Hopkins is OVERALL a better fighter then Roy

[-MAKAVELLI-]

Basic fundamentals and technique, its ‘Nard…no question…if you’re talking about pure athleticism and reflex, there are very few that can equal a prime Roy

[Vladimir303]

Fundamentals isn't everything. Look what Roy did to James Toney. And remember Roy is known in boxing circles as one of the smartest fighters in the ring of all time. Roy might be unorthodox, but he still was a skilled counter puncher.

But look what happened to Roy. He is getting knocked out cartoonishly in his late 30's while Hopkins....young or old never came close to getting KO'd and has been competitive in each of his 5 losses.

Look at the fight against each other. Hopkins clearly lost but never got domianted against Jones.

Look at their fights against calzaghe, Tarver, Glen Jonson, tito. In all of those fights Hopkins did much better then Roy.

[-Hyperion-]

**** ray leonard is worse than hopkins, i mean look at his short ass prime and his late losses(some ebarrassing).......

[ßringer]

B-Hop's mind is more than a match for Jones's athleticism

The smartest thing I've read on here all day.

[Truth]

**** ray leonard is worse than hopkins, i mean look at his short ass prime and his late losses(some ebarrassing).......

EXACTLY

If you go by this Hopkins is better than Ali too. After all Ali was a shell of his former self by 36, when bernard had just got going.

[krispy kreme]

Fundamentals isn't everything. Look what Roy did to James Toney. And remember Roy is known in boxing circles as one of the smartest fighters in the ring of all time. Roy might be unorthodox, but he still was a skilled counter puncher.

It isn't, but it is very important. Being a textbook fighter can be the difference between you being on your ass or catching your opponents punch on your glove. We have plenty of fighters today who sometimes depend on raw talent to get them through a fight, and they usually don't last long or they step up against a good fighter and they lose. When I see overall fighter, I am thinking skill wise and opponent wise. Hopkins has been in the ring with better fighters and has beaten them impressively. Not taking anything away from Roy, but I can't be biased just because I like him more than Hopkins.

[Dan...]

LOL, reading some of this **** you would think Roy was just some flash in the pan rather than one of the most gifted fighers in history who dominated boxing for a whole decade and achieved something noone else has in over a century. Incredible this place sometimes.

[-Hyperion-]

EXACTLY

If you go by this Hopkins is better than Ali too. After all Ali was a shell of his former self by 36, when bernard had just got going.

of course....but you know as well as me that all this idiot legion is just on hopkins' nuts so they can keep hating on joe calzaghe........

[Truth]

But look what happened to Roy. He is getting knocked out cartoonishly in his late 30's while Hopkins....young or old never came close to getting KO'd and has been competitive in each of his 5 losses.

Look at the fight against each other. Hopkins clearly lost but never got domianted against Jones.

Look at their fights against calzaghe, Tarver, Glen Jonson, tito. In all of those fights Hopkins did much better then Roy.

If you want to think Hopkins is better than Roy, go right ahead. But I have my opinion as well.

[ßringer]

It goes like this.

Prime for Prime, Jones is the better man. I can't argue that because of the Ruiz and Toney fights.

But overall legacy? I think Hopkins has the edge because he's still winning fights well into his 40's, he schooled the man who clowned Jones 3 times in Tarver, he TKO'd Johnson 10 years ago in Johnson's prime while Roy got KO'd by Johnson 10 years later, and a lot of people think he beat Joe while Roy got ****d for 33 minutes.