Just watched Roy Jones-Bernard Hopkins again

[KO Boxing]

And I noticed a few things.

1. Although a chess match, and forgetting where they went in their careers and what have you, this was a damn good fight against a 21-0 and 22-1 (#1 and #2 contendors).

2. Again, although a chess match, Roy really did dominate this match moreso than most people lead on. Most rounds were close (REALLY was a chess match), but Roy was NOT ONLY the cleaner and sharper puncher, but in the majority of the rounds, also threw the more punches.

3. Nonetheless, Roy seemed quite tentative, JUST as much as Hopkins was in fact (maybe more so), considering it was ALSO his first world title fight.

4. Considering both fighters developed a lot more after, I really can't see a way that Hopkins could find a way to beat Roy, EVER. (although Hopkins became a significantly different fighter after).

5. I scored the fight 117-111, but would NOT argue with 118-110 (10 rounds to 2, which is what the commentators had it - one even had it 119-109!!!) but also could NOT argue with 116-112 (which is what the 3 judges had it, plus the majority of what people SAY they had it, although I question how long it has been since they've really scored it)

6. Finally, with the bad blood that was already there, DAMN this fight shoulda had a rematch. It woulda been a beauty to have had it in 2003, a decade later... That's the stuff of history!

[Betty Swollocks]

Roy Jones was hands down better than Hopkins at any point up to when he was shot.
Jones is actually becoming as underrated and Hopkins is overrated these days. Jones beat some elite fighters in their prime......Hopkins feasted on bums and smaller men.

[Lampley]

And I noticed a few things.

1. Although a chess match, and forgetting where they went in their careers and what have you, this was a damn good fight against a 21-0 and 22-1 (#1 and #2 contendors).

2. Again, although a chess match, Roy really did dominate this match moreso than most people lead on. Most rounds were close (REALLY was a chess match), but Roy was NOT ONLY the cleaner and sharper puncher, but in the majority of the rounds, also threw the more punches.

3. Nonetheless, Roy seemed quite tentative, JUST as much as Hopkins was in fact (maybe more so), considering it was ALSO his first world title fight.

4. Considering both fighters developed a lot more after, I really can't see a way that Hopkins could find a way to beat Roy, EVER. (although Hopkins became a significantly different fighter after).

5. I scored the fight 117-111, but would NOT argue with 118-110 (10 rounds to 2, which is what the commentators had it - one even had it 119-109!!!) but also could NOT argue with 116-112 (which is what the 3 judges had it, plus the majority of what people SAY they had it, although I question how long it has been since they've really scored it)

6. Finally, with the bad blood that was already there, DAMN this fight shoulda had a rematch. It woulda been a beauty to have had it in 2003, a decade later... That's the stuff of history!

Good post. This was the undercard bout for the historic Bowe/Ferguson fight. Larry hated the fight as you would expect, and at one point he compared it to a debate on C-Span, which was sort of a cable tv novelty at the time.

You know you are a real fan if you enjoy this fight. I think it's fascinating and watch it frequently. Such a shame they couldn't have hooked up later, although I think the result was inevitable.

Both guys were terrified of each other, it was obvious. Gil Clancy started talking about the "jabbing short" from the very opening of the bout.

The real beauty in this fight is watching their feet. Not much is happening with their hands, but the competition for real estate was being conducted at such a high athletic level, it's really fun to watch in retrospect.

Hopkins was the only guy for many years who moved toward Roy so aggressively, and Jones was bothered by it, but Roy never stayed in one spot long enough for Hopkins to get comfortable enough to throw, and he was in awe of Roy's handspeed.

So, the pattern of the fight was Hopkins would push forward using his quick feet, and if Roy felt compromised, he would make a dazzling move to escape. Meanwhile, a punch did occasionally get thrown, but very few landed cleanly.

I scored it 8-4 based on Roy's coasting a little late and Hopkins finally starting to throw combos against Jones on the ropes. He waited too long to do this, and even then he never truly committed. Bernard may have been green and far more aggressive in those days, but he never was going to be a face-first kind of guy.

Anyway, I'm mostly just happy that there's one more person out there who enjoys this fight, which is almost universally considered a stinker.

[huki]

It sucks that they fought each other so early. After every time I watch it, it's pretty disappointing because both of them weren't very comfortable and didn't seem to have much of a plan. The match should have happened a few years later. Roy just won because of his speed and natural talent. I'm a bigger Hopkins fan than a Jones fan and I think Bernard could have fought a better fight with a better gameplan, but I don't think he could have ever beaten Jones. Roy just has too much talent for anybody in history at MW. His quickness and awkward angled punches would always trouble Hopkins.

