Roy Jones vs Leonard at 160lbs

For all the James Toney and Bernard Hopkins were very good fighters (Toney less so, but nonetheless) no-one, and I do mean no-one, who knows anything about boxing would rate them as better than Hearns, Duran and Hagler. No-one.

MTF

 

It's been said before and it bears repeating - Bernard Hopkins is probably the highest ATG rated fighter who gets the biggest pass for his entire MW reign. He basically lost to the only world-class middles he ever fought.

MTF

 

Hopkins and toney were better middleweights than a 35 year old duran

 

I was referring to prime versions of all. That was the context of Sly's original ramble.

MTF

 

They were both better middleweights than any version of Duran

 

Duran's prime clearly wasn't as a middleweight. Hence I said 'prime versions were better', not 'middleweight versions were better'.

MTF

 

Hopkins is a better fighter overall than Hearns, p4p. Hearns was a very good boxer and had fast hands, devastating power and was as exciting as they come! Win or lose he was usually in a fight!! But he was vulnerable of the chin and had decent but less than epic stamina. Hopkins had no real weakness and had incredible stamina, chin, ring smarts and versatility. Better fighter and still doesn't get his due respect. There's a reason why Hopkins was able to still be successful into his late 40s. He had extreme talent and intellect to depend on when he lost his speed and reflexes.

Hopkins was better than Hagler. Not as exciting but better. Marginally better but better.

Hopkins was also as dominant a middleweight as Duran was a lightweight.

James Toney was bloody talented also. I'd pick him to stop Hearns at 160 and p4p he's a pick'em with Duran in a scrap. Toney va Hagler at 160 is a close decision either way, Hagler wins 6 out of 10 times.

Essentially, by any objective measure Hopkins and Toney, in aggregation are within the ballpark of Hagler, Hearns and Duran at the very least.

Again, Jones dominated them without breaking much of a sweat. No way Leonard dominates either of them P4P or otherwise.

 

See. This is what I was arguing against.

MTF ::

 

Hopkins was not better than Hagler... It's fucking preposterous... Hagler's comp before he even won the title was miles better than Bernard's hideous opposition during his title reign... Hagler was more impressive against his better opposition than Hopkins was against his shitty competition... Hagler is clearly the greater middleweight

The biggest reason for Hopkins success into his 40s is the fucking talent-starved wasteland he was operating in, He's no Archie Moore

Hopkins was as dominant at Middleweight as Duran was at Lightweight? Crack kills. Put down the pipe. Actually, just skip that and kill yourself.

 

it's comical shit

 

I fucking guarantee that the Duran Hagler fought gives Hopkins fits... fucking FITS

 

Oh my God. Hopkins better than Hagler. Never been so glad I stopped posting about boxing.

 

Hopkins is undoubtedly better than Hagler, not much better, but undoubtedly better. If y'all can't see that then you don't know boxing.

 

Tito Trinidad fucks up than version of Duran at 160lbs.

You see , you guys operate on circular reasoning: Hagler struggled with Duran therefore Duran was ultra formidable at 160lbs therefore Hagler fought a great opponent in Duran.

Hagler had no business having a somewhat competitive fight with that short old blown up lightweight who already lost to guys at lower weights.

Tito would have wrecked him, not as early as Hearns did, but would have finished him off. Hopkinsnwould have boxed his ears off.

 

Hagler didn't struggle with Duran. I gave Duran 3 rounds I think.

 

Sorry.

 

I had it 11-4... He boxed great but basically took a nice subtle beating ... It's a tribute to his cleverness and chin that he went the distance

 

Hagler is clearly better.

 

Yep. Duran gave a good account of himself, but he lost by a wide margin.

 

Perfect example of a fight where a guy doesn't get killed as expected and winds up winning lots of undeserved credit from the judges

 

duran won the event

 

Hopkins has 'no real weakness'. Then how come RJJ basically shut him down? How come Jermaine Taylor, an afletic leap-amateur who got knocked out by Carl Froch, defeated him twice? How come Calzaghe showed he could be outworked and demoralised by inaccurate volume punching?

No 'real weaknesses' my hairy arse. You want to now what Middleweight Hopkins' real weakness was? His fucking paper thin resume.

MTF

 

'James Toney is better P4P than Roberto Duran and Tommy Hearns'.

This is what Sly has stooped to in an attempt to support his Floyd Mayweather nuthuggery.

MTF

 

Indefensible stuff

 

sly is mentally ill due to his pbf obsession. sick stuff. he used to be the same way with rjj. wonder who will be next? presumably, whoever manages to stay undefeated for a good while.

 

He's gone way farther with Floyd than he did with Jones, though... It's a new level... Sly basically reimagines all of boxing history in order to elevate pbf

 

Please tell me you didn't think I was agreeing with Sly. Hopkins was good but his competition is lacklustre.

Also Hagler over Duran 12 to 3. Breakdown here: http://fightbeat.com/forums/showthread.php?39603-Fight-Club-Volume-1-Marvin-Hagler-Vs-Roberto-Duran

No idea how people score that a close fight. Duran was gallant but soundly beaten.

 

Word... He showed his great skill, his guile and his toughness but he lost clearly