Hopkins or Toney - who was better?

[therealpugilist]

That would make sense if Toney wasn't in his prime when Griffin beat him twice.

If Hearns and Hopkins lost to Barkley and Taylor twice in their primes then maybe I would but let's face it they would never lose to that caliber fighter in their primes.

THREE bad showings Toney had? Williams, Sosa, Johnson, Tiberi, Thadzi, Griffin x2, Roy Jones I think that's slightly more than three.

Hopkins was near his prime when he lost to taylor, he wasnt washed up. He lost fair and square and was considered a top 3 p4p fighter at the time. He simply lost to a style he couldnt deal with......just like he couldnt deal with Dawson.

Hopkins liked dwarfing his opponents, world class guys he didnt outsize gave him trouble.

Hopkins could be outworked and outmaneuvered......Dawson, Calzaghe, Jones, Taylor 2x, Kovalev, Jones, didnt let him set that slow azz deliberate pace and he lost

as a tactician he overrated and cant overcome faster fighters most times. Pascal fights in spurts. Someone who throws arm punches and wide shots shouldnt be able to compete with Hopkins if he is so skilled. He is overrated skillwise because he falls short vs other elite fighters. Toney beat better opposition than Hopkins

Dude was world class up to age 50.


if Hopkins fought Johnson, he'd have probably been his best middleweight opponent, Hopkins opposition was the worst of any great middleweight.
So age isnt even a factor, the fight was 10 years ago

[therealpugilist]

Trinidad was proven at 160 as was McCallum.

Difference is Toney got a draw with McCallum and edged a decision most feel he should have lost the second time whereas Hopkins absolutely dominated and stopped Trinidad sometning Toney never did against a top tier opponent.

lay off the pipe

Trinidad was great at 147, very good at 154 and just good at 160. Hell winky wright beat him worse than Hopkins. He was never a middleweight in the first place, just a great fighter taking risks

your problem here is you followed Hopkins career closely but probably just skimmed over toney's record but dont even know him or his opponents

at the time, trinidad beat William Joppy, thats it

Before McCallum fought toney in fight one, he beat sumbu kalambay(underrated fighter), Steve Collins, Michael Watson and Herol Graham


if you are gonna debate at least know what you are talking about.

[therealpugilist]

Trinidad was proven at 160 as was McCallum.

Difference is Toney got a draw with McCallum and edged a decision most feel he should have lost the second time whereas Hopkins absolutely dominated and stopped Trinidad sometning Toney never did against a top tier opponent.

Hopkins wouldnt have got that considering, he tries to impose his pace, when he is forced to take the lead he loses or out of his comfort zone...look at his fights with Jones, Toney, Dawson

.......Michael Nunn was the lineal middleweight champion.....toney was losing and came back and won


thats better than beating a former welterweight bro

michael nunn at the time was looked at as one of the best fighters in the world and a possible all time great, he also went on to win the lineal title at 168, Tito was done after he lost to Hopkins.

Trinidad vs Nunn at 160....Trinidad gets embarassed and Hopkins takes a loss...he cant deal with middleweights he didnt dwarf...Nunn had it all. Hopkins never dealt with a big middleweight with that kinda speed, reflexes, movement, and pizzazz......Hopkins best wins are over washed up guys like john david jackson and simon brown at 160

[IronDanHamza]

Hopkins was near his prime when he lost to taylor, he wasnt washed up. He lost fair and square and was considered a top 3 p4p fighter at the time. He simply lost to a style he couldnt deal with......just like he couldnt deal with Dawson.

Hopkins liked dwarfing his opponents, world class guys he didnt outsize gave him trouble.

Hopkins could be outworked and outmaneuvered......Dawson, Calzaghe, Jones, Taylor 2x, Kovalev, Jones, didnt let him set that slow azz deliberate pace and he lost

as a tactician he overrated and cant overcome faster fighters most times. Pascal fights in spurts. Someone who throws arm punches and wide shots shouldnt be able to compete with Hopkins if he is so skilled. He is overrated skillwise because he falls short vs other elite fighters. Toney beat better opposition than Hopkins

Dude was world class up to age 50.


if Hopkins fought Johnson, he'd have probably been his best middleweight opponent, Hopkins opposition was the worst of any great middleweight.
So age isnt even a factor, the fight was 10 years ago

Hopkins was not in his prime at age 40. Simple as that.

World class still? Yes of course but clearly not prime.

Toney was in his prime when Griffin beat him twice. Also in his prime when Dave Tiberi beat him aswell.

All those fights you named Hopkins was in his 40's and passed his best outside of Jones and Jones didn't "outwork" him either. And Hopkins lost to Jones but he didn't get embarrassed like Toney did.

[therealpugilist]

Hopkins was not in his prime at age 40. Simple as that.

World class still? Yes of course but clearly not prime.

