Joe Calzaghe v Roy Jones Jnr 2002

He also fails to mention that for the majority of the time there wasn't 4 belts to fight for. When fighters like Conn and Foster moved up they had to face THE champion not some trinket beltholder. Spinks moved up and fought THE champion he didn't move up and try and face Trevor Berbick instead :rofl that is what Jones did. There are tons of examples of this.

What Jones did is NOT history. Period.

 

if its not history, then who else has done it?

take your time to answer, now. perhaps someone else WILL do it if you wait long enough, hey.

 

Rico simply doesn't like fighters who he says have glass jaws, expect for Wladimir Klitschko who he has a huge crush on.

 

He didn't fight THE champion like Fitzsimmons and others that moved up did. He opted to take the easy way out and fight a trinket beltholder :rofl

Like I said what he did would have been the equivalent of Spinks moving up and fighting Berbick instead of Holmes which would have been a complete joke.

That is Jones fault for not having the courage to fight THE champion. atsch

 

It's a pointless argument, over 50 pages of opinion being passed as fact. Utter nonsense.

Prime Calzaghe v Prime Jones would have been a corker but it was not possible to be made, they did not overlap at their respective peaks for it to happen. So there's really no debate to be had. You only really get arguments as vociferous as this in boxing, you rarely see it happen in any sport, even head-to-head sports. People arguing about nothing.

 

I never said it wasn't an acheivement in an historical sense.

You need to understand that, If Ruiz had been champ instead of Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano, Joe Frazier or Muhammad Ali, then surely Billy Conn, Archie Moore and Bob Foster would have been there before Jones.

Let me give you a little history lesson here lad. Back in the day there was only one belt a division. Today there is more than 4. This means, that is much easier to win a belt today, compared to how it was back in the day. Understand?

You may leave now.

 

why are you trying to tell me things I already know? and in that tone? What does your tone tell me about your character?

not that it matters, but anyway thanks for acknowledging that Jones made history.

 

Rico Spadafora,

The thing with you is, you're not looking for a fair, objective debate. You've got an agenda.

I've never said that Roy HAD to fight Ruiz. But Holyfield was Roy's initial target, and Roy had wanted to fight him for a while. Now you've got to cut Roy some slack, he was never just going to move up and challenge Lewis. He was always going to test the water first, and then assess his options. That's why he didn't target Tyson first either. Whether you liked him or not, Ruiz was a top 5 guy, and the WBA champ. It's still an achievement for a 34 year old LHW to go up and dominate him. Now we both know, that you can't list a load of other former MW's that accomplished that. If Ruiz was the WBA champ today, would Ward, Kessler, Froch, Cleverley etc be knocking on his door?

This makes no sense.

How did Joe risk EVERYTHING? He'd moved up in weight, had a much better camp, where he didn't have to starve himself, he'd already done everything he possibly could at 168, and was in his final year. Hopkins was still elite, but he was 43, and couldn't last the pace.

Roy started at 154, and won a version of the HW title at 34, after 50 fights. He was boxing in his 5th weight class. Are you telling me that Roy didn't take a risk moving from MW to fight Toney? Are you telling me that Roy didn't take a bigger risk than Joe, when he fought Ruiz? Are you telling me that he didn't take a bigger risk, when he went back down to 175 for Tarver? Those were much bigger risks. Joe was happy to stay in a weaker division for fourteen years, until 2008, even though he'd said in 2004, that he knew he HAD to move up to further his career. It was Joe who was MADE to fight Peter Manfredo at 34-35 for U.S. Exposure.

You're crazy, if you think that Roy didn't take more risks in his career.

How is it irrelevant exactly? He waited ten years to unify through a lack of ambition. Roy could have stayed at 168 and held onto his IBF, eventually waiting for another opportunity to unify. But he didn't! In 2003, Joe couldn't unify against Ottke, like how Roy couldn't fight Benn and Liles. What happened? He STAYED! Again the following year, Joe said there was nothing left for him at 168. What happened? He STAYED! This was before Lacy and Kessler came on the scene. That shows you his mindset.

You're having a laugh!

He didn't duck Lacy?

1. According to Frank W, he tried to pull out at the last minute with a phantom injury.

2. Who had Lacy beaten?

3. Who had Kessler beaten?


Joe admitted he didn't want tough fights in his 20's, and ended up fighting the Salem's and the Pudwell's of the world in his 30's.

