The fighters:
Hagler
Hopkins
Toney
McCallum


Judging criteria:
1: defence
2: offence
3: footwork

toney
hopkins
hagler
mccallum

Hopkins
Hagler
Toney
Mccallum

hopkins
toney
mccallum
hagler

Toney
McCallum
Hagler
Hopkins

Hopkins
McCallum
Hagler
Toney




Toney was nowhere near as versatile as the others.He always looked good against stationary targets,but any fighter who used lateral movement and gave him angles caused him great,great difficulty.



Too one dimensional to be compared to the others.

Toney was nowhere near as versatile as the others.He always looked good against stationary targets,but any fighter who used lateral movement and gave him angles caused him great,great difficulty.

would any of the other fighters move up and beat hollyfield?

Toney
Hopkins
McCallum
Hagler

would any of the other fighters move up and beat hollyfield?




If they bulked up accordingly,then yes,they would have dominated the walking corpse that Toney beat.


Holyfield was a shot fighter at the time he fought the fat man.

Hagler
Hopkins
Toney
McCallum

toney
hopkins
hagler
mccallum
I would say that defensively Toney is better than Hopkins. I'm not sure how to grade them in terms of offence, but I would class Hopkins's footwork as better than Toney's.

McCallum was great defensively as good as anyone on that list second maybe to Toney, better footwork than Toney. Maybe better offensively as well, he seemed to make the transition from counter puncher to lead puncher much better than Toney did.

Hagler was solid offensively, maybe the best on that list, solid footwork, maybe the best on the list and as good as Hopkins defensively

Toney fought flatfooted, so in terms on footwork I would rate him last, the best defensively, not to sure how to grade him in terms of offence. he tended to struggle if there were no opportunities for him to land the counter right

Maybe:
Hagler
McCallum
Toney
Hopkins?

Toney
McCallum
Hopkins
Hagler

Toney
McCallum
Hopkins
Hagler
Why do you rate Toney above Hagler?

Why do you rate Toney above Hagler?

In terms of boxing ability I think Toney was more complete. As far as who was greater its not even close.....Hagler all day.

In terms of boxing ability I think Toney was more complete. As far as who was greater its not even close.....Hagler all day.
In terms of ability:
Defense:Toney
Offense:Hagler
Footwork:Hagler

Thats how I see it

Hagler
Hopkins
Toney
McCallum


Judging criteria:
1: defence
2: offence
3: footwork

Oy vey. Gimme a sec.

I would say that defensively Toney is better than Hopkins. I'm not sure how to grade them in terms of offence, but I would class Hopkins's footwork as better than Toney's.

McCallum was great defensively as good as anyone on that list second maybe to Toney, better footwork than Toney. Maybe better offensively as well, he seemed to make the transition from counter puncher to lead puncher much better than Toney did.

Hagler was solid offensively, maybe the best on that list, solid footwork, maybe the best on the list and as good as Hopkins defensively

Toney fought flatfooted, so in terms on footwork I would rate him last, the best defensively, not to sure how to grade him in terms of offence. he tended to struggle if there were no opportunities for him to land the counter right

Maybe:
Hagler
McCallum
Toney
Hopkins?

toney isnt the most mobile out the group but he was still able to use his style effectively against much bigger and younger guys late in his career.if you compare these fighters in the last stages,their is a big change in thier performance,paticulary with hopkins

offensivley,mccallum was probly the most gifted,but really is behind hops and toney when it comes to defence.toney would let you fight your fight and still kick ass,while hops negated everything you did and fought a textbook style.mccallum and hagler were both prone to fighting the other guys fight.hagler was a good combo of both but he didnt push himself like others did.he retired to young

Oy vey. Gimme a sec.
Im having a hard time rating them as well

In terms of ability:
Defense:Toney
Offense:Hagler
Footwork:Hagler

Thats how I see it

I wouldn't argue with this, though I think they're pretty close in the footwork dept. Fighting flat footed doesn't mean you have bad footwork, only more subtle.

My biggest thing is the way Toney transitioned his offense and defense so smoothly. He was always in the right position.

i never thought hagler really had "good" footwork, i mean he got the job done, but you wouldnt teach someone the footwork of hagler if you were training them. just before he knocks out hearns his pretty much jogging accross the ring...buts thats why we all love him.

Defense: Hopkins - Barely ever gets hit clean, even in his younger more offensive days.

Offense: Hagler - Hagler can outbox and outslug and do it in both stances with power and fluidity.

