Quote Originally Posted by p4pking View Post
Roy easily beat Hopkins when they fought. How that doesn't count for more amongst some people has always baffled me. CLEARLY Roy should be higher, in anywhere near his best form he would have always beat Hopkins and anyone that Hopkins was capable of beating, it really shouldn't even be an argument.
Roy was better. The argument that Hop was good longer ignores who was better. It's so damn frustrating. If the best of Roy beats the best of Hop he's better. And we know the best of Roy beats the best of Hop.

Hop gets full credit for his longevity but you can't ignore who was better when discussing who was better.