Roy Jones Jr. vs. Murderers Row

He decked Eric Harding
He floored Toney more than once in their fights but those KDs were ruled as slips.
He made Toney spit blood.
He landed on Jones.
At least as effective as Whitaker or Byrd in landed punches.

The outcome of the rematch vs Jones was a result of a calculated scam by Jones or at least his management or promoter/s to rush Griffin cold into the ring.
Jones and his handlers knew the source of what made Jones cheat in their 1st fight, and could not allow it, or worse, to happen again, hence the scam.

In a way similar to when the Jorge Vaca fight was scheduled as a 154lbs fight, Jones came overweight and not as a result of being a lazy trainer or unprepared, and old ass Vaca had to concede for cash, or else, no cash.

Roy Jones is a hard labored glass jawed fraud.

 

Ok, frankenfrank, so who did you score Toney-Griffin bouts for?
Rush Griffin cold into the ring? I suppose, you believe the rest of Griffin losses were totally unjust as well, except the Glen Johnson fight, which was the only bout in that interview that Griffin admitted as losing fair and square?

 

I watched each of these fights at least 3 times each, I think maybe even 5 times each, and never got the source of the George Foreman **** commentary and analingus he performed on Toney.
I never tried to score them, but never felt like Toney won any.
And I liked Toney.
Griffin also lost fair and square 2 Tarver as far as I know now.
Possibly 2 Michalczewski as well.

 

Just watched Jones vs Malinga. Jones was an unstoppable force in his heyday. People who think that any one of the Murderer's Row would stand a chance against him besides maybe Burley are either overrating the Murderer's Row or underrating Jones. To my mind, Jones was as good as Ezzard Charles. Though Charles did drop an early loss to Marshall, he avenged it, which I could see Jones doing if he happened to lose to any of the Murderers Row.

 

Pure **** of a post.
This borderline ****** deduces from a performance against a man 14 years older than Jones whom could not even beat Nigel Benn years before he fought Jones that he was as good as the man whom KOd Archie Wright, beat him at least 1 more time, and past his own prime, lasted 15 with prime Marchegiano.


Also Marshall was past his prime when he KOd Charles, and even more when Charles avenged (only on and for the record) his loss.

Marshall also beat the overrated Jake LaMotta, Charles Burley and Joey Berardinelli, almost KOing him in the process, and almost stopped Archie Wright.
All of which, including Charles and notably Wright were younger than Marshall.

Jones' best wins are Julio Gonzalez, Clinton Woods and John Ruiz.

Not sure how much the Murderers Row are overrated or underrated, probably not much either way, but Jones is extremely overrated.

One interesting fact about the Murderers Row, is the amount of 8 and 9 counts after which the victim got back 2 win or at least last the distance.

Do not use the word fixed fights regarding the Murderers Row.
Jones' fights were fixed in modern way.
Today's way.
A court test passing way.

 

Does that mean you felt Griffin had outpointed Toney? I just wonder what the people who scored it for Griffin were looking at, what criteria, when giving him points.

 

Jone's best wins are against Bernard Hopkins and James Toney who would likewise beat most of the "black murderers row" and Mike McCallum would definitely belong among them if he fought back in their day. I'd put a Bernard Hopkins win up there with an Archie Moore win, a James Toney victory as the equal to a Jersey Joe Walcott victory. John Ruiz isn't good enough to qualify with an old Joe Louis but he is good enough to rank with Charles' wins over Elmer Ray. Resume wise Ezzard Charles has more with the Louis victory, Bivins, Marshall which is better than Jone's MacCallum victory. The Tarver decision is worth maybe the Maxim or maybe Lesnevich on Charles' record. But hand to hand I don't see much between them in their primes.

 

Victory is not a good way to describe Jones' performance against Hopkins in their 1st fight.
Hopkins did more damage in the clinches and Roy remained passive for some reason.
Never considered it a robbery, but real victories do not look that way.
Toney feinted after the weigh in and gained 10% of his weight past it out of sheer rehydration.
McCallum was 41 years old. And the correct rumor about Marchegiano is that his opponents were old and past their prime. All of them were significantly younger than 41.
McCallum was great, but by the time and weight he fought Jones, he was only a shell of his former self, decorated by a big name.
This is what Roy Jones', Ray Leonard's, Floyd Mayweather Jr's careers are built on:
Fighting big name opponents only when their condition guarantees a win over them: Toney, McCallum, Pazienza, Reggie Johnson, Jorge Vaca, Thulani Malinga, etc. etc.
Taking on Hopkins in their 1st fight was an exception.
It is a significant fight for Jones, but not a big win.

 

The Bernard Hopkins that Jones fought would not have beat most of the BMR. Likewise, the ANCIENT Mike McCallum would not have beaten most of the BMR. This is revisionist history at its best trying to pretend that glossy names were in their prime when Jones fought them. They were not. One was beyond severely faded and the other was several years from even beginning to enter his prime.

 

Is just me or does this guy make a ton of sense when he gets the marbles out of his mouth.

 

My thoughts exactly :good I hope he keeps it up.

 

So, are you arguing that Futch was a non-factor in Griffin-Jones I...?

 

Futch saw Toney's habit of countering rights with a hard right, so he had Griffin throw less rights while moving to his right, away from Toney's big shot. The fights were close. I think I had them split, but don't recall. Anyway, that isn't the point -the point is that Futch, so to speak, fought Toney 4x (with McCallum twice) and did very well.

Think about it -Griffin, who was anything but a great fighter, went 3-0 against Jones and Toney when Futch was with him.

Do think that's a coincidence?

 

I think the judges were blind in both Toney-Griffin fights, especially Doug Tucker in the rematch. Griffin had had slight success, but when Toney adjusted just a little bit, Futch had nothing to offer. His absence had zero impact on the rematch with Jones.