If Hopkins Beat Jones Jr and then Beat David Haye, Would he a top 10 ATG?

[r.burgundy]

Come on Ron, are you trying to tell me that beating 25, 30 or whatever the number is top 10 fighters isn't impressive?

Big difference between fat, out of shape heavyweights who fight nobodies and get title shots compared to fighters who were forced to fight other top fighters to get a ranking because their was only one title. And if Pep fought them all...that IS saying a lot.

Im still curious about the question I asked about Conn.

of course its impressive but everytrhing must be kept in context.guys fought so much more often back then and boxing was less about buisness.so its unfair to hold fighters of today to those standards.so using the context of how often they fought,what great champion wouldnt beat the top 20 contenders in his division?im really just playing devils advocate.pep was great but i think he was only good for his time.he didnt have trascendent skills.

no difference between outta shape fat guys and outta shape skinny guys.pep didnt have a ripped physique.you say they fight nobodies but who are the other top guys fighting to become somebody?for instance looking at roy jones on boxrec,i dont know who the hell glen wolfe is but he was 28-3 when he fought roy,so its a safe bet that was he was in the top 5 of at least 1 of the major sanctioning bodys.he retired after that fight but is it fair to call him a great fighter cause he had a decent record against guys ive never seen?is that a win roy should put on a pedestol?roys 1 of my all time favs and i have at least 30 of his fights

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE]

of course its impressive but everytrhing must be kept in context.guys fought so much more often back then and boxing was less about buisness.so its unfair to hold fighters of today to those standards.so using the context of how often they fought,what great champion wouldnt beat the top 20 contenders in his division?[/QUOTE]

You're assuming a great champion would, while questioning what a great champion actually did. That doesn't make sense.

im really just playing devils advocate.pep was great but i think he was only good for his time.he didnt have trascendent skills.

There are thousands of fans and hundreds of boxers, experts and historians who would disagree with you.

no difference between outta shape fat guys and outta shape skinny guys.pep didnt have a ripped physique.

Being ripped does not make a fighter in shape. Fighters from Peps era routinely went 15 rounds and threw more punches.

you say they fight nobodies but who are the other top guys fighting to become somebody?for instance looking at roy jones on boxrec,i dont know who the hell glen wolfe is but he was 28-3 when he fought roy,so its a safe bet that was he was in the top 5 of at least 1 of the major sanctioning bodys.he retired after that fight but is it fair to call him a great fighter cause he had a decent record against guys ive never seen?is that a win roy should put on a pedestol?roys 1 of my all time favs and i have at least 30 of his fights

I don't know what Roy has to do with any of this, but maybe you don't understand the difference between being ranked by one of four ABC organizations and being ranked for the one and only belt. There is a big difference.

Im not letting that Conn question go Ron. What fights have you seen to come to the conclusion he was a better defensive fighter than Pep? I hate to call you out, but I think you have only seen the 2 Louis fights.

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

**** no!!!!!!!

[r.burgundy]

[QUOTE=JAB5239;7886296]

I don't know what Roy has to do with any of this, but maybe you don't understand the difference between being ranked by one of four ABC organizations and being ranked for the one and only belt. There is a big difference.

Im not letting that Conn question go Ron. What fights have you seen to come to the conclusion he was a better defensive fighter than Pep? I hate to call you out, but I think you have only seen the 2 Louis fights.

its the fact that in boxing it is very hard to determine who a legit contender is without seeing them.and even if there is 1 and only belt,a 28-3 record would have to have you ranked in a top 5 or 10.everybody cant be undefeated.so i say that to ask,who are these other guys beating.how did glen wolfe get 28 wins and the right to fight roy.i just picked roy randomly

pep fought 25 top guys but he never fought flash elorde whom i think would have beat him handily,so obviously he didnt fight everybody

sorry.i had missed that conn question and my net connection is ****ty right now.but ive only seen him fight against louis.there was a poster on another forum who had made some gifs from another fight that were cool,but ive never seen the fight though.

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE=r.burgundy;7886417]

its the fact that in boxing it is very hard to determine who a legit contender is without seeing them.and even if there is 1 and only belt,a 28-3 record would have to have you ranked in a top 5 or 10.everybody cant be undefeated.so i say that to ask,who are these other guys beating.how did glen wolfe get 28 wins and the right to fight roy.i just picked roy randomly

Yet you've determined Conn was a better defensive fighter than Pep with even less footage of him. Very interesting.

pep fought 25 top guys but he never fought flash elorde whom i think would have beat him handily,so obviously he didnt fight everybody

Elorde didn't become prominent until the late 50's to the mid 60's. By than Pep was far past his best. Before than Elordes resume is peppered with the wins and losses of inconsistency.

sorry.i had missed that conn question and my net connection is ****ty right now.but ive only seen him fight against louis.there was a poster on another forum who had made some gifs from another fight that were cool,but ive never seen the fight though.

Dude, you're telling me you consider Conn a better defensive fighter than Pep, even though you already stated its almost impossible (Your opinion) to judge a fighter with so little footage. On top of that there is tons more footage of Pep and the majority of experts consider him if not the best defensive fighter all time, one of the top 3. You're telling me you formed that opinion, an opinion that contradicts fans and experts alike, from JUST the Louis fight? (sigh) You gotta be freakin kidding me.

[-Blackout-]

Top 10 no. Around top 25.

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

Top 10 no. Around top 25.

hell nooooo

[BEEHOP]

Easily top 10.

[Mr. Philadel]

Hopkins is already Top 50.

A win over Roy does nothing but getting a Heavyweight Title pushes him to Top 25 on my list.

I respect that!!

[General Zod]

He already is top 50, you're delusional. This is Bernard Hopkins we are taking about, not that quitting coward you like so much.

I hope you are joking with that number? Hopkins best wins are: Tito, Tarver and Holmes, with this he is top 50 according to you? lol