Thread: Doug Jones
View Single Post
Old 09-17-2009, 03:52 PM   #39
East Side Guru
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,870
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Doug Jones

Originally Posted by frankenfrank View Post
they have a chance , don't know how good.
Next to Buckley's.

p4p they are , and harold johnson not even a great 175.
they just didn't fight in their appropriate divisions.
maybe byrd's success was because of him fighting much less mobile
HWs and SHWs.
Comparing someone like Orlin Norris to Harold Johnson is the epitome of ridiculous. Who the **** did Orlin beat that could carry the jockstrap of the TEN best guys Harold beat?

true most of times. it is a criterion.
if you are not the best of your era , how are you best of all eras ?
1. Being the best of all eras is a pretty high standard. If that's what greatness means then there's only a dozen or so great fighters, which of course is rubbish.

2. If you era is outstanding, as Johnson's obviously was, it matters little that you didn't dominate it or come out on top. Comparing it to Tarver's era of journeymen and washed up fighters is a disgrace.

this is not something i said. never.
it is something that hopkins , calzaghe and holmes lovers say.
and the klitschko lovers also , and many more.
especially what the old timers say.
they just don't recognize **** eras as such.
Tarver fought in a **** era though. Beating a past prime Roy Jones and a past prime Reggie Johnson, Montell Griffin and prime journeyman Glen Johnson is not anything CLOSE to the level of fighters Harold beat.

you haven't seen the best of chad dawson yet.
he is 27. and already achieved what he did.
i am not saying he is already proven ATG , but he may be.
Unless he improves DRAMATICALLY there is no chance he will be an excellent fighter, let alone a great.

toney was drained for the jones fight.
that's why roy picked him then.
he wasn't beaten by roy in a series of matches.
roy wanted none of him before or since their fight.
for thadzi and tiberi he was also drained.
the griffin fights were close and griffin also beat roy , don't forget.
if roy wouldn't have fouled he would have lost a decision just like james did. and for Griffin-Jones 2 Griffin was not allowed enough time to warm. griffin is underestimated himself.
i didn't know his back was broken for the walcott fight.
but he did lose perenially to moore.
Toney is a fat, undisciplined slob who would probably give Johnson 2 close fights in a series of 5 and get shut out three times when he Burger Kings it.

when did I say it ?
tarver is better h2h 175 , that's true.
didn't compare them p4p.
johnson's loss to hopkins is embarassing , however , it has big p4p implications.
Such as? That he was an embarassment at middleweight? **** that will carry a LOT of p4p weight for Glen. That should put him near Tarver for sure, my bad.

when did I say it ? #2
Originally Posted by frankenfrank
reggie johnson is a 160 who became 168 but went to 175 from career/political reasons. that explains his losses at 175 who despite the HIGH-LEVEL oposition he faced were never by stoppage.
harold johnson was somewhat bigger than reggie johnson and for sure bigger than jorge castro and fitted 175 much better than them.
can you see him going the distance with jirov , paul briggs , roy jones , sebastiaan rothman.
stopping derrick harmon and imamu mayfield.

when did I say it ? #3
at 175 ofcourse he is.
p4p is another story.
still didn't claim anything about that either.
possibly moore is greater p4p also , but i am not sure.

maybe at 175 he is.
p4p no.
Originally Posted by frankenfrank
moore was a better 175 for sure than reggie johnson because he was a natural such if not even slightly bigger than 175.
he should have been anorectic to make 175.
reggie johnson is a 160 who became 168 , hence the reason why moore a better 175 than him. but p4p is another story with an unclear answer.

when did I say it ? #4
don't know those forgotten ranked contenders that probably beat only each other and maybe a couple of them even succeeded to snitch some
controversial SD or MD over an ATG.
Which is pretty much a problem when it comes to judging them isn't it? THey only snitched the odd ATG win hey? As opposed to Reggie Johnson, Orlin Norris and Jorge Castro who had a bag full of them

quite full.
didn't know harding's injury for tarver and johnson's for walcott.
You see the whole problems stems from the fact that you haven't even seen enough of Johnson, Charles, Moore etc to form a proper opinion. Placing the resume's of Tarver and Johnson on a par is just an example of that. They are NOT on a par. Anyone with a full historical perspective, or even a half assed one, would tell you that.
sweet_scientist is offline  Top
Reply With Quote