[Lampley]

It sucks that they fought each other so early. After every time I watch it, it's pretty disappointing because both of them weren't very comfortable and didn't seem to have much of a plan. The match should have happened a few years later. Roy just won because of his speed and natural talent. I'm a bigger Hopkins fan than a Jones fan and I think Bernard could have fought a better fight with a better gameplan, but I don't think he could have ever beaten Jones. Roy just has too much talent for anybody in history at MW. His quickness and awkward angled punches would always trouble Hopkins.

For the sake of argument, how about Hagler? Hopkins' work in that fight has me thinking that Marvin would have been able to push Roy similarly, and Marvin would have thrown punches. I think I'd favor Hagler slightly over Jones at 160, but Roy by a moderate margin at 168.

[KO Boxing]

The real beauty in this fight is watching their feet. Not much is happening with their hands, but the competition for real estate was being conducted at such a high athletic level, it's really fun to watch in retrospect.

:good

The version I have isn't the HBO version, and the commentators (who sometimes aren't the brightest bunch) picked up on the beautiful footwork. It really is something to watch, if you focus on it.

And as I said, can't argue with 116-112 (as ALL three judges had that). I had it 8-2 after 10, and both last rounds were close and arguable, so even on my card it coulda ended up 8-4. Still a clear win for Roy, I had it 117-111, and one commentator even had it 119-109.

[The Kurgan]

I had Jones clearly winning it 119-110 (ie. 10-1-1). The rounds were close because neither boxer wanted to do anything aggressive, but at no point did I feel that Hopkins did enough to win a round except in the 8th. Jones, on the other hand, put on one of the poorer performances of his career and only did just enough to win rounds. I think I scored one of the rounds even due to total deadlock.

What this fight did show to me, somewhat like Jones-Toney, was that this was a case of a world class boxer falling short against a great boxer. I've never understood why anyone thinks that Hopkins could have beaten a peak Roy, but I suppose the Philadelphia appeal is a seductive one.

[huki]

For the sake of argument, how about Hagler? Hopkins' work in that fight has me thinking that Marvin would have been able to push Roy similarly, and Marvin would have thrown punches. I think I'd favor Hagler slightly over Jones at 160, but Roy by a moderate margin at 168.
Not only would he lose, but I think Hagler has a smaller chance against Jones than Hopkins. He was bothered by speed even more than Hopkins and he would be more frustrated by Jones' running/exploding style.

It's very hard to imagine anybody beating Roy Jones at MW (not considering the tiny chance of landing a KO punch on him). He was just the perfect fighter and he was physically huge at that weight too.. there has never been anybody like him really. There is no style to beat him. At 175 he only loses to some ATG's because of size disadvantages. A MW version of Bob Foster would get knocked out by Jones.

[hitman_hatton1]

This was the undercard bout for the historic Bowe/Ferguson fight.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[HopkinsFan]

You gotta keep in mind Jones claims he beat Hopkins basically with one hand.. May not be true but he was obviously favoring one during the fight (can't remember which)
I also agree that Hopkins made it a closer fight then you see it, he landed a lot more on Jones in his prime then most fighters can on todays Jones..

[Carlos Primera]

Jones had without question the fastest hands ever in boxing, you can't really argue otherwise if you've seen all his fights.
2 words: Meldrick taylor

fastest ever hands i have ever seen on a fighter. just a blur watching him throw at close range

however rjj was a more effective puncher than meldrick, due to the power he had and the angles that he attacked from, coupled with his deadly speed.

[Lloyd Banks]

Jones' speed was gravity defying, the man was awesome. Hopkins really didn't impress me this fight - heck, Vinny Pazienza did a better job!

Jones had without question the fastest hands ever in boxing, you can't really argue otherwise if you've seen all his fights.

The Vinny Pazienza fight was brilliant to watch.. shit was rape though..

[LockDog387]

Hopkins was still progressing as a fighter at that time, Roy beat up a green Hopkins. Compare that fight with Hopkins-Johnson, and you will see a totally different Hopkins.

[enquirer]

Monzon is another fighter (as well as hagler.) who would rough up peak 160 jones,moreso than hagler.

[PH|LLA]

Noone thinks that Hopkins would have been favoured to beat a peak Roy. But Hopkins remained at the very top level of boxing for a longer time than Roy was able to, and to take away credit from that is just stupid. Could a 34 year old Roy beat a 38 year old Hopkins? Surely you'd have to pick Hopkins.

