Who deserved fighters of the Decade more..(90's)

Sweet pea.

From 90-97 he did more than did jones from 93-99 imo.

Pea might have had a past prime struggle with rivera but jones had a prime struggle with griffin.

It could be argued both failed to fight their biggest challenge with jones not getting the fight with dm and pea never unifying with tito. However pea's work at lw is better than jones in any division by my reckoning.

Pea close but clear. He also, to me, looks better on film.

 

Whitaker.

 

I think Jones has a better land mark wins in the decade with his wins over the likes of Bhop,
and Toney but Whitaker done some serious work at 135 which was more than Jones done in any of the three weights he fought at in the 90s.

I can never split these two and i think i was on the judging panel the fact that Jones was doing well through the whole decade, with only that 1 DQ loss that was avenged so surely and Pea had not won a fight for the last few years of the decade, that i would lean towards Jones.

Its one of those times that the timing of a career can let a fighter down for FOTD.

 

Jones didn't do anything the first few years of the decade though, that evens out pea's lack of work at the end imo. Even then he deserved to beat the p4p number 1 imo.

 

I know but as i have trouble splitting them i was just trying to think how the judges might, taking Jones virtually undefeated record at the time into account along with the fact he had about 15 more fights in the decade. With Pea getting the draw in his biggest fight and those losses at the end of the decade.

They are both two of my favorite all time fighters to watch.

 

for me, it's jones. it's worth discussing and arguments are there for both but jones saw his best two wins at this time and by 1996-97 was at the top of the pound for pound lists where he would remain for the rest of the decade

the 90s were good for whitaker but his true peak likely ended in 93 and by 97, he wasn't the same dynamo as old. if you included 88 and 89, i'd say sweet pea

 

Pea was just as undefeated as roy was during the decade up until the tito fight.

Counting meaningful fights only there's not much difference in the volume tbh.

 

I agree taking the meaningful fights into consideration they are about equal but i do think the two big wins for Jones vs the draw with Chavez for Pea holds Pea back.

Also Pea may be undefeated in the time frame but imagine being a judge at the time and seeing both of them. Yes Pea looks better if you take a look at both at their very best, only by a fraction though. They had seen Pea look much less incredible against some people in comparison to Jones.

 

Wasn't really a draw vs chavez and no sane minded judge would treat it as such imo.

 

I score the fight for Pea but like i said i just think that it could be little things like this that were in the judges heads.

 

I really don't see it a big issue Jones didn't fight Dariusz, who wasn't all that.

Roy fought a lot of gold fighters as LHW, Michalewszhkieszie was just another good fighter he missed. Not like he was insanely brilliant and Roy ****ed up big time not fighting him.

Matching them up H2H it's a mismatch IMO. A shame, but not that much of a shame.

Sweet Pea for me though. Just.

Roy Jones was the first fighter I ever stumbled across (well, me old man made me watch him) as a kid and he got me into boxing. It's not an easy choice for me.

 

Pea for me looking back

 

i just can't see pea as fighter of the decade...i don't know, it wasn't the opponents as much as the sustained dominance for me. from 1993-2000 he competed in 3 divisions and completely dominated two of them, and beating an all time great and reaching the top of the division in the third. in a pound for pound sense i believe he had more years at #1 than pea had and he was certainly in the top 5 more years than pea. i guess what i'm getting tripped up on is that jones was at his best in the 90s and pea wasn't

 

I've answered differently in the past but I'd probably go for Jones.

Whitaker has the better resume for me (since I include Chavez and DLH as wins for Pea) and at his best (1990-1991) he was probably more unbeatable than Jones at his best (1994-1995), but basically Whitaker looked less than convincing for more than half the decade whereas Jones kept his dominance throughout 1993-1999.

The Griffin fight Jones looked bad, but he still was about to KO Griffin and win the fight. Beyond that, Jones was pretty much flawless for the decade.

P4p, I like Whitaker better, though I'm not too hard up against anyone that picks Jones there too.

Jones has had an embarrassing fall from grace, but we shouldn't forget what a special fighter he was. Head and shoulders better than anyone in the sport at the moment in a h2h sense imo.