archie moore vs roy jones jr lightheavy....

:roflYou're not right in the head.

 

Jimmy Bivins, Eddie Booker, Ezzard Charles and Joey Maxim cannot compare to the mastery of Reggie Johnson and Virgil Hill.

 

No I don't think Maxim is better than Reggie J, Hill or Tarver from the film I've seen of them all. I'm not counting Charles as that isn't a win. Booker was a MW who beat him and drew with him and I haven't seen Booker. If you're going to include those names for Moore add Toney and BHOPs for RJJ

Bivins looks poor on film. Sometimes you have to look at the film for yourself

 

Why do people take these jokers who think Jones is on par with someone like Moore seriously. Jones was not a real fighter. His career was more pro-wrestling/smoke and mirrors than actual in the trenches fighting. His record and career was enabled by HBO and the oodles of cash they dumped into him while he avoided real fights for years and years and years and cherry picked his competition. Even when the guy fought Hopkins Hopkins was a nobody. A nobody, it was for a vacant title in Hopkins first big fight and it was the weakest fight he could have chosen in that division to win a title (and Jones looked less than super-human to boot). Jones had one big, competetive fight for the first FOURTEEN years of his career. Then when he actually moved up to challenge a HW like he said he would do for years and years he chose the weakest HW champ and took a shitload of roids to do it. Then he looked like **** against Tarver (who wasnt anything special either, and who I still thought won that fight) yet claimed he looked bad because he lost too much weight (despite spending his entire LHW career ducking challenges by saying he was really only a mw). Sorry guys, Jones cant compare in any way shape or form to Moore. And for those touting his speed and athleticism I say look who he was fighting. Those guys would make anyone look good. Why do you think all these prospects look great on the way up fighting part time fighters? Its no different only Jones wasnt a prospect he was literally defending his "championships" against men who made the lions share of their income doing something other than boxing and did it under the conditions most favorable to him.

 

i stopped there. cheated out of gold in the olympics, named fighter of the decade in the 90s by the same boxing writers who hated his guts and clearly one of the most talented fighters to ever step in the ring but you don't consider him a fighter? comical.

 

klompton i think you're taking some reasonable criticisms of jones to cartoonish extremes while discounting his obvious quality.

 

i don't think anyone is arguing that jones fought better competition than moore. that would be ridiculous to suggest. moore should always be ranked ahead on the all-time lists ahead of jones. head to head is a different story. if you don't want to give jones credit for anything he did in his career, ok, he didn't have "bottom." :roll:

jones-marciano is probably the one all-time matchup i would want to happen more than any others. all the "old-timers" wouldn't be too happy about the outcome of this one.

 

Pathetic post.

What's most laughable is that a guy who has the balls to actually step into the ring and fight at an elite level for years and years giving (and late in his career) receiving lumps is not considered a real fighter by some arrogant arsewipe who (correct me if I'm wrong Klompton and post your record with it) who has never fought professionally before at all.

You think he's overrated,that's fine. But don't call a guy who had the balls to actually step in the ring not a real fighter.

The funny thing is how disparaging these historian types are when it concerns Roy Jones. It's like his filmed performances are threatening somehow to them and their old time sacred cows who to be honest often look ridiculously pedestrian by comparison with Jones,so him and whoever he fought have to be degraded down to a ridiculous level.

You could do a Jones vs Stanley Ketchel thread and these ye olde time nuthuggers would straight faced say that Ketchel would knock him out easily even though all available film shows that Ketchel is so primitive that he's flat out throwing a punch without falling over.

It's a joke.

 

Let's stick to light heavyweight and cut to the chase. Who are the best three light heayweights Roy Jones defeated ? Not middleweight and not super middleweights.. when you compare him against Archie Moore, a man who fought exceptional competition, I'd like to see your perspective ... no arrogant putdowns, just some facts please ...

 

i wouldn't take it that far but i think you have some really good points. i think comparison of film is extremely difficult between eras and has to be taken within the context. in the end, moore looks good on film even now and i think there is a lot of detailed analysis of this fight that COULD be done by intelligent posters. unfortunately, the thought of jones being competitive with moore is so insulting to some posters that they attack roy jones like wolverines.

 

this is one of greatest posts in history! i love the history of the sport and have the ultimate respect for all of the great fighters that are discussed here but i don't suffer from "old-timer" syndrome. i understand there's a few modern fighters that could compete in the golden era of the sport.

 

Of course there is but Archie Moore is not exactly an old timer .. there is extensive footage of him and he fought in an era that without question ahd sophisticated, exceptional fighters ...

 

Anyone who looks at the way Jones beat inferior opposition with his blinding speed and athleticism and think he will beat Archie the same way is seriously fooling themselves. Moore has beaten fighters that were better than Roy, and to think that RJJ can just pot-shot Moore to victory is laughable. RJJ has always had a flawed style. He just never fought anyone who could exploit his flaws during his prime.

 

Wait so now I have to have been a professional boxer to criticize his holiness mr. Jones? Get the **** out of here, if thats the case 99% plus of all of the critics of sports would be out of a job. That argument is the last refuge of people and athletes who have no basis for their arguments. Jones was a product of media hype, PEDs, and extremely selective matchmaking. Anyone who wants to argue that fact go ahead and post why he wasnt. Did he not have an extremely deferential contract with HBO that at the end of his career even they admitted was a big mistake. Did he not try to get HBO to force Larry Merchant to not even mention Darius' name on air and when rebuked quit his broadcasting job with them? Did he not test positive for PEDs (and dont give me that Ripped Fuel bull**** because Ive seen the Indiana report and it states specifically it was anabolic steroids), did he not gain 30+ pounds of solid muscle to fight Ruiz in six months (and before you look at the weigh in stats also look at the unofficial pre fight scales which stated 201 lbs) sorry but without steroids thats an impossibility Mackie Shilstein or not. I could continue but pathetic fanboys wont listen they will continue to ignore the fact that jones' record is notable for who he didnt fight and the creative ways he chose not to fight them rather than his actual accomplishments which were basically a knack for picking up worthless title belts from paper champions and an incredible ability to weave through actual competetive fights in order to face the least competetive fighters. But this guy is gonna beat Marciano and Moore??? Ive got news for the fanboys: Michalczewski wasnt nearly as talented or scary as Moore, and Jirov wasnt nearly as dogged, determined, or hard hitting as Marciano. Jones avoided both of those guys like the black death, he sure aint stepping in the ring with Moore and Marciano.