Do you think RJJ, Toney, and Hopkins can dominate modern era??

They were the overwhelming boxers of their era. What would they look like if they fought in the middle, SM now? Even after a long time. Do you think they stand a chance against Canelo and GGG or SM? - -They be wearing diapers. When U outta U BigBoyBarney trainers?

RJJ could easily be a HW title holder in this garbage era.

Jones would make this era look like bums

fcuk off you idiot If boxers are more athletic now, where is the evidence? Alvarez hardly moves, and he is not hard to hit. And he is pound for pound number 1. Tyson Fury is 6"9 and, lets face it? Fury is out of condition, even with all the sport science 'The man is not ever solid at the weight'.

Prime for prime, Roid Jones Jr. vs. Clenelo Alvarez would have been a fight for the ages!

And that claim is based on what exactly. Lol at past fighters on Canelo beef hahaha. They were 100 times more juiced than any modern fighter is today. Bullshit, modern fighters are on everything, you really think Hagler and SRL were juicing? Not in that era they weren't and if they were fighting now they would tear up the likes of Charlo and Andrade in minutes even without juice.

I say yes to Jones and Toney. Hopkins I'm on the fence there. I don't know if I see him beating GGG and Canelo at 160. Jones was the GOAT at 168, no one is beating him in his prime at that weight. I think even a 168 Toney can beat Canelo and any other SMW.

All 3 could but I wouldn't have total confidence in toney dominating, as class as he was he was inconsistent at times. Put in some poor performances at light heavy.

You need to stop romanticizing the old boxers from the past- Boxers are ore athletic and the sport is international and more competitive To be fair, Roy was more athletic than any MW or SMW from the past decade plus. Toney as well, but he isn't as reliable due to weight cuts and a lack of discipline. Hopkins is athletic, but more patient than athletic Obviously if they fought in today's era, they would be more athletic because they would have the luxury of using modern day science and technology. But the fact that Jones was still more athletic in the 90's without modern day science and tech says a lot of his ATG abilities

100% they would all be title holders and probably all three on the p4p list

I think people over-estimate modern fighters because they think drugs, diet, training etc is so much better now they have more advantages. Truth is you put fighters from previous generations in this era with those advantages and you'll be getting dead bodies in the ring. If you could put prime Hagler in this era and get him on that Canelo beef then no modern MW would stand a chance. And that claim is based on what exactly. Lol at past fighters on Canelo beef hahaha. They were 100 times more juiced than any modern fighter is today.

They would be dominate now just like they were then.

You need to sign out of this forum and don't come back. You need to stop romanticizing the old boxers from the past- Boxers are ore athletic and the sport is international and more competitive

Could 3 of the best p4p boxers of all time dominate today? Well...errr...yeah.

No i meant they sweep everyone in this era bar Canelo. Canelo would at least be a challenge, nobody else in this era gets close. Canelo literally lost to GGG twice. And beat Jacobs like 7-5 on the cards. He is fighting well but even with the beef he can still be challenged. BJS was a good dominant win. Callum Smith was a cherry-pick though. He barely beat him better than Ryder did.

I think people over-estimate modern fighters because they think drugs, diet, training etc is so much better now they have more advantages. Truth is you put fighters from previous generations in this era with those advantages and you'll be getting dead bodies in the ring. If you could put prime Hagler in this era and get him on that Canelo beef then no modern MW would stand a chance. The drugs and training regimens today do help, you have to think. And some past greats certainly still pass the eye test on film. However many come off as very amateurish skill-wise compared to today's fighters. Which is understandable - the sport was more of a side job or just one job for most fighters in history, absent this modern era. All we can really evaluate and compare is the film. All of the other 'what-ifs' just make it hard to compare eras in boxing anyway. It's like that with most sports.

It's hard to compare eras in any sport. But these guys all basically just fought. It's ridiculous to wonder 'if they would stand a chance' etc vs the current top guys. If you asked that question about guys from 30+ years ago, I think that's a fair convo to have. And it's fair to wonder if those guys would dominate as much in this era, if the game has improved overall, etc. I think people over-estimate modern fighters because they think drugs, diet, training etc is so much better now they have more advantages. Truth is you put fighters from previous generations in this era with those advantages and you'll be getting dead bodies in the ring. If you could put prime Hagler in this era and get him on that Canelo beef then no modern MW would stand a chance.

Don't get me wrong. I love Canelo & GGG, but you're that confident Canelo sweeps all of them? Especially RJJ? Hard to swallow. No i meant they sweep everyone in this era bar Canelo. Canelo would at least be a challenge, nobody else in this era gets close.

Im curious, didn't James Tony lose against Montel Griffin in his era?

It's hard to compare eras in any sport. But these guys all basically just fought. It's ridiculous to wonder 'if they would stand a chance' etc vs the current top guys. If you asked that question about guys from 30+ years ago, I think that's a fair convo to have. And it's fair to wonder if those guys would dominate as much in this era, if the game has improved overall, etc.