How Do You Rank Jones, Calzaghe, and Hopkins ATGreatness As Of Now?

[intoccabile]

You're the one that don't understand. You keep contradicting yourself.

You rate Hopkins higher than Joe because you THINK Hopkins would beat MORE higher calibre fighters than Joe. You THINK. You can't PROVE it. You THINK it.

You THINK Hopkins record is better than Calzaghes? Would Joe have struggled with Tito or Oscar? Tarver and Winky?

I could equally claim i THINK Hopkins would lose to Kessler and Eubank. I can't prove it though.

The only PROVABLE thing is Hopkins LOST to Joe. No excuses. Hopkins LOST to Joe.

Therefore Joe is better. Fact.

I clearly said, BASED ON THEIR RESUMES!
Jesus christ. The statistics do not lie. And i repeat.
ON PAPER.. HOPKINS SHITS ALL OVER JOE CALZAGHE
ITS A FACT.. Joe's accomplishments and resume doesnt even come CLOSE

So Hopkins resume, that includes a LOSS to Joe Calzaghe, is better than Joe Calzaghe's who has lost to NO-ONE!!!

ON PAPER Joe Calzaghe BEAT Roy Jones!!!

In REALITY Calzaghe BEAT Hopkins. The statistics don't lie. That is the ONLY fact. Fact.

Yes.. because i happen to know that You can lose to someone and still be greater than them. Are you going to tell me that Jermain Taylor, who beat hopkins twice, is greater than Bernard Hopkins now?

Joes resume has NOTHING on hopkins. Hopkins has fought a great list of fighters with big names, has been in the spot light for a very long time, CONTINUES to dominate at this age/stage of his career, has the 23 defenses and a decade as champion under his belt. and his close fight with Calzaghe is ANOTHER achievement.

on paper hopkins is the better man bro, i dont see how it can even be disputed.
None the less, we'll have to agree to disagree... I have to be at the gym in 30 minutes.
+rep for the arguement. Good points, maybe we'll bump heads later.