Footwork: Hopkins - There are few boxers in history with better technique.

Hopkins
Hagler
Toney
McCallum

Extremely hard to accurately rate their boxing ability as these are all some of the most talented and skilled fighters ever.

Hopkins doesn't have the best talent, but clearly the best technique. He'll cut your output by a 3rd without ever throwing a punch. Feinting and footwork usually never get any shine, but he can do both and has boxing ability to spare.

Like I said before, Hagler can get on his toes and outbox or get flatfooted and outslug and do it in both stances with power and fluidity.

Toney might be the most talented out of the all 4. His speed, toughness, power, and chin combined with his accuracy, defense, and ring IQ allowed him to move up from middleweight and stay at heavyweight. Fighting and beating heavyweight contenders (although a weak division), not just a 1 off.

McCallum has one of the best chins ever, really good underrated defense and offense, and was pretty solid all around, so I find it hard to place him in last on any list. But this is a list of fighters with the best boxing ability ever, so there's really no shame in that.

Defense: Hopkins - Barely ever gets hit clean, even in his younger more offensive days.

Offense: Hagler - Hagler can outbox and outslug and do it in both stances with power and fluidity.

Footwork: Hopkins - There are few boxers in history with better technique.

Hopkins
Hagler
Toney
McCallum

Extremely hard to accurately rate their boxing ability as these are all some of the most talented and skilled fighters ever.

Hopkins doesn't have the best talent, but clearly the best technique. He'll cut your output by a 3rd without ever throwing a punch. Feinting and footwork usually never get any shine, but he can do both and has boxing ability to spare.

Like I said before, Hagler can get on his toes and outbox or get flatfooted and outslug and do it in both stances with power and fluidity.

Toney might be the most talented out of the all 4. His speed, toughness, power, and chin combined with his accuracy, defense, and ring IQ allowed him to move up from middleweight and stay at heavyweight. Fighting and beating heavyweight contenders (although a weak division), not just a 1 off.

McCallum has one of the best chins ever, really good underrated defense and offense, and was pretty solid all around, so I find it hard to place him in last on any list. But this is a list of fighters with the best boxing ability ever, so there's really no shame in that.
Excellent post

Why do you think Hopkins's footwork is better than Hagler's?

Excellent post

Why do you think Hopkins's footwork is better than Hagler's?

Because it's 1 of the main reasons he's been able to fight well into his 40s. His footwork was already great, but it's gotten even better while his output has gone down.

His lateral movement is better than Hagler's. He has great balance and is always getting into position to land his shots while not letting his opponents get set, let alone land a clean punch. Just look at what he does with his legs against Pavlik, Calzaghe, Trinidad, Tarver, etc. Thanks for the green btw.

Because it's 1 of the main reasons he's been able to fight well into his 40s. His footwork was already great, but it's gotten even better while his output has gone down.

His lateral movement is better than Hagler's. He has great balance and is always getting into position to land his shots while not letting his opponents get set, let alone land a clean punch. Just look at what he does with his legs against Pavlik, Calzaghe, Trinidad, Tarver, etc. Thanks for the green btw.
No problemo

Im going to have to watch some rounds with these guys fighting again, so I can make a better informed judgement

I do agree that Hopkins showed some nice footwork in the Pavlik and Tito fights, never going to watch any part of the Calzaghe-Hopkins fight though, lol

No problemo

Im going to have to watch some rounds with these guys fighting again, so I can make a better informed judgement

I do agree that Hopkins showed some nice footwork in the Pavlik and Tito fights, never going to watch any part of the Calzaghe-Hopkins fight though, lol

Lol, that fight could get anyone :sleeping: no doubt, but he did have his footwork on display in those fights. Trinidad and Pavlik are just as tall, if not taller than him and he disarmed both.

Boxing is a complex sport because even though Hopkins was so good defensively where he rarely ever got hit clean, he's not as good or comfortable as Toney was defensively on the inside. That's part of the reason why he holds.

I am re-watching a few of there fights myself :boxing:.

i never thought hagler really had "good" footwork, i mean he got the job done, but you wouldnt teach someone the footwork of hagler if you were training them. just before he knocks out hearns his pretty much jogging accross the ring...buts thats why we all love him.

Hagler had solid footwork. He used the ring pretty well when he'd move laterally or on the backfoot, and then would stop and unleash punches at the right time. Sometimes he'd be moving laterally and then stop and leap forward with a punishing jab at the perfect time, which requires good footwork and times.

