Was B-Hop too green when few first fought Jones? Sure he was a champ but he hadn't really beat anyone Why was there never a rematch sooner than there eventually was??
Bernard had more fights when they fought and had been a professional longer. Also, Bernard wasn't a champion, the title was vacant. You can say he hadn't developed to be who he would eventually become, but to say he was "green". Nah, that's simply not a great excuse.
I'm still amazed how easily Jones beat two excellent fighters (Hopkins and Toney) back then. I was not a big fan of him but he was certainly at another level.
Hopkins wasn't the champion when he and Roy Jones fought the first time. James Toney had been the IBF Middleweight Champion. Bernard Hopkins was his #1 contender. Roy Jones was the #2 contender. But Toney had troubles making weight. So Toney vacated. The first Hopkins-Jones fight was for the title left vacant by Toney. Jones won. When Jones left the division, Hopkins fought for the vacant IBF belt again. Once again, he was unsuccessful. He was floored twice and fought to a draw with Segundo Mercado. In his third attempt at the IBF Middleweight title, Hopkins finally won. Hopkins wasn't considered that great of a fighter during the initial part of his middleweight run. And Roy Jones had left the division, gone up to super middleweight and, later, light heavyweight. So at a certain point there were two divisions separating them. HBO tried to drum up interest in a Jones-Hopkins rematch in 2000. They even held a doubleheader featuring Hopkins-Vanderpool and Jones-Hall, but Hopkins didn't look impressive. And Hopkins wanted a 50-50 purse split. It didn't make sense at the time. Hopkins wasn't really elevated to another level in everyone's eyes until he won the middleweight unification tournament and knocked out Trinidad in Madison Square Garden.
You can't fall back on the excuse that someone's amateur background is a sole determining factor of someone's class level in the ring. They're professionals, They were pro's for literally the same amount of time, same (effective) amount of fights. They both had the same amount of seasoning as professionals. You can't call a pro "green" once they're 5 years into their career, I don't care what the opponents amateur career looked like.
So why do Olympians and high level amateurs tend to do better in the early careers than a normal fighter Plus that was really Hopkins first big moment in the limelight whereas Roy Jones was used to the bright lights or does that not matter to you either
Olympians and high level amateur boxers are looked after much better then someone who wasn't known. They have people who have invested time and money into them. And an Olympic boxers aren't going to be thrown to the wolves like an unknown young pro.
Bernard Hopkins had a decent amateur career although he wasn't as good as Jones. Both were fighting for a title for the first time in their lives. Jones also had an injured hand (or so I recall).