He literally starved himself to make 168, when he could have had bigger fights at 175.

What's the great achievement, in defending a lightly regarded belt for nearly ten years, and then eventually unifying against Kessler?

How did Kessler obtain his belts?

Who'd he beaten?

Roy had much more ambition, and took far greater risks, than fighting a 43 year old Bernard Hopkins, and Mikkel Kessler.

What would a peak version of Roy have done with Kessler and Lacy?

Roy would probably have made Kessler look like a nobody, and then been criticised afterwards.

He pulled out of the Sanders fight to pursue a BIGGER fight!

What don't you understand about that?

Oh the irony!

Who the F**k are these other posters?

Bailey and Assassin? Ha!

Hilarious!


Roy's made many mistakes in his career, but you have an agenda.


Yes, Kerry Davis was unhappy with Roy at a certain point in time, just like Larry Merchant was after the Frazier fight.


But again, they were happy as a whole, and Roy fought for them over 25 times.


You can't just mention those two incidents, and then ignore what happened afterwards.

Davis and HBO hated the Frazier, Kelly and Harmon fights.

But they were more than happy with fights against the likes of Reggie Johnson, Griffin, Hill, Harding, Telesco, Ruiz and Tarver.

But you're not interested in that.


I don't mind that you hate Roy. But you have to be fair with it.


Your hatred throws all logic out of the window.

 

A bigger fight for 1/3 of the money? :rofl

Get lost. That is the most delusional thing you have posted yet. I can guarantee you Jones wishes he had that extra money now. And, once again this post was littered with your Opinion. Stop.

 

I suspect James J Corbett is somewhat past showing up for fights when Roy was at HW.
But given your newly revealed penchant for fighting past times champions, you must be well proud of Joe Calzahge cherrypicking 19th century oldies like Bernard Hopkins.

yeeehaaa cowboy.

 

I'm generally tired of the Ripped Fuel brigade upping Jones's resume to heights his merits cannot cash in.

 

if its not history, why has no one else done it yet?

Put another way, why has no one else done it yet, since its not history?

Or phrased another way, if something has not been done yet, is it not history? When does it become history? When you, Rico, God being of all, choose it to be?


OR -if its the first time its done in history, how is it not...history?

Or indeed in another way - if history its not, why has no one yet doneth it? (Shakespeare version)


Theres only so many ways and permutations in which I can rearrange the same words into the same question and I am running out of combinations of them. Please answer soon.

 

I am just saying its history, I am not equating it with Bob Fitzsimmons superior feat.

 

Exactly, no one has said it's as good as what Fitzsimmons did or that Ruiz was the best heavyweight out there, all people have said is that a guy going from 154lbs all the way up to heavyweight and picking up a belt there is pretty impressive however you slice it.

Roy Jones was a far greater fighter than Calzaghe, had a miles better resume and achieved far far more. Had the pair met in the early 00's Jones would be the victor.

 

Why are using the Sanders link as evidence, but then ignoring the Tyson links, and pretending that you've never seen them?

He pulled out of the Sanders fight to pursue Tyson.

You can't ride with one link, and then dismiss the others, because it doesn't suit your agenda.

The Tyson fight couldn't be made in 2003, and Lewis seemed interested, but then didn't know if he was going to fight again.

Meanwhile, Tarver had been baiting him all year.

Corrie Sanders was an extremely tough fight, for very good money.

But fights with either Tyson or Lewis would have been for crazy money.

Roy was approaching 35, and was a LHW. A guy in that position didn't need to be fighting Corrie Sanders.

Roy never planned on staying at HW for a while.

That's why there was no point in him fighting Vitali and Byrd.

Tyson at that stage, would probably have been a much easier than Byrd, Sanders and Vitali, again for a LOT more money.


Again, Tarver had chased Roy hard for the fight. Mocking him on radio, and crashing the post fight press conference with Ruiz etc.

He really got under Roy's skin.

When those huge HW fights couldn't be made, he gave into Tarver, and had a chance of making history.

Alton Merkerson has always said that it was hard for Roy to take off the weight for Tarver, because he kept his Ruiz physique, in the hope of fighting Tyson.

If you watch the post fight interview after the Tarver fight, Roy said his only goal was to fight Tyson.

He was actually prepared to go back to HW for him.