Who has the greater legacy: RJJ or Hopkins?

I have to completely disagree here. The fight wasn't one-sided at all. There was give and take, with Jones winning a clear decision. Hopkins had rounds where he gave Jones all he could handle.

 

I wouldn't call it onesided either. BHop was competitive.

But the defeat was decisive. Bernard won three rounds to Roy's eight or nine with one round possibly even.

 

Aye, very competitive. A lot of close rounds, many of them probably edged in Roy's favour, but not by HBO commentary's margin.

 

Nubs laughs at threads like these. People, especially boxing enthusiasts hate a fast talking, unorthodox fighter. RJJ made "Good" competition look HORRIBLE and "great" competition look BAD. No one looked good against jones in his prime. RJJ is NOTHING compared to who he was and he was able to knock down calzache on a horribly placed punch. Joe C tried to mock and emulate the old jones but he has nowhere NEAR the speed and power of a prime RJJ.

Regardin the question though, Nubs has the view that RJJ was one of the rawest talents this generation or any generation ever witnessed, and Hopkins may be cementing a better legecy. RJJ just couldn't quite let his talents shine against the best opponents because THEY WEREN'T really there

Most importantly, Nubs knows (and any other smart Nub) that legacy and talent are remembered long after a fighter's career ends and the defining moments of a fighters career are not judged by their twilight years...which is what people around here are making the mistake of doing...