Thread: Doug Jones
View Single Post
Old 09-18-2009, 01:11 AM   #46
East Side Guru
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,971
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Doug Jones

Originally Posted by frankenfrank View Post

fights against very good fighters that are on a winning streak or at least after a controversial/competent loss.
if they have physical advantage - it just adds to the quality.
and most preferably - fighters that are at the mix of the top of your division on top i mean the beaters of the beaters of such , etc.
Then using these standards YOU've set up, fighters like Clarence Henry, Nino Valdez, Henry Hall, Paul Andrews, Billy Smith, Marty Marshall, Eddie Cotton, Eddie Machen, Doug Jones, Gustav Scholz, Lothar Stengel, Tommy Ruth and probably others ALL qualify as "quality" fights, contrary to your earlier statement.

Originally Posted by frankenfrank View Post
jonesX3 , JohnsonX2,DawsonX2,HardingX2 ,reggie johnson , griffin , woods (even , because he is part of the mix of tarver's time and younger than tarver , and not smaller ) , benguesmia - stopped o'neil bell , Hopkins
Then on Johnson's side, you'd have Moore(x5), Charles, Bivins, Walcott, Pastrano, Satterfield(x3), Henry, Valdez, Hall(x3), Andrews(x2), Marshall, Cotton, Machen, Jones, Scholz, Stengel, and Ruth.

I'd say it's pretty clear Johnson had more quality fights and did better in them.

Originally Posted by frankenfrank View Post
again , don't let me repeat the hopkins and dawson stories.
Just because you can come up with an excuse for a fighter doesn't mean the loss(es) didn't happen. You can make an excuse for every loss a fighter ever had. If you wanted, you could make excuses for the fighters who lost to Tarver, and then where would his legacy be?

The fact still remains, he was a total of 0-3 against them, losing every fight by a wide margin.

Originally Posted by frankenfrank View Post
tarver's stoppage of harding was more decisive than harding's points victory over him.
So what? The fact still is his loss was decisive, not "close or controversial", contrary to what you earlier said.

Originally Posted by frankenfrank View Post
says who ? fleaman ?
Says most anyone who's actually studied those fighters - which you've admitted excludes you.

Originally Posted by frankenfrank View Post
Johnson fought jones only once he didn't do better than tarver cause tarver stopped roy much quicker , and also beat him on another ocasion
Johnson needed only one try to beat him and dominated him from the get-go. Tarver LOST the first time he fought Roy and needed a second fight before he could figure him out.
My2Sense is offline  Top
Reply With Quote