When fighting in a more aggressive manner, midway through the round Hearns was boxing in the middle of the ring, but Hagler was able to cut him off and corner him. That's really all you can ask for in that situation.

Defense:

1) Hopkins
2) Toney
3) McCallum
4) Hagler

I thought both Hagler and McCallum had pretty good defense though. Hagler for most of his career had good head movement and parrying skills, and McCallum had some little slick moves in there to slip shots or avoid the full impact.

While I have Hopkins first, I'd also like to point out that styles comes into play. Hopkins uses much more movement than Toney which results in him getting hit less. He's also more inclined to hold or use his head as a third fist on the inside than Toney.

Offense:

1) Hagler
2) McCallum
3) Toney
4) Hopkins

Tough choice as all 4 of them had pretty complete arsenals. Hopkins often gets a bad rap because of the more boring and defensive style he adapted as he got older, but in his younger days he had a good offense. Just not quite as good as the others. The reason I had Hagler first is that we've seen him be so effective offensively in a variety of ways, often in the same fight. For instance, against Mugabi, he jabbed Mugabi silly all night from the outside. In rounds like 6 and I think the 9th, he ****ed up Mugabi on the inside with shots upstairs and downstairs.


Footwork:

1) Hopkins
2) Hagler
3) Toney
4) McCallum


Again, not the most easy choice. I went with Hopkins first because he so often puts himself in the perfect position. It seems like he knows every square inch of that ring and exactly where to put his feet. Hagler was more mobile than Toney & McCallum, and also showed some solid ring-cutting abilities, so I have him second. Toney is less mobile but knows where to plant his feet to get the ring angles. McCallum is not bad with footwork either, I just have him behind the others.

I don't know how I'd rank them overall but if we're just going by rankings in these three categories, it would go:

1) Hopkins- 6 (two 1s and a 4)
2) Hagler- 7 (a 1, 2, and a 4)
3) Toney- 8 (a 2 and two 3s)
4) McCallum 9 (a 3, 2, and a 4)

Defense:

1) Hopkins
2) Toney
3) McCallum
4) Hagler

I thought both Hagler and McCallum had pretty good defense though. Hagler for most of his career had good head movement and parrying skills, and McCallum had some little slick moves in there to slip shots or avoid the full impact.

While I have Hopkins first, I'd also like to point out that styles comes into play. Hopkins uses much more movement than Toney which results in him getting hit less. He's also more inclined to hold or use his head as a third fist on the inside than Toney.

Offense:

1) Hagler
2) McCallum
3) Toney
4) Hopkins

Tough choice as all 4 of them had pretty complete arsenals. Hopkins often gets a bad rap because of the more boring and defensive style he adapted as he got older, but in his younger days he had a good offense. Just not quite as good as the others. The reason I had Hagler first is that we've seen him be so effective offensively in a variety of ways, often in the same fight. For instance, against Mugabi, he jabbed Mugabi silly all night from the outside. In rounds like 6 and I think the 9th, he ****ed up Mugabi on the inside with shots upstairs and downstairs.


Footwork:

1) Hopkins
2) Hagler
3) Toney
4) McCallum


Again, not the most easy choice. I went with Hopkins first because he so often puts himself in the perfect position. It seems like he knows every square inch of that ring and exactly where to put his feet. Hagler was more mobile than Toney & McCallum, and also showed some solid ring-cutting abilities, so I have him second. Toney is less mobile but knows where to plant his feet to get the ring angles. McCallum is not bad with footwork either, I just have him behind the others.

I don't know how I'd rank them overall but if we're just going by rankings in these three categories, it would go:

1) Hopkins- 6 (two 1s and a 4)
2) Hagler- 7 (a 1, 2, and a 4)
3) Toney- 8 (a 2 and two 3s)
4) McCallum 9 (a 3, 2, and a 4)
Thanks for the breakdown, great post

Hopkins
Hagler
Toney
McCallum


1) Hopkins- 6 (two 1s and a 4)
2) Hagler- 7 (a 1, 2, and a 4)
3) Toney- 8 (a 2 and two 3s)
4) McCallum 9 (a 3, 2, and a 4)
I see you guys have both reached the same conclusion, thanks too everyone who contributed to this thread as well

toney isnt the most mobile out the group but he was still able to use his style effectively against much bigger and younger guys late in his career.if you compare these fighters in the last stages,their is a big change in thier performance,paticulary with hopkins

Good point, I watched Toney-Holyfield the other day, Toney's use of angles and ability to close the gap were really impressive