Originally Posted by bj44
Hopkins wins now but hes never gonna convince anyone he was the better fighter when they were in there primes... He has an argument for going down as the better fighter in the history book though cus of his longevity.
I agree that Roy is most definitely the better fighter in their prime, and he may be the better fighter this Saturday...
The Kelly Pavlik and Antonio Tarver wins were big for Hopkins, but this fight with Roy will definitely put some closure on the debate between some of the fans. For me, Roy has the more impressive resume and storied career regardless of what happens on Saturday. Everybody already agrees that they are past their time at this point, and even if Bernard beats Roy, he can never erase the beating Roy gave him in 1993.
Hopkins longevity is not really surprising when you look at it. Since 2006 his rate of fights has dropped down, which is to be expected, but when you are comparing his career to Roy's, you need to remember that Roy started boxing at an amateur level when he was 15 years old and he had 134 fights, of which he won 121. Also, Roy was robbed at the Olympic games in 1988, one year before starting his pro career.
Bernard went straight to the pro level when he was 23 in 1988 and he lost his very first fight. He didn't fight again until 1990, and then did not lose again until he met Roy in 93. Now, I am not gonna take anything Bernard has accomplished away from him, not at all. I think he is definitely a Hall of Famer with a strong argument for All Time Great. However I will admit I am a huge Roy Jones fan, and I will always be partial to Jones in the debate over who has the better legacy.