Let me give you an idea on how great Roy Jones Jr really was

[CatchAndShoot]

Other than Tyson and Sugar Ray Leonard, he was one of the first mainstream boxers that got me into boxing permanently, and I remember being in 7th or 8th grade, and watching a RJJ on HBO, and almost literally thinking the guy was superman, or an alien being that wasn't a full human. I couldn't believe a human being could be THAT amazing in the ring, or be able to move and be that coordinated and have the reflexes and speed he had. I still have that nostalgia when I think of RJJ, because his prime was so extremely rare. Just like Tyson, you can't duplicate what RJJ did in the ring.

[CatchAndShoot]

That's why the Tarver KO was so shocking.

It was like seeing Superman get shot down.

People just weren't ready to see that happen.

So true. I can watch that KO to this day, and still be shocked at what happened. It was seriously like Superman losing to Lex Luthor or something. It just didn't feel right.

[ghost94]

I beg to differ. For one, Canelo Alvarez hasn't even fought at 160 yet. He fought at 164. Golovkin has fought 3 champions: Geale, Ouma and Jacobs. Don't ever compare him to prime Hopkins.

There were several guys that RJJ beat at 160 that were much more proven at 160 than Canelo.




And you say Hopkins wasn't in his prime because of what? Do you even know? Because he lost to prime RJJ? How do you quantify what Hopkins prime was?





I beg your pardon?

Virgil Hill is a top 10 Light Heavyweight of ALL TIME. Is Andre Ward or Sergey Kovalev even in the top 20 Light Heavyweights of all time? I don't think so.

This is not even including all the other scalps on Jones' resume at 175

I didn't compare Golovkin to prime Hopkins. Prime Hopkins is better. Except '93 Hopkins isn't prime Hopkins. And Roy didn't beat anyone at 160 better than Golovkin is now.

Hopkins wasn't in his prime yet because he hadn't beat anyone. Why do you think he was?

No, Ward and Kovalev are head and shoulders above Hill in every way. He lost to Tiger before getting knocked out by Roy. Griffin was a better win than Hill even.

[Chollo Vista]

I didn't compare Golovkin to prime Hopkins. Prime Hopkins is better. Except '93 Hopkins isn't prime Hopkins

This theory makes zero sense.

When was Hopkins prime? Has anyone beaten prime Hopkins? Hopkins lost his first fight so he was too young. Hopkins lost to RJJ so he wasn't old enough. Hopkins lost to Taylor so he was too old. I can go for days. You make zero sense. When was his prime? Was it against Joe Calzaghe? Or does his prime only count when he wins a fight?

Golovkin has beaten 2 champions: Geale and Kassim Ouma. Maybe Golovkin has never really reached his prime yet because theoretically "he hasn't beaten proven champions". There's more holes in your theory than a bullet ridden car in Chicago.

And Roy didn't beat anyone at 160 better than Golovkin is now

How do we know how good Golovkin is? Because he beat Daniel Geale and got a gift decision against Daniel Jacobs?

Hopkins is a proven ATG. Is GGG a HOF'er? That remains to be seen. Don't ever compare prime Hopkins against GGG.

No, Ward and Kovalev are head and shoulders above Hill in every way. He lost to Tiger before getting knocked out by Roy. Griffin was a better win than Hill even

Once again kid, it doesn't work like this.

In order for Ward and Kovalev to be above Hill at 175, they have to accomplish more than Hill at 175. If you're talking "head to head", that's a different story. If you're talking who was more proven and accomplished more at Light Heavy, that's not debatable; it's Virgil Hill. Virgil Hill is a TOP 10 LIght Heavy weight of ALL TIME.

Kovalev beating a 50 year old Hopkins, Blake Caperello, Cedrick Agnew, Nathan Cleverly, Nadjib Mohammedi and Cornelius White DOES NOT make him better than Virgil Hill..... And Andre Ward beating Kovalev doesn't make him a better Light Heavyweight than Virgil Hill.

Now if you're saying, based off the eye-test, you feel Kovalev is better than Hill because he's knocked out more bums, then cool.

I think you need to educate yourself on the sport and how things work first.

[ghost94]

This theory makes zero sense.

When was Hopkins prime? Has anyone beaten prime Hopkins? Hopkins lost his first fight so he was too young. Hopkins lost to RJJ so he wasn't old enough. Hopkins lost to Taylor so he was too old. I can go for days. You make zero sense. When was his prime? Was it against Joe Calzaghe? Or does his prime only count when he wins a fight?

Golovkin has beaten 2 champions: Geale and Kassim Ouma. Maybe Golovkin has never really reached his prime yet because theoretically "he hasn't beaten proven champions". There's more holes in your theory than a bullet ridden car in Chicago.