[PhillyPhan69]

I am a BIG B-Hop Phan! And believe he would have won a rematch (that's why RJJ created outrageous demands!) and so does RJJ! But this was a horrible fight. These were the 2 best MW's and neither one was willing to establish the dominance that was sought by fans. RJJ clearly won the fight, and had B-Hop befuddled (for maybe the only time in his carear). B-Hop seemed at a loss as how to attck RJJ and did not seem to get a handle on it till around rd. 9...I scored it 9-3 for RJJ, I could feasibly give Hop's a 4th, but didn't? Both fighters (and I use that term loosely) were way to tentative, showed way to much respect for the other. I veiw this as Hop's losing the fight more than RJJ winning it, only because neither guy seemed willing to let it fly!

[KO Boxing]

Hopkins was still progressing as a fighter at that time, Roy beat up a green Hopkins. Compare that fight with Hopkins-Johnson, and you will see a totally different Hopkins.
100% agree.

But at the same time, you HAVE to compare that Jones against say, the Jones against Toney or Pazzienza. :good


From a pure boxing point of view, I really do not mind this fight. It's obvious both guys were tentative; and knowing where they go in their careers and what they are/were capable of, it's kinda frustrating to see the lack of work (or perhaps, such respect of their opponent, which considering that their both ATGs now, is pretty smart on their behalf). BUT, forgetting who they are and what they can do (in hindsight), and just looking at the fight as it was at the time (a young undefeated star from the olmypics who was 21-0 with 20kos against the number 1 contendor who had come up the hard way, but still 22-1). Although they may not have shown exactly how great they would turn out to be, watch closely, and you'll see the slight touch of "greatness" evident in a number of things their doing. And it's quite nice to watch.

Also good to watch Jones-Toney straight after. Damn!

[sambob]

I think its safe to say the Bernard Hopkins of the late 90s couldn't beat Jones, when he was at his peak. But what the Hopkins that fought Antwun Echols the second time, or the Hopkins that fought Tarver? If Hopkins was a bit more physical with Jones, I don't see why he doesn't have a chance of beating him.

I haven't seen the fight, but isn't that how Glen Johnson beat him? Aside from Jones just being mentally not ready to fight anymore.

[sambob]

Also maybe someone knows,, whats up with the first fight on Hopkins' record? Does anyone know the story of this? I would expect a fighter like Hopkins to have NO trouble with bums fought in his first few pro fights!

[KO Boxing]

Also maybe someone knows,, whats up with the first fight on Hopkins' record? Does anyone know the story of this? I would expect a fighter like Hopkins to have NO trouble with bums fought in his first few pro fights!
Right now, off the top of my head, all I can help you out with is that it was at light-heavy, and afterwards, Hopkins took nearly 2 years off (reinvented himself, to a middleweight) and started off at 160 again. Collecting 22 straight wins, and becoming the number 1 contendor in the meantime.

Also, Hops was in jail for 5 years prior. So him losing his first fight (as a light-heavy, nonetheless) doesn't mean too much at all.

[sambob]

Well as is obvious by his current status, the loss didn't mean shit. I was just curious.

[Lampley]

Not only would he lose, but I think Hagler has a smaller chance against Jones than Hopkins. He was bothered by speed even more than Hopkins and he would be more frustrated by Jones' running/exploding style.

It's very hard to imagine anybody beating Roy Jones at MW (not considering the tiny chance of landing a KO punch on him). He was just the perfect fighter and he was physically huge at that weight too.. there has never been anybody like him really. There is no style to beat him. At 175 he only loses to some ATG's because of size disadvantages. A MW version of Bob Foster would get knocked out by Jones.

Really? I think the Marvin of 1980-81 would have had matched up OK with Roy. With his chin, I think his workrate won't drop too much, and he certainly knew how to take advantage of a guy against the ropes.

My impression of Jones has been that he was an under-muscular 160, and he was nearly perfect at 168. He was a big, strong middle, sure, but he was beneath his natural class, while Hagler was exactly where he needed to be.

Roy obviously did have that edge in speed, but he also lost four rounds officially to Hopkins for going backward, when Hopkins himself did very little. If Jones were to back up constantly against the burrowing, jabbing, combo-throwing Hagler, Marvin would have a chance to win rounds even if Roy potshotted him cleanly on occasion.

It would be a hell of a fight. Again, though, at 168, Roy gained so much strength that I think Marvin's physical advantages would disappear.

[Lampley]

Well as is obvious by his current status, the loss didn't mean shit. I was just curious.

I've always wanted to hear Hopkins discuss that fight. It's not like it affects his legacy in any way.