Who was the best fighter Roy Jones beat?

[The Old LefHook]

I never said either of them were great.

Toney isn't great.

Hopkins? Debatable.

A curious thing about Toney is he had no home division--it was any division he could squeeze into at the time. That makes it hard to judge him p4p. Does a man's blubber count against him p4p? We cannot really judge him as a super middleweight or light heavy by what he did at heavyweight. In a few aspects he was great, like chin. If he hadn't been crazy to begin with, he may have become great. You expect a crazy man to have questionable discipline, and Toney was fruitcake slappy with slurred speech for a long time. I believe he had more gifts than Ho'kins, but Ho'kins wrung every bit of usability out of his, while Toney was too lazy for that.

[BKM-]

Does a man's blubber count against him p4p?

After regaining my breath from laughing, I'm gonna have to say no. A sure way to ruin your career in the sport of boxing and get KTFO in bigger weight classes is by gaining fat and getting lazy. Toney somehow turned that behavior into an ATG career instead.

[kara]

James Toney, Bernard Hopkins, Mike McCallum, Reggie Johnson, Antonio Tarver?

[tokon]

So my previous question made sense... Are we looking for the best fighter, or the best win?

The best win was Toney, who was in his prime when RJJ dominated him.

Gets my vote too.

[Silence]

That's basically 1993 B-Hop vs 1994 Toney

Toney was way closer to his prime but he was drained. Still Toney edges it.

[IronDanHamza]

That's basically 1993 B-Hop vs 1994 Toney

Toney was way closer to his prime but he was drained. Still Toney edges it.

How was he any more drained than any of his other fights?

[Willie Pep 229]

Uh, oh! Somebody made aa excuse for Toney.

[them_apples]

Nah. Not at all actually.

Hopkins is the superior fighter.

Toney is the superior fighter, both skills wise, mentally and physically. Where he lacks is discipline. Hopkins worked very hard for his victories and always came in shape. And even then these wins while good, weren’t always impressive or against true top tier comp.

toney on the other hand was obese schooling ranked heavyweights. Ive never seen a masterclass like Toney vs Barkley. He was truly an absolute throwback dropped into the modern era. And had they fought I think Toney’s style matches up well against Hopkins.

[them_apples]

A curious thing about Toney is he had no home division--it was any division he could squeeze into at the time. That makes it hard to judge him p4p. Does a man's blubber count against him p4p? We cannot really judge him as a super middleweight or light heavy by what he did at heavyweight. In a few aspects he was great, like chin. If he hadn't been crazy to begin with, he may have become great. You expect a crazy man to have questionable discipline, and Toney was fruitcake slappy with slurred speech for a long time. I believe he had more gifts than Ho'kins, but Ho'kins wrung every bit of usability out of his, while Toney was too lazy for that.

lmao thats so true, nobody knows his actual weight class because he fought at whatever weight he wanted and for the most part looked good in every weight class. At every weight class he had at least one “motivated” Toney where he would dominate someone.

[them_apples]

Well, OK, it wasn't much better, as far as competition goes. I have to compromise. You could even call it a draw. Toney fought 6 former or future heavyweight title holders, two of them twice, and was never KO'd in his career, both of which bring his stock up. He definitely fought the bigger punchers, but Ho'kins fought a few more decent title holders, but no large sized ones. Whether a title holder is first rate competition is another matter, which is decided personally. They both fought title holders I did not include.

As with any draw, I know it is reasonable to disagree.

Ho'kins cried about fictional fouls more than once, trying to win by foul, and was KO'd twice. His middleweight run was semi-barren of quality competition, so he could break records cheaply, but he started upping it when he went to higher divisions, which brings his stock up. He also has more recognizable names on his ledger, like Hoya and Trinidad, who were smaller fighters, however. All but a few of Toney's quality opposition were naturally built much larger than he was. He was nearly always fighting fat. Hopkins was much more disciplined and a great trainer who was always in shape. If that is what makes a fighter great to Hammy, I also know that is part of the equation.

To be clear: I have now conceded that the competition was about equal. Who was better is still up for debate, I believe. Hopkins fought a few more title claimants, Toney fought the bigger punchers by far.

Toney

Lucas Browne (1)
Oquendo (1)
Rahman (2)
Peter (2)
John Ruiz (1)
Holyfield (1)
Jirov (1)
McCallum (3)
Montell Griffin (1)
Roy Jones (1)
Iran Barkley (1)
Reggie Johnson (1)
Nunn (1)
Charles Williams (1)
Steve Little (1)



Ho'kins


Joe Smith (1)
Kovalev (1)
Cloud (1)
Dawson (2)
Pascal (2)
Roy Jones (2)
Pavlik (1)
Calzaghe (1)
Winky Wright (1)
Tarver (1)
Taylor (2)
Hoya (1)
Trinidad (1)
Glen Johnson (1)
Jackson (1)
Simon Brown (1)
Joppy (1)

im looking at Hopkins resume and outside of Jones Toney would slaughter most of them, even on a bad night. Those 2 welters - trinidad and dlh would have been beat up badly.

I’m not sure how Hopkins does against mcallum and nunn, and im positive he doesn’t last long at heavyweight.