(Corrected Poll) Would BHOP and ROY go through Calzaghe's record undefeated?!?

now kess took joe very close as mentioned before with a less than perfect training camp but alot of people still refuse to recognize his status as being a legitimate contender for a top 10 p4p fighter slot. if kess were to fight hopkins tomorrow - it would be one of hopkins harder fights. alot harder than fighting good but over rated fighters like tito and pavlik for sure, kess would probably be one of the strongest and most powerful fighters that bhop has been in a ring with. I was at the fight and it was close through six with a nice late surge from Mikkel. Losing to a great fighter is okay, and Joe will be the gold standard for 168 lb. champs as long as the division exists. Kessler is still no worse than one the world's best from 11-20. Not sure if Kess beats the Hopkins of a week ago but he presents different puzzles and does a hell of a lot better than Pavlik. I told the guys in the press room before Pavlik-Taylor I that Kess or Cal beats both handily and still stand by it. As another note, Hopkins plied his trade for years dogged by a single loss. Tons of people said 'elite fighter' but the mainstream of Boxing fans resisted because he'd 'only' lost to Roy. It was wrong then too...and think, if Tito had skipped Hopkins and goine for the Roy $-fight, where would Hopkins be? Still questioned. Kessler will, eventually, get another big fight and we'll see.

Kessler is closer to the elite level than average for certain, but you don't seem to understand what I am saying. I will try to break it down for you. Kessler has been impressive in running through all but one of the top fighters at 168. The likes of Mundine, Siaca, Lucas, Beyer, Andrade are solid fighters. Not top class, but solid. Sure he looked good, however he has only been in the ring with a top class figher once, and he was comprehensively outclassed. You commented, "Kessler performed better against Joe than some elite fighters like Tito or Winky did with BHop and no one questioned their place as elite fighters". Do you see how this is a ridiculous thing to say? YOu are basically implying that to question Kessler's place as an elite fighter after losing a competitve fight to Calzaghe is akin to questioning the status of Trinidad or Wright after their losses to BHop. You are basically disrgarding the level of competition they have faced and beaten. Kessler's best wins are against B+ fighters whilst Tito and Wright have beaten certified HOFers. DO you understand this? I know what you're saying, but I think people put sometimes just a little (not a lot) too much stock in names without looking at context. The only HOFers Wright beat were Tito, one fight off a long retirement, and Mosley at the end of the worst run of his career (from Forrest I through Winky). Mosley was sluggish through most of that run, hardly through combos, and in Wright may have been downcycling based on other evidence. Tito beat two HOFers as well, Pea and Oscar. Pea was 35 and coming off a coke suspension. DLH? I thought Tito won by a point but... And none of this is to say Tito isn't greater than Kessler. He is and his resume is strong all over and stronger than Kessler's based on a deep pool of really good wins. I guess what I'm getting at is the line between 'elite' and just good isn't that wide. It was the difference for Bute against Andrade and Kess against the same for instance (Bute is still quite good even with the storm of BS in that fight).

Kessler is closer to the elite level than average for certain, but you don't seem to understand what I am saying. I will try to break it down for you. Kessler has been impressive in running through all but one of the top fighters at 168. The likes of Mundine, Siaca, Lucas, Beyer, Andrade are solid fighters. Not top class, but solid. Sure he looked good, however he has only been in the ring with a top class figher once, and he was comprehensively outclassed. You commented, "Kessler performed better against Joe than some elite fighters like Tito or Winky did with BHop and no one questioned their place as elite fighters". Do you see how this is a ridiculous thing to say? YOu are basically implying that to question Kessler's place as an elite fighter after losing a competitve fight to Calzaghe is akin to questioning the status of Trinidad or Wright after their losses to BHop. You are basically disrgarding the level of competition they have faced and beaten. Kessler's best wins are against B+ fighters whilst Tito and Wright have beaten certified HOFers. DO you understand this? kess took on a fight with a p4p champion, a fighter who dominated his division, he did it at the time with a broken right hand and a less than perfect training camp. he performed better in his loss than tito and wright did in their losses against b-hop as mentioned before by crold1. but this is where the double standards come into play b-hop took joe close as well, and made him work harder for the win yet his status as a p4p fighter didn't change in alot of people eyes. they still had him in the top 10 between no 5 and no 10. now kess took joe very close as mentioned before with a less than perfect training camp but alot of people still refuse to recognize his status as being a legitimate contender for a top 10 p4p fighter slot. if kess were to fight hopkins tomorrow - it would be one of hopkins harder fights. alot harder than fighting good but over rated fighters like tito and pavlik for sure, kess would probably be one of the strongest and most powerful fighters that bhop has been in a ring with. ________ SEX TAPE

You beat who is available and that was a strong run of the top ten in his class...he lost to a legitimately great fighter in a good fight where he got outdueled in the second half. If Kessler's two best foes/wins were equal to Winky's, you'd be noting how flawed the Wright-Tito/Shane wins are in equating greatness. Andrade and Mundine are both good, quality fighters and blowing them out by wide margins is the mark of a fighter closer to the elite level than average. true its not necesarily who you beat but how you beat them - when kess fought fighters like mndine, beyer and andrade he looked more than a just a few notches above them. you could argue that he dominated them in a way that great fighters dominate contenders, in a way that JC dominated his opponents. if hopkins fought kess tomorrow i would rate kess as being one of the top 3 biggest challenges that hopkins takes on (RJJ, JC then kess). ________ BMW M30

