Who Won The Roy Jones Vs Bernard Hopkins Rivialry?

Borenard was never as good as Rjj once he got beat by Jones he avoided him like the plague until he was Ko ed several times and lost his legs before agreeing to the rematch. I don't know why these two always get compared when they are league apart

 

Good ****ogy. I like it! :smoke

LOL, why is the proper word for Butthole censored when Butthole isn't?

 

I see it as a tie. Roy had the best early career and Hopkins had the better late career.

 

Fair enough. By avenging his early loss to Jones, BHOP has evened up their head to head bouts to 1 and 1.

However, in this rivalry, there can be only one, and that one is, Bernard "The Executioner Alien" Hopkins. :yep

 

That's simple. Hopkins did. Even though both guys boxed well after his due date, Hopkins didn't embarrass himself and destroy his legacy by getting his glass chin cracked a good dozen times like RJJ did.

 

the fans lost, since they refused to fight a rematch until jones was irrelevant.

 

It wasn't "They", but Roy Jones who ducked the rematch.

Had the rematch occurred sooner, BHOP would have been the 1st to KO Jones. :yep

 

jones appeared to want nothing of hopkins for years. hbo would have a list of guys jones should fight next. every time jones would find someone no one had heard of.

 

I fail to see any reasonable argument for Hopkins. As for their personal rivalry the first fight was clearly the more significant fight. Jones won that easily and with a broken hand too.

The other great fighter from 160-168 during their career was Toney and Joe Calzaghe. The latter wanted nothing to do with either until they were clearly past their best so he's irrelevant to the conversation. Hopkins never fought Toney and Jones easily defeated him. Points for Jones.

Hopkins stayed at 160 and dominated a reletively weak division beating the likes of Johnson, Mercado, Joppy. Essentially nobody really noteworthy until he beat a Welterweight named Trinidad.

As Hopkins went to 175 he beat Pavlik which is pretty good, but again he's the smaller man. Essentially since 2005 he just kept racking up losses. So his longevity is overstated. Was he good for a very long time? Yes he was. But let's remember that since 2005 he's been doing a ton of losing.

Meanwhile Roy Jones was an exceptionally dominant fighter for an entire decade.

 

You KNOW that's not true yet you said it anyway.


Hopkins wasn't willing to swallow his pride, admit he was the lesser draw, AND they guy coming up and accept 60/40

"60/40 I kick your ass"

 

In 1993, Roy beat Bernard with a fractured hand, and Bernard then went undefeated for a further 12 years.

In 2002, the boxing world was desperate to see two of the best Pound for Pound fighters in the world square off. Yet Bernard priced himself out and clearly didn't want the fight. (see below) Bernard then spent over a year out of the ring before coming back and fighting Morrade Hakkar.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/boxing/stories/2002-07-10-jones-hopkins.htm


In 2010, Bernard signed to fight Roy, even though he'd said that Roy was finished in 2008:

http://www.doghouseboxing.com/Benz/Benz_1112a08.htm


In a pointless, foul filled match, Bernard gained his revenge whilst trying his best to get Roy disqualified.


So the answer to your question is simple as far as I'm concerned:


1. Roy beat him when it mattered.

2. Bernard would not fight Roy in 2002, when the fight would have been huge.

3. Bernard beat Roy when it didn't matter, when Roy hadn't had a top level win for over 6 years.


Roy clearly got the upper hand in their rivalry.


:good

 

Roy Jones

 

Roy unified LHW, went up to HW, then went back and reclaimed the LHW titles.

That was while Bernard was still fighting at MW.

 

:good

 

That's another debate altogether.

We're supposedly looking at their rivalry.