Who will leave boxing with the best legacy out of Toney, Jones and Hopkins?

[Bozo_no no]

I'm a big fan of all 3, and think they are definatly the top 3 of their generation

(With an honourable mention for Ricardo Lopez who doesn't get enough love)

But Roy beat the other two.

With the titles at 160, 168, 175, and Heavy, the blinding and awe inspiring natural skill and reflex, and the wins over the other two,

Top spot goes to RJJ imo.

[Memorex]

i voted for hopkins cuz of his record title defenses and beating tito and oscar and taylor(this saturday), i guessing hes gonna fight winky next year and thats a w. if he finishes off like that then yea, he will have a better legacy than rjj and toney

[adeelr]

jones, he beat both of them while they were all of them were in there prime or close to it.


dont give me this bull that hopkins was green when they fought, hop had more fights in and is older.


toney was considered top 2 or 3 in the world at the time jones handed his ass to him.


jones than hop than toney.

A legacy is made when a fighter rises from adversity and defeat and claims whats his...out of these Three fighters, only hopkins has been able to do that.
therefore Hopkins has the best legacy.

[Manny_P]

Bernard Hopkins easily.

JOnes got KTFO twice and put a "running" performance gainst Tarver in last fight.

Toney might win titles at heavyweight, but then again those oppoents aint really a threat to Toney. Wlad glass chin, Byrd feather fists, Ruiz boring hugabear, Rahman Mr Inconsistent unpredictable, Brewster hasn't done anything outstanding.

[czars_salad]

hopkins easily... been a champ for more than a decade.. beat that!

[Red_Menace]

A legacy is made when a fighter rises from adversity and defeat and claims whats his...out of these Three fighters, only hopkins has been able to do that.
therefore Hopkins has the best legacy.

I think I'd pick Jones. Jones dominated for a long time. Every great fighter eventually falls at the end of his career. The problem with Jones is he made it all look too easy until he finally lost. People make as many excuses for the people Jones beat as the people who make excuses for the times Jones lost. It's funny that people wanted to see Jones struggle, and give them a tough fight where he would struggle and rise to the occassion. He gave that to us in Jones Tarver I, but a lot of people choose to ignore it.

I think James Toney and Hopkins have excellent legacies, and are top class fighters, worth of all-time great lists, but Jones was really something special.

[The Fix]

It's really not worth getting into who looked better against similar opponents.

I very strongly disagree that Jones performed better against Ruiz as well, and to say that "it could have gone either way had Ruiz not been knocked down and had he won another round" sounds luda. Toney won that Ruiz fight 116-111 EASY...it was probably more like 117-110 however. I had it 9-3 Toney + the KD. Toney also mugged his ass with hard right hands upstairs and down all night. Was there a "right hand cam" for the Jones/Ruiz fight? No...there was for Toney though because he was landing dem mutha****as all night

I need to stop getting faded and then attempting to dabble on the internet. I'm downstairs drinking 40's and then I come up to my room and spout off some bull****. It's sad but theres absolutely nothing going on here because of Finals week

how can you disagree about the ruiz fight? from start to finish jones dominated. toney was far from it.


ruiz wasnt knocked down it was a terrible call, toney stood on ruiz's foot. it should have been called a slip.

[Super_Lightweight]

hmm

"Joe Louis has the record for HW title defenses...nah so what it's just a number and he never really beat any great fighters in that period" There I said it just so you can see how ****** that looks from a different perspective amigo.

Hops doesn't have the names that Louis had. Without the names, it's just a number.

Most fans thought Taylor won...hmmm that's funny because most writers and boxing analysts thought Hopkins won. I wonder who I should side with...joe schmoe who thinks Taylor should have won because he missed a million punches or writers who score on things other than being uneffectively aggressive

The boxing establishment bows down to Bernard Hopkins. The opinion of hardcore fans on this site and others combined isn;t outweighed by someone just because they write in a magazine. Unneffective aggresion is better than layin dead like a dog for 8 rounds doing nothing.

So basically what you're saying is that boxing skill means nothing when it comes to fighting Roy Jones? Wow why don't you just go the whole 9 yards and call him the sweet lord above himself...

Yes, it means nothing, and surely you know it. Hops wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of outboxing Roy Jones in his prime.

Hagler was still a very dangerous fighter...saying otherwise makes you look silly. Also, Leonard was pretty damaged old goods by that time too. And stop with the analogy because IT DOESN"T WORK HERE. Barry retired because he didn't want to play anymore, not because his body was giving out.

Hagler was dangerous to whom? That was no prime Hagler in there in any case. But anyway, Barry retired. By your "standards" he couldn't hack it. He couldn't deal with "adversity". Of course you'll make an exception for your idol, Mr. Sanders.

I can tell you are going out of your way to make Roy look greta just by your choice of words. You demonize Hopkins and Toney by calling them "hardcore street guys" while whimsically referring to Roy as this "nice old country bumpkin". Hahaha I can't believe you actually called him a country bumpkin.

I'm not demonizing anything. They are street guys, and they themselves will tell you as much. I'm just trying to rationalize with a knowledgeable person like you would try to BS me and tell me Hops' resume will trump Roy's with a win over Jermain ****in Taylor.

This wasn't about giving someone props. I acknowledge that Roy was an incredible talent and a great fighter, but that doesn't mean I have to say he's going to go down as a greater fighter than Hop or Toney. What do you want me to lie about it and take your side?

Yes! Go against your heart and think with your BRAIN. (^_^)

I know we'll never agree in a million years. We always seem to disagree when it comes to Toney especially. I guess my time is wasted. Oh well, I'll just move on.

[McKay 1]

Just for the record. Dariusz Michalczewski did at Light Heavyweight almost exactly what Bernard Hopkins did at middleweight. That is, defend the Linear title I believe 19 consecutive times with a high KO percentage.

I'd say that both Hopkins and Michalczewski defended their titles against relatively mediocre opposition. My point is, if you are going to rate Hopkins so high for what he has accompllished, that is defending the middleweight title a record number of times, Dariusz Michalczewski falls into the exact same category. Only be it in a separeate weight class. And Dariuz was of course undefeated until the final 2 fights of his career.

[JUYJUY]

Just for the record. Dariusz Michalczewski did at Light Heavyweight almost exactly what Bernard Hopkins did at middleweight. That is, defend the Linear title I believe 19 consecutive times with a high KO percentage.

Hopkins didn't become Linear champion until he beat Trinidad, so he didn't defend the Linear title 19 times at all, IBF was not Linear at all. Hopkins' quality of opposition outside of a couple of 'names' (eg blown-up lightweights Oscar and Trinidad) is actually a damn heck of a lot worse than Eubank's, Michalczewski's, Ottke's and Calzaghe's oppositions.