Roy Jones.

Great post!

I'd like to wish you luck in explaining it to Mongoose.

:good

 

So because The Ring had him at number 1 for a brief time, 50/50 was fair?

Right.

 

Who's said that?

 

Great link.

:good

 

Great read.:good

How anyone could put the blame on Jones is beyond me.

 

So you believe its impossible for a fighter to improve over a 9 year period? That in his 25 year career, Hopkins reached his apex as a fighter in just his third full year as a pro?

 

Because not all of us are quick to believe Jones and his advisor's account of a private meeting. I'll kick your ass for 60/40 is all the public knows.

 

He was rated ahead of Roy for two years. Needless to say, the time this fight would take place.

 

Beat 9 years previously when he was an untested 3 year Pro with no relevant amateur experience to speak of. Jones was a natural with a deep amateur pedigree. It took a Hopkins a little longer to find his groove and continue to improve. Hopkins/Jones I is baseless for predicting a 2002 match up, and ancient history in boxing time as far as hanging over someone's head.

Yep, it had me excited for a match, and that was HBO's intention.


I think both men should have jumped at the chance to make the fight.

 

I don't care if The Ring had Bernard above Roy for certain months.

The Ring has always been very highly respected.

But other publications and the rest of the boxing world also had opinions.

But even if everyone agreed with The Ring, and Roy was 2nd, it didn't alter the fact that Bernard had already lost to him, and he wouldn't fight at LHW, which would have resulted in Roy having to go down in weight.

You can't expect the guy who's beaten you once already, to drop weight for you, for an even split.

Bernard called Roy out.

He had to be willing to make concessions to make the fight.

It was him who supposedly wanted revenge.

Although it would have been great for the fans, Roy did not have to fight him again. He had nothing to prove.

So again, 50-50 was never fair, despite where they ranked on the P4P lists.

 

So you're just going to dismiss the link?

 

But you're holding Roy solely responsible for the fight not happening.

Don't forget in 93, Roy was only 24, and had a fractured hand.

A win for any guy, gives them more power at the negotiating table for a rematch.

That should be obvious to anyone.

You have to realise that if Bernard had won in 93, and he'd have needed to go down in weight, he would have scoffed at the idea of giving Roy an equal split.

If you've watched Bernard for a long time, you know I'm right.

 

No, it was fair. You just feel Jones deserved more than fair, and I have yet to see a case for this except he beat Hopkins 9 years prior.

 

If you believe that Hopkins secretly demanded over 70% of the purse in private without question, that's your problem. Jones might as have said the meeting happened in Hopkins' spaceship.

 

You can point fingers all the day.

The whole point is that after Toney, Jones failed to secure the meaningful fights that could have defined or tested his perceived greatness. In his 10 year reign, he missed the undisputed Champions, outstanding contenders, and P4P fighters until he was no longer in a position of power.

On the other hand, Hopkins made the super fights with other P4P rated fighters and undisputed Champions like Tito, Oscar, Taylor, Wright, Tarver, Calzaghe, and Pavlik.

Jones greatness can only be measured by what ifs. Lots of talk bout how Jones would have beat him again anyway, but he didn't did he?