Roy Jones.

Nutty?

Some of your posts are laughable.

 

How were they damn near on the level exactly?


Dariusz had a very good win over Hill.

He took a dive against Roch to get him DQ'd, before beating him in a rematch.

He beat Griffin after Roy.

He beat Hall after Roy, and had trouble with him.

He beat Harmon after Roy.

His other wins were Piper, Prince, Thadzi, Lakatos, King, Magi, Umarov and Girard etc.


Roy beat a faded McCallum.

He crushed Griffin in a single round in their rematch.

He crushed Hill in just four rounds, and was the only guy to knock him out.

He beat Lou Del Valle.

He easily beat Reggie Johnson.

He hammered Richard Hall.

He beat David Telesco.

He easily beat Julio Gonzalez.

He beat Eric Harding.

He toyed with Harmon.

He toyed with Woods.

He beat Tarver just after Dariusz had lost to Gonzalez.


So I don't see how they were on the level.


Roy clearly had the better wins.

 

atsch

He was just named fighter of the year?

Roy was named the fighter of the decade for the 90's.

Apart from the DQ against Griffin, he was undefeated in almost 50 fights.

He was the unified LHW champ, after starting out at JMW.

He'd already beaten Hopkins with a fractured hand, and was two weight divisions higher.

What more do you want?

You think moving up in weight is equal to moving down?

Why didn't Hopkins challenge him at LHW?

How can anyone respect what you write?

Seriously?

Roy had already beaten him.

Just let that sink in.

If Roy held a win over him, and was two divisions higher, and had to lose weight to make the fight, how on earth was 50/50 fair?

Seriously, what planet are you living on?

You're clueless.

Under the circumstances, 50/50 wasn't fair.

It's an absolute joke that you blame Roy for the fight not taking place.

 

Of course you don't, because you see the world though Roy Jones Jr tinted glasses, and your post couldn't be more clear on the matter.

Why do you place so much emphasis on the "after" clarification in regards to Dariusz's opponents but can't bring yourself to describe Roy/Hill in such fashion. That's a pretty big "after" considering Dariusz beat him when he was still the lineal Champion and top guy.

Why is Roy's loss to Griffin omitted?

How come Dariusz just "beat "Rocchigiani? If that was Roy, you likely would have said..he hammered him to the only knockout loss of his career?

Thadzi is grouped with other names despite coming off a big win over Toney.

 

That tends to happen when a guy turns down a fight.

 

Hopkins was calling out Jones, yet he used the contract negotiations to not make the fight. It wasn't Jones calling out Hopkins. I think if Hopkins really felt he could beat Jones he would have taken a pay cut or anything needed to make the fight happen. The bottom line is Hopkins played the system very well and marketed his avoidance of Roy very well.

The proof is when Hopkins made the fight with Roy when he was reduced to a corpse, knowing there was zero upside and a lot less of a payday. He knew he couldn't beat Jones at the time he was running his mouth, he just used Jones to help boost his status.

 

Hopkins had everything to gain, Roy had everything to lose, Roy had already beat Hopkins, and Jones would have had to drop down in weight as Hopkins was unwilling to fight him at LHW.. Hopkins was riding a big win, but most still considered Jones the man to beat, especially having already beat Hopkins.

60-40 to get his ass kicked was still more money that Bernard made in his next few fights... While Roy beat Woods and went to HW and beat Ruiz.

 

Who is most ? I can cite RING magazine having Hopkins as the Man to Beat at the P4P #1 spot. Who can you source?

Get his ass kicked? Try not be so biased. And Hopkins went on to have one of the biggest fights of that time with Oscar.

 

The man to beat that Roy already beat?:huh When I say most, I would be pretty sure Hopkins would be the underdog. I still considered Roy the best fighter in the world, despite Hopkins destruction of Trinidad.

I was being humorous, remember that HBO interview when they were mouthing off?

True, and Hopkins lasted much longer than Roy, and certainly had a better late career... But after that Trinidad victory there were some dry spells where Hopkins didn't do too much.. I think he should have jumped at the chance to get revenge on Roy when it mattered, but I don't feel like Hopkins knew he could win.

 

I haven't elaborated on Dariusz's wins, because there's no reason for me to do so.

But feel free to elaborate on them yourself.

The onus is on you.

It's you who's claiming that they were on the level.

So you put forward Dariusz's case.

I'm not viewing things through rose tinted glasses.

Look who Roy fought, and look at the manner of his victories.

They had a few common opponents, and Roy beat them much easier, and apart from Hill, Roy beat them first.

Richard Hall gave Dariusz problems, after Roy had given him an absolute hiding.

He easily beat Gonzalez who beat Dariusz. And although I can appreciate that Dariusz was faded at that point, we're doing a direct comparison of their LHW resumes.

Why is the Griffin DQ relevant?

It doesn't alter anything.

 

Dariusz's opposition was nowhere near as good as Jones opposition and when he fought Hall and Gonzalez he went life and death.

DM is 1 of boxings biggest myths

 

Anyone know odds for what a 2002 fight would be. Ring had Jones 15-1 in 96 or 97. Clearly be different in 2002.

usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/boxing/stories/2002-07-10-jones-hopkins.htm

 

Hopkins is the guy who won 2 rounds against a Jones with a broken hand, that's why, Hopkins isn't fit to carry Jones jockstrap, never was, he's a bum in comparison to Jones.

 

So you blame Roy?

Ha!

You're a joker.

How have you got the cheek to talk about me viewing Roy's career through rose tinted glasses?

You don't lay one ounce of blame at Bernard's door, even though he wouldn't move up to LHW, and renegotiate.

That's fair.

If Bernard wanted the fight, he had to make concessions.

He deserved an equal split, because he beat Tito?