...




REED:hammert:

 

Hopkins doesn't lunge in anything remotely like Roy. He does it "cheaply" by covering the bases and wading in to feign aggression. It makes it sometimes appear like the opponent is the one doing the clinching. Then he acts annoyed like he wanted to fight but the other guy is negating the action! :shit: . It's a hybrid of Camacho and Ruiz tactics.

 

Yeah, but Hopkins understood that too, and even in his prime he was a very economic fighter. That's not good for Toney. I agree that if they fought 10 times, I could easily see each one winning 5, all close decisions.

 

Michael Nunn was ahead by miles when he got stupid and started overcommitting to offense, planting his feet... that is what enabled Toney to start having success and eventually turn the tables... Had Nunn not been a moron, he wins that fight by a good 6 points

 

Hopkins was far more intelligent than Nunn, more versatile and tougher... He was a better fighter

 

Toney's body attack had something to do with Nunn's feet planting.

I'll say again, this is a very close fight if we're talking about the Toney from the first McCallum fight. Toney was robbed in that fight as far as I'm concerned. He beat McCallum close, but clear that night.

 

I disagree... I think it was a neglible factor at best

The rest I agree with... I think Toney won that fight as well and I have never said this wouldn't be close

 

David Tiberi vs the second market....who wins?