Toney was in his prime when Griffin beat him twice. Also in his prime when Dave Tiberi beat him aswell.

All those fights you named Hopkins was in his 40's and passed his best outside of Jones and Jones didn't "outwork" him either. And Hopkins lost to Jones but he didn't get embarrassed like Toney did.

He was not shot so bringing up age, is your weak attempt of trying to dilute this so called awesome technician not being able to get by a bigger, faster, more active middleweight.


Hopkins always had trouble with that style...he couldnt beat dawson either and flopped like lebron to not take a prolonged loss.


a loss is a loss.....he was hesitant and didnt try to win until he landed a few good straight rights, forgot what round. He was befuddled.


oh yea..how can you say Trinidad was as proven at 160 as McCallum was when Mccallum fought several world champions and beat them at 160 before even facing toney

[IronDanHamza]

lay off the pipe

Trinidad was great at 147, very good at 154 and just good at 160. Hell winky wright beat him worse than Hopkins. He was never a middleweight in the first place, just a great fighter taking risks

your problem here is you followed Hopkins career closely but probably just skimmed over toney's record but dont even know him or his opponents

at the time, trinidad beat William Joppy, thats it

Before McCallum fought toney in fight one, he beat sumbu kalambay(underrated fighter), Steve Collins, Michael Watson and Herol Graham


if you are gonna debate at least know what you are talking about.

Atleast know what I'm talking about That's the problem, I actually know both of their careers from start to finish. I know Toney's career better than I do Hopkins I can tell you anything about Toney's career.

Winky Wright fought Trinidad in 2005 man, do you understand what time is?

What's even your point regarding the rest of your post? You don't need to explain to me what Tito Trinidad and Mike McCallum did in their careers. I've never disputed that McCallum is better than Trinidad.

What I'm saying is Hopkins dominated and stopped Tito, something Toney never did over a top level opponent.

[IronDanHamza]

He was not shot so bringing up age, is your weak attempt of trying to dilute this so called awesome technician not being able to get by a bigger, faster, more active middleweight.


Hopkins always had trouble with that style...he couldnt beat dawson either and flopped like lebron to not take a prolonged loss.


a loss is a loss.....he was hesitant and didnt try to win until he landed a few good straight rights, forgot what round. He was befuddled.

What kind of backwards logic is that?

No, he wasn't shot. But he also wasn't prime at age 40.

James Toney was in his prime when he lost to Griffin and Tiberi.

I'm merely pointing out the difference.

[therealpugilist]

Atleast know what I'm talking about That's the problem, I actually know both of their careers from start to finish. I know Toney's career better than I do Hopkins I can tell you anything about Toney's career.

Winky Wright fought Trinidad in 2005 man, do you understand what time is?

What's even your point regarding the rest of your post? You don't need to explain to me what Tito Trinidad and Mike McCallum did in their careers. I've never disputed that McCallum is better than Trinidad.

What I'm saying is Hopkins dominated and stopped Tito, something Toney never did over a top level opponent.

Trinidad was not a top level middleweight....thats my point...he is a great fighter from a lower division who could compete, their is a difference. McCallum would hang or beat some of the best middleweights of all time

if you knew his career and his opponents you wouldnt have stated " trinidad is just as proven as mccallum at 160" when he wasnt

Trinidad beat Joppy before he fought Hopkins...thats it

McCallum beat collins who would go on to be a champion, herol graham, and sumbu kalambay

its not even close

[therealpugilist]

What kind of backwards logic is that?

No, he wasn't shot. But he also wasn't prime at age 40.

James Toney was in his prime when he lost to Griffin and Tiberi.

I'm merely pointing out the difference.

pointing out the difference doesnt change the fact that when Hopkins didnt have a clear edge in size and speed, he lost

whether he was prime (jones)

slightly past prime(taylor 2x)

or world class but clear past it(Dawson, Pascal 1 he looked like crap,CALZAGHE)


Timing beats speed and Hopkins was always one step behind when he wasnt facing come forward types

[IronDanHamza]

Trinidad was not a top level middleweight....thats my point...he is a great fighter from a lower division who could compete, their is a difference. McCallum would hang or beat some of the best middleweights of all time

if you knew his career and his opponents you wouldnt have stated " trinidad is just as proven as mccallum at 160" when he wasnt

Trinidad beat Joppy before he fought Hopkins...thats it

McCallum beat collins who would go on to be a champion, herol graham, and sumbu kalambay

its not even close

I did not say Trinidad is as proven as McCallum at 160.

I said Trinidad was proven at 160, as was McCallum.

Completely different statements, learn to differentiate.

Trinidad wasn't a top MW? What? So you're telling me Trinidad wasn't one of the top MW's in the world when Hopkins fought him?

Again, I haven't disputed that McCallum is better than Trinidad. He's better at MW and in general. I don't need you to tell me about the careers of McCallum and Trinidad.