How do we know how good Golovkin is? Because he beat Daniel Geale and got a gift decision against Daniel Jacobs?

Hopkins is a proven ATG. Is GGG a HOF'er? That remains to be seen. Don't ever compare prime Hopkins against GGG.




Once again kid, it doesn't work like this.

In order for Ward and Kovalev to be above Hill at 175, they have to accomplish more than Hill at 175. If you're talking "head to head", that's a different story. If you're talking who was more proven and accomplished more at Light Heavy, that's not debatable; it's Virgil Hill. Virgil Hill is a TOP 10 LIght Heavy weight of ALL TIME.

Kovalev beating a 50 year old Hopkins, Blake Caperello, Cedrick Agnew, Nathan Cleverly, Nadjib Mohammedi and Cornelius White DOES NOT make him better than Virgil Hill..... And Andre Ward beating Kovalev doesn't make him a better Light Heavyweight than Virgil Hill.

Now if you're saying, based off the eye-test, you feel Kovalev is better than Hill because he's knocked out more bums, then cool.

I think you need to educate yourself on the sport and how things work first.

I already told you Hopkins' prime. 2001 or so.

Yes, Hopkins was an all-time great. But he wasn't in '93 when Roy beat him.

And to make it perfectly clear for the 3rd time, I never compared GGG to prime Hopkins and even said Hopkins was better.

And pop your mouth off to me and call me kid one more time and I'm done discussing boxing with you.

Ward's resume is better than Hill.

And for the record, you're the one who needs educated in boxing.

[-DSG-]

Some of these comments tells me you guys didn't watch Roy in his prime.

[Chollo Vista]

I already told you Hopkins' prime. 2001 or so.

Yes, Hopkins was an all-time great. But he wasn't in '93 when Roy beat him.

And to make it perfectly clear for the 3rd time, I never compared GGG to prime Hopkins and even said Hopkins was better.

So Hopkins prime was only because he beat Tito Trinidad? A Trinidad that came up from WW/JMW? Has anyone ever beaten a prime Hopkins? In your book, I'm pretty sure they haven't.

And pop your mouth off to me and call me kid one more time and I'm done discussing boxing with you.

Ok kid.

Ward's resume is better than Hill.

Ward's resume IS NOT better than Virgil Hill's. We're talking about resume at Light Heavy here. What don't you understand about that?

[Vadrigar.]

This is a false equivalence between 1993 Hopkins and Canelo/GGG. Even in 1993 Hopkins' skillset was better and punch technique far more refined than Canelo/GGG. His ring IQ was obviously greater too. That's why in hindsight we can see why he went on to become an ATG.

Moreover at 28 years old Hopkins was at his athletic prime (Power, speed, reflexes, stamina, endurance and recovery). He scored more knockouts around that time than later on when he got older.

Hopkins went undefeated for 12 years thereafter and proved to be a legit ATG. Canelo/GGG haven't come close to doing that yet. It really is an insult to compare them to 1993 Hopkins.

So yes Roy definitely beat better quality than Canelo/GGG @160.

[Chollo Vista]

This is a false equivalence between 1993 Hopkins and Canelo/GGG. Even in 1993 Hopkins' skillset was better and punch technique far more refined than Canelo/GGG. His ring IQ was obviously greater too. That's why in hindsight we can see why he went on to become an ATG.

Moreover at 28 years old Hopkins was at his athletic prime (Power, speed, reflexes, endurance and recovery). He scored more knockouts around that time than later on when he got older.

Hopkins went undefeated for 12 years and proved to be a legit ATG. Canelo/GGG haven't come close to doing that yet. It really is an insult to compare them to 1993 Hopkins.

So yes Roy definitely beat better quality than Canelo/GGG @160.

You're making too much sense in this post.

But the "only" reason I even compared Canelo/GGG to prime Hopkins is because given the selection of fighters today at 160, they were the only ones I can use in comparison to if Charlo beat them today.

[ghost94]

This is a false equivalence between 1993 Hopkins and Canelo/GGG. Even in 1993 Hopkins' skillset was better and punch technique far more refined than Canelo/GGG. His ring IQ was obviously greater too. That's why in hindsight we can see why he went on to become an ATG.

Moreover at 28 years old Hopkins was at his athletic prime (Power, speed, reflexes, stamina, endurance and recovery). He scored more knockouts around that time than later on when he got older.

Hopkins went undefeated for 12 years thereafter and proved to be a legit ATG. Canelo/GGG haven't come close to doing that yet. It really is an insult to compare them to 1993 Hopkins.

So yes Roy definitely beat better quality than Canelo/GGG @160.

Was 2001-2003 worse than 1993 Hopkins?