You beat who is available and that was a strong run of the top ten in his class...he lost to a legitimately great fighter in a good fight where he got outdueled in the second half. If Kessler's two best foes/wins were equal to Winky's, you'd be noting how flawed the Wright-Tito/Shane wins are in equating greatness. Andrade and Mundine are both good, quality fighters and blowing them out by wide margins is the mark of a fighter closer to the elite level than average. Kessler is closer to the elite level than average for certain, but you don't seem to understand what I am saying. I will try to break it down for you. Kessler has been impressive in running through all but one of the top fighters at 168. The likes of Mundine, Siaca, Lucas, Beyer, Andrade are solid fighters. Not top class, but solid. Sure he looked good, however he has only been in the ring with a top class figher once, and he was comprehensively outclassed. You commented, "Kessler performed better against Joe than some elite fighters like Tito or Winky did with BHop and no one questioned their place as elite fighters". Do you see how this is a ridiculous thing to say? YOu are basically implying that to question Kessler's place as an elite fighter after losing a competitve fight to Calzaghe is akin to questioning the status of Trinidad or Wright after their losses to BHop. You are basically disrgarding the level of competition they have faced and beaten. Kessler's best wins are against B+ fighters whilst Tito and Wright have beaten certified HOFers. DO you understand this?

Oh FFS, IT IS ABOUT WHO YOU HAVE FKN BEATEN! Who is Kessler's best win? Anthony Mun-fkn-dine? Other notable wins? Beyer (Ottke Jnr.), Siaca, Andrade? If Wright or Tito had those as their best wins would they be considered elite? Of course they fkn wouldn't be. Seriously what a ridiculous post. You beat who is available and that was a strong run of the top ten in his class...he lost to a legitimately great fighter in a good fight where he got outdueled in the second half. If Kessler's two best foes/wins were equal to Winky's, you'd be noting how flawed the Wright-Tito/Shane wins are in equating greatness. Andrade and Mundine are both good, quality fighters and blowing them out by wide margins is the mark of a fighter closer to the elite level than average.

Where is the both option

Yeah but you see you cannot take Roy as he is now and put him against Kessler, say he would probably lose and therefore the people voting yes are wrong. Do you see why? Joe never went to heavy, Joe never fought Tarver. THis is the path Roy would have taken. He would (most likely) have been in much better shape to fight Kessler than would have been the case given what he had experienced in his career in the preceding years. That is the issue. You take Roy, put him in Joe's place right since the early 90s and see how he goes. I say he definately does not lose until BHop, and even then he could probably win that one too. I think this comes down to how you'd see Roy without going to HW. I still think he'd be past prime enough to lose to Kessler in 2007. Personally I think it's kind to Roy to factor the HW thing in to too much of a degree, and it's entirely debatable as too how much is fair in a poll like this. For instance, it's instantly pretty harsh to follow the same thinking for Joe in Roys resume because he doesn't have the athleticism to get to HW and would have had worse and more knock outs after wards. Then these kinds of polls start to look irrelevant with so many variables.

How many eilte guys are there really though? Kessler performed better against Joe than some elite fighters like Tito or Winky did with BHop and no one questioned their place as elite fighters. beating a bunch of really good comp, which Kessler has, and dominating it is often a clue. It's a shame we live in this era; at a better time, fighters like Kessler, Joe, BHop etc. could have had series of fights instead of one-offs. Hell, if Gene Tunney had been judged based on the first Greb fight, he would have never gone on to beat Greb a bunch of times after taking an ass whooping. Oh FFS, IT IS ABOUT WHO YOU HAVE FKN BEATEN! Who is Kessler's best win? Anthony Mun-fkn-dine? Other notable wins? Beyer (Ottke Jnr.), Siaca, Andrade? If Wright or Tito had those as their best wins would they be considered elite? Of course they fkn wouldn't be. Seriously what a ridiculous post.

I feel your pain on the Kessler front but in fight or in polls Kessler would probably be favoured over Roy Jones like we both think, so already the poll is not factoring that in really. Even if it was close you'd have a healthy portion of people favouring Kessler so the stats here are inflated and misleading imo. As for Roy facing Hopkins he'd probably lose that yes. So rather than factor that in and negatively effect him, let's do it to not favour Joe. So lets instead take that resume entry out of the equation, that's what a lot have also clearly done, because most favour Hopkins over Roy. Yeah but you see you cannot take Roy as he is now and put him against Kessler, say he would probably lose and therefore the people voting yes are wrong. Do you see why? Joe never went to heavy, Joe never fought Tarver. THis is the path Roy would have taken. He would (most likely) have been in much better shape to fight Kessler than would have been the case given what he had experienced in his career in the preceding years. That is the issue. You take Roy, put him in Joe's place right since the early 90s and see how he goes. I say he definately does not lose until BHop, and even then he could probably win that one too.

