Roy Jones.

You brought Calzaghe up initially.

I don't care about Calzaghe, everybody knows what went down.

What is your point?

Tell me.

I know that you were frustrated that Roy never fought bigger fights.

That's understandable.

But I've only pulled you up on your posts, because they all imply that Roy ducked out of bigger challengers because he wasn't interested.

That's how they read to me and everyone else.

They read as though you're accusing Roy of only wanting easy fights against C level fighters.

So tell me your point, and we'll start again.


:good

 

You have finally lost it my friend. You are trying to turn a humiliating defeat into some kind of moral victory. Soap Opera nonsense at it's best.

Of course Joe made Jones look a p***k where it counted. Inside the square circle. Clowning him, subconsciously asking what are you doing in here with me when you just aren't good enough? What made you think you could possibly beat me, but if you are that arrogant I'll take the money and the easy win. You do remember he was 36 himself at the time he fought the 3 year older man don't you? 4 months short of being 37 in fact.

Basically you are trying to make an irrelevant issue about pre fight words, not the action as it evolved. No one FORCED Jones to fight Calzaghe, rather he pushed for it.

If you asked any either active, or retired prize fighter on this or any other board, they will tell you that they would have done exactly the same thing Joe Cal did. That is why they are prize fighters, MONEY.

As to whether or not Calzaghe would have clowned him however many years earlier, who knows or cares, other than rather silly Jones fan boys? They are the only ones getting excited about it.

I can assure you I am not getting things back to front my friend. Rather it is a case of you obviously viewing the world through Jones tinted glasses.

 

:nut Actually, I didn't. You randomly linked to an article of Hopkins talking about Calzaghe/Jones, and asked twice for me to comment on it. I don't have time for stupid games like this.

 

Foxy 01,

Ha!

There was no humiliating defeat.

An elite guy clowning a shot fighter who'd been destroyed four years earlier = a humiliating defeat?

I don't think so.


Glen Johnson beat Roy by nine rounds, before brutally knocking him out cold.

That was a humiliating defeat.

That happened in 2004.


If you say you don't want to fight someone because they are shot, then proceed to fight them and clown, then you look like a fool.

Joe embarrassed himself to the media.

He was asked about what he'd put in his autobiography, with regards to the fight being pointless.

His reply:

"Well, I did say that, but Roy is now back to his BEST, and he's had three GREAT wins."

atsch


What were the three great wins?

A points win over Prince Badi Ajamu?

A points win over Anthony Hanshaw?

A points win over Felix Trinidad who hadn't fought in three years, and who couldn't even make the agreed catchweight of 170 pounds?


Ha!

In Joe's fantasy world they were GREAT wins, and Roy was back to how he'd performed in the 90's.



How the hell he said that to the media whilst keeping a straight face, is beyond me.


Yes, Joe was approaching 37.

But he'd had back to back wins at the highest level.

Roy hadn't won at the highest level for FIVE years!


Whether you want to admit it or not, Joe would never have clowned Roy like that if Roy had been prime.

We know that from the comments he's made.

He had too much respect for the danger that Roy represented, to even have thought of doing such a thing.

The whole thing just looked bad on Joe.

No, there's two separate issues here.

1. Fighting for the money.

2. Showboating.


I didn't mind him taking the fight for financial reasons.

But what was embarrassing, was the fact that he tried to kid people that Roy was a force again, after three great wins, and the fact that he clowned, when everyone knows he would never have dared to have done such a thing if they'd have fought earlier.

We know that Joe would never have fought Roy in his prime, let alone tried to clown him.

I'm viewing things as an intelligent fan of the sport.

You can start a poll on any boxing forum on the internet, asking people's thoughts on the fight from 2008.

I can assure you that hardly any one will give Joe credit for that win.

 

Stupid games?

Are you for real?


What do you mean, randomly linked?

It wasn't randomly linked.

We were discussing why their rematch didn't happen earlier.

It was relevant to what we were debating.

What's wrong with you?


The article that I linked was for you to view what Bernard had said about Roy in 2008.

Calzaghe was nothing to do with why I posted it.

But it just so happened that Bernard's comments were in relation to Roy's fight against Calzaghe.

But Calzaghe was nothing to do with my point.

My point was to show you the hypocrisy of Bernard Hopkins.

I wasn't asking you to comment on Calzaghe.

I was asking you to comment on Bernard's actions.

That should have been obvious to you.

I asked you twice.


So are we going to move on?

Are you going to tell me what point you want to make regarding Roy's career?

 

I think in that timeframe of 93-03, he's in the mix with Lewis and Oscar, but that's because that it his timeframe, it specifically maps his peak as a fighter.

At any rate, he fought plenty of top 10 guys, that's not my criticism. Paz was top 5 at Super Middle believe it or not, Super Middle and Light Heavy were not deep divisions than. That's why missing out the critical names looks all the more worse.

 

For ****'s sake, the posts here for everyone to see.

I commented on Hopkins actions and said it was irrelevant to my point. Which resulted in epic rambling posts whining and crying and *****in about Calzaghe/Jones.

 

Anybody reading these posts with an ounce of intelligence, knows that that I posted you that link to discuss Bernard's actions.

I wasn't talking about Calzaghe.

Us talking specifically about Calzaghe, has escalated from your initial post. (number 184)


So let's forget Calzaghe, and you can make the point that you want to make.

 

But in 2003 just before (or after) the Ruiz fight Paz wouldn't have been ranked in the top ten.

 

Looks better if he fights Benn in 1995, instead of the Punching Postman man. But even Benn admitted that was going to hard fight to make.

Liles, Hopkins turned it down in 1996 so Jones fought McCallum instead. Benn was done by then anyways.

In 1997 he fought Griffin twice, after Griffin beat Toney. Winner got a fight with Jones. Nothing wrong there.

Rocchigiani wanted to much in 1998, and Jones ended up fighting Grant instead. Jones also fought Hill and a unification bout with Del Valle that year. Yes 1998 would have looked better with Rocchigiani on it then Grant, but again he wanted more then HBO was willing to give.

 

No, that initial post was a response to you asking me twice to comment on an article about a Calzaghe fight. :nut

You didn't like that I said Calzaghe humiliated Jones..which is what that whole article is about, and just had to set the record straight with your opinion of the fight. Thanks for sharing, I don't care.

I already have.

 

I don't think you are even sure what you are trying to say anymore.

I think you made a bogus claim and are now trying to wiggle out of it.

 

I know who Jones fought and didn't fight.

Who says Hopkins turned down a 96 fight?

 

Not at all trying to wiggle out of it. I guess you don't understand, and maybe I wasn't clear.

After the Woods fight, you take the rankings for all the divisions. Not all time, but what they would have been at that moment in 2002. Jones would have fought more ranked fighters there then anyone else, in any weight class.