Why did RJJ duck Michalczewski and how did he justify it?

:deal

 

I would pick him to beat them all.

Of course that doesn't mean he would, but at his best, he was a level above them IMO.

 

Roy was never going to go to Germany, when he'd got the three main belts around his waist, he was considered the best, and he'd been scarred from the Olympics and thought that he could get robbed again.

Roy also beat common opponents much easier, including a 4th round stoppage of Hill, just after Dariusz had fought him. So look from Roy's perspective. Again, he had all the belts. Why would he have gone to Germany, for the WBO belt, which nobody respected back then?

He basically had nothing to gain, and everything to lose.

So apart from a ridiculous sum of money, there was no need to go.

Again, go and look at what both guys did after.

Roy fought Ruiz and Tarver, whilst Dariusz was content to fight Roy's left overs.

So just how upset was Dariusz when he no longer had his belts?

Because he seemed happy to constantly milk the WBO for good money.

 

darius michalczewski should have fought roy in america

 

He was considered the best because of the bias that existed back then against European fighters. That allowed Jones Jr a position where there wasn't much pressure for him to make that fight. It would be like Wilder beating Stiverne becoming a more popular champion, Wlad being stripped of a title, which Wilder picks up, does that make Wilder the real champion just because he has most of the belts and because US fans see him as a champion despite never facing the established champion?

I understand why Jones Jr never pushed hard for the fight, he took the path of least resistance which most people would do. While it's totally understandable it doesn't mean he can is free from criticism for his choice. Just like DM shouldn't be free of criticism for not pushing hard enough for the fight.

As for DM and the belts, it's not like he had a choice. He was stripped of the titles unfairly because the sanctioning bodies wanted the higher fees Jones Jr would bring them. There was nothing he could have done to prevent from being stripped and knew he was getting screwed over by everyone but the WBO and so was happy to stick defending a title from a sanctioning body that didn't try and screw him over at the first opportunity.

 

They should have fought somewhere neutral tbf.

 

He was considered the best because of the way he beat guys ! Look at their common opponents ! Bias had nothing to do with it !

And if anyone took a path of least resistance it was DM ! just look at the bum of the month tour he went on after beating Hill ..And he was NOT stripped unfairly !

He refused to fight his mandatories for the WBA and IBF that's why he never contested those strippings and kept the meaningless WBO belt who let him fight who ever !

This is why Lou Devalle picked up the WBA. He was DM's mando for that after he was robbed against. Hill And he was stripped of the IBF for refusing to fight Guthrie who was with King at the time and it's been quoted that DM's own promoter said we will never work with King !

In the end though I blame both guys for letting their egos get in the way .

 

I'm just gonna repeat what I said in the hope that if you quote me you reply to what I with ally posted.


This is the rings fault. had they given DM the title, the fight would have happened

 

:good

 

I was going to reply to you, but Imperial has covered everything in his response.

:good

 

You sure about that?

 

I'd agree that DM opposition was pretty weak and definitely worse than RJJ's but RJJ's opposition wasn't exactly stellar either during DM's reign and it still doesn't alter the fact DM was the clear champion when RJJ moved up.

Jones Jr's resume at that time was better but was filled with middleweights (Johnson, Grant), built up contenders with no significant wins (Hall, Telesco) and fighters DM also beat. (Griffin, Hall, Hill) Hardly enough in my opinion to forget the DM fight never happened. Jones Jr was clearly better though and would have won if they fought but still doesn't mean a fighter should not fight their best available opponent.

Yes DM was stripped of the titles but he never had a chance to defend them or keep them.

The WBA didn't strip DM for not facing DeValle they stripped him because they didn't recognise the WBO and stripped him because he displayed the WBA belt with the WBO. DM never had the opportunity to face his mandatory.

The IBF ordered he face Guthrie 30 days after beating Hill. Was DM meant to negotiate the fight in this short time frame, take no time to recover physically and go straight back into training, find a venue on short notice as well as a spot on TV all in 30 days? It was an impossible demand. So basically your assumption he refused to face his mandatories is incorrect.

The sanctioning bodies are to blame here. They saw RJJ as a potential cash cow and jumped ship from the rightful champion to cash in. This allowed RJJ to pick up all the major titles which helped him to not have to face the established champion in his new division.

I to blame both for the fight for not being made, both could have worked harder to make the fight and both chose not to push for this fight. It tarnishes both their legacies.

 

See the thing is this the WBA and the IBF didn't just hand those belts over to. Jones , Devalle fought for the title and so did Gurthire ...Guthire lost to Reggie Johnson and Lou Devalle picked up the WBA. Devalle was indeed Dm's mandatory as was Guthrie ..Like I said DM could have contested those strippings but didn't ,could have made up an injury hell boxers do it all the time ..That's why he kept the WBO. But in the end we can agree both guys ego's got in the way ..And it hurt the sport more than anything that they didn't fight.

 

Found this on the DM Jones situation the guy brought up some interesting points


"
If that is the case, that will demand you either give up the WBO
> title of make a defense of there title with in a time that is unreasonable
and
> in Dariusz's case, impossible.
the bottom line is Dariusz, like Hamed didnt want to give of the WBO,
because of the flexibility they allow him. Truth is DM didnt want purse
bids to force him to fight mandatories in the US. Scenario: if Dariusz
wouldve given up the WBO, he wouldve defended against Guthrie, whom he
wouldve KOed (but maybe he didnt want to fight Guthrie as he was unknown and
undefeated)

he wouldve then defended against Del Valle (who was also unknown
and and lost a split decision to the man he had just won a split decision
from) then he wouldve face Jones for the undisputed championship, which
naturally wouldve been here in the US. He didnt want to go that route, his
handlers said, lets keep the WBO, because we can clean up over here in
Germany. So 2 things immediately come to my attention as bull****...

(1)
people say the Hill Jones beat 10 months after losing the title to DM was
not the same Hill. BS. Hill was offered a nice piece of change to defend
his titles in Germany against Dariusz, who was the WBO champion, so it was a
unification of sorts. He thought he stood a better chance of winning (which
he almost did) and collecting a good amount of money as opposed to fighting
Roy for the same amount and definetely losing (which he did 10 months
later).

(2) How people say Jones just picked up the belts Dariusz gave up.
He did, but DM chose to give up the belts and keep the WBO, and like someone
said, they wouldve paid step aside fees to Guthrie and Del Valle to get it
on and the winner would still have to face them next. Also, if it wouldve
been alot more money proposed for Hill to face Jones in a unification then,
Hill wouldve lost to Jones then and not 10 months later. All of this has
been propagated to say Dariusz is the best light heavy or Jones is ducking
him. Which is foolish, it is all about business. Why do you think Hamed
gave up the IBF (which he actually defended 3 times along with the WBO) and
the WBC if Vasquez wouldve had the WBA when he fought Hamed, Hamed wouldve
relinquished that belt too.

All in all, I dont think DM wanted to lose to
RJJ so soon, in effect...he kept the WBO and made a fortune defending it in
Germany, he can do this virtually forever or until someone comes over there
and beats him. He can always say well I was the WBA and IBF champ before
Jones and I never lost the belts in the ring, like you guys seem to always
echo. note: the WBO is a bull**** title, they dont want you to fight for
another organization, but they will sanction fights that are unwarranted,
like just because Simon was their champ at 154, they let him fight his first
fight at 160 for their vacant belt which is pure bs, because they had a #1
contender, his name is Eastman, and he wont even get the next shot, the next
fight will be with Kranjnc, the man who vacated the belt in the first place!"