Who has a better Legacy??? Hopkins or Jones

[S.G.]

Hopkins, in my opinion

his resume is better and skill-wise the two are pretty close, so he edges it for me

[KingTito]

It's a tough call. I'd lean toward B-Hop.

[dde91]

Hard to call. Nard had a late surge with some surprisingly easy victories over Pavlik and Tarver, but mostly remembered for beating up on blown up welterweights. Roy captured a HW crown by beating the easiest of the champs, but was unstoppable early in his career. I would have to give the nod to Roy for the HW title and unifying the LHW division.

the only blown up WW he fought was Oscar. Trinidad was not over blown up. Trinidad knocked out Joppy, who was a real middleweight. If you take away Hopkins win over Trinidad, then take away Wrights win from him to, because that Winky Wrights best win, is over Trinidad.

And if Bernard Hopkins became Lineal champ at LHW and if he does at Cruiser, will that show he fought bigger men?
Hagler beat a Blown up welterweight in Hearns then, and a extremely blown up LW in Duran.

[ИATAS]

Gotta go with bhop on this one. I think he took on the tougher challenges imo.

[larryx]

both are legends..why compare

[THE REED]

WHoever you think has the better legacy.... saying that because Hopkins did better later in his career is not worthy of a valid reason...

Roy sealed his legacy in his 20's and early 30s...

Bernard sealed his in his 30's and early 40's


Just because one can fight longer? What about the guy that got there first?


MY defense on Roy over BHOP... aside from Tarver... every BIG NAME fighter had to move up to fight Bernard...

Where Roy had to move up to fight alll the fighters he fought...

[dde91]

I'm in the minority, but I think Hopkins has a better legacy. I think Hopkins' 20 title defenses are damn near as good as Roy's multiple belts in multiple divisions. Both men have been in the top 10 P4P in 10 different years.

But the reason I pick Hopkins (aside from a little bias), is because Hopkins KO'd a prime, undefeated Trinidad - Roy outpointed a 3 years retired, fat, old version of Tito.

Hopkins TKO'd Glen Johnson 10 years ago - Roy got knocked out by an older, slower version of Johnson many years later.

Hopkins schooled the man who beat Jones in a trilogy, one by knockout, in Tarver. (I don't care what you say, Roy lost the first fight too. He got a gift decision and everybody knew it.)

Hopkins dropped a highly contested, close SD loss to undefeated Calzaghe - Roy got embarassed and ****d by Calzaghe, losing 11 rounds and being battered without mercy.

Hopkins gets my vote.

No disrespect to Roy. I love Roy. I just love Bernard more.

that how i see it too.
Everybody says Jones muscle loss messed up his fights with Tarver. He had 3 fights with Tarver, and inbetween had much time to get his rest his body.

[dde91]

WHoever you think has the better legacy.... saying that because Hopkins did better later in his career is not worthy of a valid reason...

Roy sealed his legacy in his 20's and early 30s...

Bernard sealed his in his 30's and early 40's


Just because one can fight longer? What about the guy that got there first?

not saying because he did better later in his career, but because he was able to keep fighting big names and winning at such a late age. (Pavlik, Winky, Tarver)

[IMDAZED]

that how i see it too.
Everybody says Jones muscle loss messed up his fights with Tarver. He had 3 fights with Tarver, and inbetween had much time to get his rest his body.

Longevity doesn't make one better than the other or LL Cool J would be the greatest rapper ever. And Bernard hopkins would be rated higher than Ray Robinson who also went south in his mid-30's. It's what you accomplish, period. Furthermore, it wasn't as if Jones' dominance was brief - he ran the sport for about a good ten years. I rate Roy higher but Hops is not finished. Either way, they're both ATG's. However, I think these kind of threads should have some guidelines. Like - were you following boxing in the 90's? And not 1999 either.

[Truth]

It could go either way. I really have no problem with someone rating Nard over Roy, or Roy over Nard.