Which win is more legit? vote

[RockyB]

What win is more legit?

Roy Jones UD win over Bernard Hopkins in 93 when a lot of people state Hopkins wasnt at his best yet? or if Hopkins wins the upcoming bout where Jones is clearly shot to pieces and at his absolute worst. and who will go down as the best fighter?

[bojangles1987]

This is no debate, Roy Jones was nearly as green himself when he fought Hopkins, and he is the only person to decisively beat Hopkins. Hopkins is still a top level fighter and RJ is shot to hell.

93 matchup: Two green future HOF fighters in their first title fight, the better man won.

2010: One old effective fighter against a really shot fighter.

[Joe Ko!]

If Roy Jones beats Hopkins this year it will be a shocking upset

I expect Hopkins wins by TKO in at least 7 rounds

[catalinul]

Roy's win over Hopkins is clearly the better one.Roy ow is totally finished.

About who's the better fighter....don't know,it's pretty close.Maybe a slight edge to Roy.

[Rolling Stone]

HHAHHAHHAHA....If Danny the ****ing Joke Green can beat Roy Jones, than you know he is a shadow of a shadow of the shell which is the shadow of another shell of Roy Jones's Shell that was left behind from Johnson which was also the shadow of Roy which was also the shell of Jones when he lost to Tarver, of his former self.

[CCobra]

This is no debate, Roy Jones was nearly as green himself when he fought Hopkins, and he is the only person to decisively beat Hopkins. Hopkins is still a top level fighter and RJ is shot to hell.

HAHA, this post sucks. Roy Jones is an OLYMPIC MEDALLIST with almost 150 amateur fights to his name, how the hell could he be green? Pre-prime maybe, but green.. GTFO with that. I hope you know that the Roy Jones of 1993 and the Jones of the late 90s aren't that different. Roy Jones never got fundamentally better at boxing, he always relied on his reflexes and that's why the difference between pre-prime Jones and prime Jones isn't that much.

Bernard Hopkins on the other hand, whilst he wasn't green he certainly wasn't as experienced as Roy Jones. The Hopkins of 1993 and the Hopkins of the late 90s and early 00s are incredibly different fighters. Hopkins got fundamentally better in every single department and there is no comparison between the Hopkins of 93 and the Hopkins of 1999/2001.

Besides, Hopkins is not a top level fighter anymore. Don't let his P4P ranking fool you, his legs are shot and if he wasn't so damn fundamentally good he wouldn't be in the position he's in right now. Bernard Hopkins will beat pretenders like Kelly Pavlik until he's 50 because if you come straight forward at Hopkins you will never win. But as soon as a guy brings lateral movement and speed to the table, Hopkins can take him close but never dominate him like he would have done in his prime.

[bojangles1987]

HAHA, this post sucks. Roy Jones is an OLYMPIC MEDALLIST with almost 150 amateur fights to his name, how the hell could he be green? Pre-prime maybe, but green.. GTFO with that. I hope you know that the Roy Jones of 1993 and the Jones of the late 90s aren't that different. Roy Jones never got fundamentally better at boxing, he always relied on his reflexes and that's why the difference between pre-prime Jones and prime Jones isn't that much.

Bernard Hopkins on the other hand, whilst he wasn't green he certainly wasn't as experienced as Roy Jones. The Hopkins of 1993 and the Hopkins of the late 90s and early 00s are incredibly different fighters. Hopkins got fundamentally better in every single department and there is no comparison between the Hopkins of 93 and the Hopkins of 1999/2001.

Besides, Hopkins is not a top level fighter anymore. Don't let his P4P ranking fool you, his legs are shot and if he wasn't so damn fundamentally good he wouldn't be in the position he's in right now. Bernard Hopkins will beat pretenders like Kelly Pavlik until he's 50 because if you come straight forward at Hopkins you will never win. But as soon as a guy brings lateral movement and speed to the table, Hopkins can take him close but never dominate him like he would have done in his prime.

So you are actually going to pretend that Roy Jones was some proven professional fighter leagues above Hopkins in their first fight? And that Hopkins beating Roy now is comparable to Roy beating Hopkins in their first fight?

Sad.

[CCobra]

So you are actually going to pretend that Roy Jones was some proven professional fighter leagues above Hopkins in their first fight? And that Hopkins beating Roy now is comparable to Roy beating Hopkins in their first fight?

Sad.

Seems to me like somebody can't read properly. I was picking up on your ridiculous Roy was green comment. At no point in my post did I say that if Hopkins were to beat Jones in 2010, it would be better than Jones win over Hopkins in 1993. It's obvious which is better the better of the two (assuming Hopkins does beat RJJ).

But of course RJJ was streaks above Hopkins in their first fight. Not only was he an Olympic medallist (should be gold) with over 150 amateur fights to his name, but he was not a fighter who relied on boxing fundamentals and therefore the RJJ of 1993 wasn't very different from the RJJ of the later part of the 90s. Hopkins on the other hand, he hit his prime when his fundamentals were polished and his physical attributes were still in good shape. Hopkins of the early 90s had physical strength, but not the fundamentals to go with it. He was just a semi-elite fighter in comparison to the elite fighter he became.

[Joe2608]

Wasn't Hopkins ranked above Jones in the IBF rankings when they fought? Hopkins was No. 1 in the rankings if i'm not mistaken.
Jones had less fights than Hopkins at that point too.
Both were young and inexperienced, it's just an excuse so that Hopkins fans can claim he has never lost.

[HighFlyer]

RJJ's win over BHOP is more legit