Who has the greater legacy: RJJ or Hopkins?

Jones still IMO, but your thread will end up being about equal on either side.

I have Hopkins right outside the top 30 and Jones right inside the top 25. The difference between 30 and 25 is about the difference between Tommy Hearns and Julian Jackson's punching power....miniscule.

 

In my opinion, Roy Jones, if both retired today, would go down as the greater fighter. I agree with kg0208...it's close and the poll will likely be close.

Remember, boxing is a "what have you done lately" sport

 

i dont know.

but man jones was unbeatable for a long time

 

Lets not start this, unless you actually plan on naming fighters and what they actually accomplished. Calling them bums, garbage men, etc without actually looking at the fact that they were top 10 ranked fighters and many were champions, former, current, or future at the time is redundant.

 

You have to take into account his loss to Jones and his losses to Taylor as well, along with his draw with a fighter that Jones would have eaten alive.

Prime for prime especially, Jones is the better fighter.

 

Jones. It's interesting that Hopkins has basically had his prime after the age of 35, but not only did Jones beat the snot out of Hopkins, he was the best fighter in the world for nearly a decade, and a top 3 P4P guy for longer than that! That's insane! There are only a select few who can say they've done anything close to that. Granted, Jones never had a run of quality fights like Hopkins has had in his late career, but spread over the course of time, and basically ignoring the time period after he fell off the cliff (which I tend to do when looking back at past professionals in all sports - why hold the times when they were green or gray against them?), he has the more impressive resume. The fact that Popkins STILL hasn't fallen off that cliff is incredible, but I'm not sure there's anything he could reasonably do at this point to pass Jones, short of beating the Calzaghe/Kessler winner and/or moving up to claim his own heavyweight belt.

 

He didn't fight everybody, but he didn't fight nobodies either.

What I find unusual is how the climate has changed. Look at Cotto's resume. People say he has fought some tough unbeaten contenders and top challengers. He gets praised....

Jones did the same all through LHW where he was the smaller man, but gets criticized for it.

Jones is judged on a sliding scale....they compare his talent to his resume, and they aren't comparable. Compared to resumes of his contemporaries, it's perfectly fine.

 

Yes, but that is another point. Until Jones was past his prime, he didn't have close fights. Even with other elite fighters and other champions, he left no doubt who won.

I am making a case for Jones. I can just as easily make a case for Hopkins, since they are that close.

 

Then that applies to everyone. Not everyone are champions...this is a myth. Certainly champions are not as high of a caliber as they used to be on the whole. They are not however, bums and nobodies.

And Jones opponents during that HBO contract were ranked fighters, not that many were old. Jones only fought old opponents when they had a belt really, and he was trying to unify.