Do I really have to explain again? I am going to try and dig up my analysis from earlier posts on this subject.
Here it is: After re-watching Jones-Lacy and Hopkins-Pavlik I have come to one final conclusion. At this point in both of their careers neither fighters are agressive in the ring but Hopkins is a bit more. Hopkins is going to have to take the fight to Roy as Jones is content with letting his opponent come to him no matter the circumstances. Hopkins doesn't apply the type of pressure that Trinidad, Hanshaw, Calzaghe and Lacy do right now; although he is on a different level except for Calzaghe in terms of overall skill. So Jones will actually not have to spend time on the ropes because Hopkins won't pin him and hug on him against the ropes like the above did. He also doesn't have the workrate to wear Jones down like Calzaghe did nor the pressure. The reason Jones was against the ropes against Lacy was because Jeff pushed and hugged him on the ropes. Hopkins will not do this as he is a counterpuncher now and is defensive. The times Roy was off the ropes is when Lacy chose to box and stay away from Jones. Not once in these periods did Roy resort to the ropes under his own power. I feel Roy still has enough in him, coupled with a stylistic advantage, to win a close decision against Bernard. Now mind you this was made right after Jones' fight with Lacy and I might need to take another look at both fights again.
I think it's a good fight. they are bith at the end of their careers so it does have significance. It's not like one guy is 25 and the other 45.