Joe Calzaghe v Roy Jones Jnr 2002

Everyone has a different body..

Spinks litterally had no fat on him at his lowest proffesional weight of 170, after cutting from 190... I just don't see it.

You can only cut so much before you start to lose your power, speed, strenght ect...

 

The favorite doesn't always win you know that. No way to know what would, could, or should have happened. Calzaghe wasn't Glen Kelly, Rick Frazier, Otis Grant, or Richard Hall. Say Calzaghe ripped him open over the eye if they fought in 2002. Huge game changer in the fight. How would Jones have reacted? We don't know. Jones was never in deep water and we both know he had no Plan B in a fight when dealing with adversity.

On the flip side how would Calzaghe react to the forearm smash to the face? Could Jones have finished him after he got up? Too many variables to just say "Jones wins the fight"

I do agree that Calzaghe's opposition during that time wasn't great but neither was Jones he had several embarrassing fights from say 1998 to 2002 against woeful competition.

 

You must have missed Roy's mid fight adjustments in Griffin 1, when he was behind early and turned the fight around.

 

I think what he is trying to say if Spinks trained specifically to make 160 under the same day weigh in procedure at the time he could. Muscle weighs more than fat. There is also the issue of water retention. I don't think it is inconceivable for Spinks under the criteria of the day to not be able to make 160.

It was a totally different ballgame back then under the same day weigh in protocol. :good

If we had same day weigh ins today it would put some fighters like Chavez Jr out of commission. His one advantage would be gone. He would be a joke. Spinks didn't rely on his size he relied on his skills and awkward fighting style.

 

Using my best judgement, and all I know about the sport, I strongly believe Jones would have beaten Calzaghe in 02.. Thats all I can really say. I also have seen Jones deal with adversity in fights with Griffin and Tarver.. It is no secret, Roy did fight a few bums..

There are many variables, but Jones would have been the favorite and for good reason..

Calzaghe's competition during this time was much worse than Jones'.:deal

 

I disagree. That is one example of a fight where he had no Plan B and ended up fouling out. He didn't know what to do and was frustrated. (Not saying he fouled out on purpose I don't think he did he was just frustrated the fight was close)

 

I know what he is trying to say, and I just don't think Spinks would have fought at MW.. He was a bigger man than Roy Jones.

Could Spinks have made it? I am sure he could have, but it would have been really hard, and he would be drained.. He wouldn't be as effective at MW.. I stand by that opinion.

 

taller? yes. But Jones had bigger shoulders for sure and I am betting a smaller waist. Not sure about legs. I am not going to predict how he would have done at 160 but I am betting he could make it.

You have to remember Roy was also on PED's. He had extra help.

 

I have to disagree..

Griffin had strategically planned for Roy, and took away Roy's left early in the fight.. Roy stopped and started looking for right leads... he started to land them more and more.

At the end of round 8, Griffin clearly fouls Roy when the ref wasn't looking, forearmed his head up punched him.. Roy never said anyting, but I honestly believe it added fuel to the fire..

Roy knew he just about had Griffin out of there, and was pissed that he was going to a knee to survive, and out of frustration hit him...

It is my honest belief that Griffin could have got up and continued, but knew Roy had figured him out and decided to do a pathetic acting job, in order to get a win.

The look of fear on his face going into the second fight, further supports this.

 

Rico,

Would you agree that Spinks caught a good window, and there are many era's where he would not have been THE HW Champion?

 

I have always said that Heavyweight era from 1980 to about 1988 or so was awful. Look at how many different guys had the WBA belt. Nobody could successfully defend it. It wasn't called the 'lost generation' for nothing. Coke and Booze ruined a lot of those early 80's Heavyweights. Some had big time skills and talent like Greg Page but were too inconsistant and out of shape etc. Tyson saved that era without him it would have been atrocious. Even with him it was one of the 3 worst Heavyweight era's being the 30's where there were 5 different Champions in 5 years, the 50's when Marciano was knocking people stiff, now of course and the 80's. People make excuses for it because of Tyson to make him look better but that era was ****. Have a lot of the title fights from that period on DVD and it was literally musical belts with the WBA and WBC after Holmes dropped it and took the newly created IBF.

 

Yeah. Every man has a different body. Spinks had a body that would be an attraction at Ripley's Believe it or Not, if you were correct.

If you were to be correct, then Spinks's body would shrink as he got older only to suddenly swell in his late 20's in ordre to fight a HW.

 

I am saying that Spinks could have been a MW under todays weighin regime. Mindblower posted a statistic that showet he was only 170 lbs before his second to last LHW fight. Mindblower does not understand, that if he had the extra time as under todays regime, he could have weighed even less.

Instead he somehow uses said statistic to prove that Spinks was a huge LHW. He is a basketcase if you ask me.

 

I posted a link proving, that at Spinks' lightest professional weight, with Mackie Shilstone, was 170 with 4.6% bodyfat.. Which is less than most Olympic marathon runners..

You say he COULD have dranied out the last 10 lbs.. Ok, but at what cost? You do realize there is a point where you are just harming your body right? You do realize he would have been drained as **** even with next day weigh ins?

 

I personally wouldn't take Spinks over Lennox, either of the Klits, Holyfield, Bowe, Ali, Foreman..

Obviously not Tyson.