How many eilte guys are there really though? Kessler performed better against Joe than some elite fighters like Tito or Winky did with BHop and no one questioned their place as elite fighters. beating a bunch of really good comp, which Kessler has, and dominating it is often a clue. It's a shame we live in this era; at a better time, fighters like Kessler, Joe, BHop etc. could have had series of fights instead of one-offs. Hell, if Gene Tunney had been judged based on the first Greb fight, he would have never gone on to beat Greb a bunch of times after taking an ass whooping.

The Roy of 2007 doesn't beat Kessler.

To be honest I have a hard time picking Kessler over any top guy right now simply because he has never beaten anyone close to elite and the one elite guy he has been in against he just looked totally lost. BUt on the balance of probabilities Roy probably doesn't have enough left to beat Kessler. I would definately pick Bernard to beat Mikkel though. Of course there are always unknowns and nobody really knows how much going to HW and back contributed to Roy's decline, but on the balance of probabilities I certainly think it is correct to say that Roy would most likely go through Joe's resume undefeated, at the least until the BHop fight. I feel your pain on the Kessler front but in fight or in polls Kessler would probably be favoured over Roy Jones like we both think, so already the poll is not factoring that in really. Even if it was close you'd have a healthy portion of people favouring Kessler so the stats here are inflated and misleading imo. As for Roy facing Hopkins he'd probably lose that yes. So rather than factor that in and negatively effect him, let's do it to not favour Joe. So lets instead take that resume entry out of the equation, that's what a lot have also clearly done, because most favour Hopkins over Roy.

Again both fighters would.

kess and eubank would beat b-hop, b-hop imo would deffo lose to eubank, actually i think the fight with a 36 year old b-hop and yesteryears kess would be really interesting. in fact i think that b-hop might just edge it out, although then again everytime he has come against an elite fighter who is own size b-hop hasn't done that well (with the exception of tarver). besides kess is a beast and probably has more power than most of what hopkins has faced before. then again kess is very mechanical and b-hop at 36/37 is in his prime more or less and would exploit kess's predictability. yeah id say b-hop would lose to eubank but not kess. i think RJJ at 37 would lose to a Hopkins - Hopkins would time him right and keep the fight on the inside, it wouldn't be pretty but i see hopkins winning. so i see both fighters suffering one loss each, b-hop to eubank and RJJ to hopkins. ________ Ford aod transmission specifications

I was exaggerating I'll admit to make the point that people weren't considering Kessler enough or the current state of the guys. I've heard people say Kessler would give them close fights, the other poll was evens for a bit but this one too many have quickly ticked yes on both without thought for what most consider close fights with Kessler. I'm not sure about saying Roy would be just dandy had he followed Joe's resume either as who really knows. I'm not denying he wouldn't get by all of those guys but I think he still would start to slip and lose motivation, who knows how he'd be, probably not worse but not as better as it might be easy to think, being ideal. I'd predict Kessler over Roy now 116-112 (Joe 117-110) and a close fight for Hopkins, but Nard winning about 115-112. To be honest I have a hard time picking Kessler over any top guy right now simply because he has never beaten anyone close to elite and the one elite guy he has been in against he just looked totally lost. BUt on the balance of probabilities Roy probably doesn't have enough left to beat Kessler. I would definately pick Bernard to beat Mikkel though. Of course there are always unknowns and nobody really knows how much going to HW and back contributed to Roy's decline, but on the balance of probabilities I certainly think it is correct to say that Roy would most likely go through Joe's resume undefeated, at the least until the BHop fight.

So you think Calzaghe-Jones will be pretty close whilst Roy would have no chance against a guy that Calzaghe made look silly? How does that work dude? And Bernard teaches Kessler a lesson. I was exaggerating I'll admit to make the point that people weren't considering Kessler enough or the current state of the guys. I've heard people say Kessler would give them close fights, the other poll was evens for a bit but this one too many have quickly ticked yes on both without thought for what most consider close fights with Kessler. I'm not sure about saying Roy would be just dandy had he followed Joe's resume either as who really knows. I'm not denying he wouldn't get by all of those guys but I think he still would start to slip and lose motivation, who knows how he'd be, probably not worse but not as better as it might be easy to think, being ideal. I'd predict Kessler over Roy now 116-112 (Joe 117-110) and a close fight for Hopkins, but Nard winning about 115-112.

I fixed the poll. Could they?!? yes both could.

Kessler might be a little faster than Pavlik but that's it. He can't fight going backwards, he hardly throws anything besides a 1-2, and he's physically and perhaps mentally weak. This is a guy who was hurt by Calzaghe...not from accumulation, but from a couple punches. So yes, Hopkins and Jones take care of Kessler.

What kind of BS is this...if they were both prime in every fight Joe fought? Gimme a break. Would a prime Joe have lost to Clinto Mitchell? I'll say this...there isn't a win on BHop's record, not one, Joe Cal would not also have been favored in and of Roy's fights there are only a handful where Joe might have lost (Tarver and Ruiz stand out). Why not just start an I don't like Joe thread and be honest.