Explain the Ducking History of Great Fighters Part I: Roy Jones

Beating Roch is much better than beating Kelly, Frazier, Hall, and Grant. How do you not understand that? Those were joke fights which HBO was embarrassed over. Roy's resume from 1998 to 2003 was a laughingstock.

 

I'll get back to this post later, but I wan't to clear up in no way do I support what Jones did to Griffin. I just believe there was a bit of acting on Griffin's part.

 

Ok I will poor,thing he just wants attention

 

Right I'm going to listen to some ass clown who probably never boxed a day in her life and take your word as gospel !

Go run along and watch some other sport and let the men talk about prize fighting ! Steroid cheat yeah ok you got proof he was on steroids ? No you don't ! But then again since you don't know **** about boxing why do I bother with such a re**** such as your self go run along now before you miss the short bus !

 

Roy turned his attention to Hopkins/Tito, when nothing seemed to be happening with Dariusz.

If Tito had've beaten Hopkins, it would have been a huge and easy payday for Roy. But they'd never have fought at MW. It would had to have been at a catchweight.

Regarding my links, when it came to Roy, HBO were completely unbiased. When they weren't happy, they made it public. You know that they crucified him at times. So when they actually supported him in that certain fights couldn't be made, you know that they were being 100% honest. If someone like Kerry Davis hadn't have tried to have made the Dariusz fight in the U.S. then he wouldn't have claimed that he had to the media.

All my links are credible.

 

Credible links are to tough for these simpletons to figure out

 

Who are you trying to kid?

Because it's not me.

Nigel Benn was shot after he'd fought Gerald. He lost to Malinga and Collins.

If Roy had've beaten him, you'd have claimed that the win was worthless.

We know that from all the guff that you've wrote on the two threads.

Steve Collins was a warrior with a big heart. But he was limited, and he had a lightly regarded belt. His claim to fame was beating a very good, but past his best Eubank, and a shot Nigel Benn.

You think that the Ruiz win was pointless, and that Roy did nothing for a nine year period. So you're telling me that if Roy had've beaten Collins, you'd now be on this thread giving him credit for doing so?

And you call me delusional.

Whining about Ruiz, while at the same time ripping him for not fighting Collins and Roch?

That's the definition of delusional.

 

How was it disgraceful? atsch


It's called circumstances.

After he'd beaten Hopkins at MW, he wanted big money fights, because his father had stifled his career. So he defended the belt just once, and then went up for Toney. Also, you have to take into account that fighting any of King's fighters was hard, due to King demanding future options.

After he'd beaten Toney at SMW, he wasn't able to clear out the division and unify, because he couldn't get fights with Benn/Nardiello or Liles. You have seen actual proof of that. Don't say that you haven't.

At LHW, HOW could he have fought Dariusz, when Kohl and HBO couldn't negotiate?

Forget HW. Nobody could have expected a 34 year old LHW, to even have attempted to clean out the division.


Life is defined by circumstances and opportunities.

Your statistics never allow for circumstances.

 

Yes I and others on here have shown you how truly pointless the Ruiz fight was. It was not 'history' and did not mean anything. Now, had he stayed and defended his belt at Heavyweight that COULD have changed that but Roy was reluctant to do such.

Furthermore I have said Roy did nothing for a 6 year period NOT a 9 year period so stop lying. This is backed up by HBO's frustration at Jones hand picking fights and taking on meaningless mandatory fights instead of fighting the fights they wanted to see. This is well documented in interviews with HBO sports executives and in ring post fight interviews with Larry Merchant. And you said earlier HBO was fine with the Gonzalez fight when in fact they were NOT fine with this fight as they openly mocked the vacant WBF and IBA trinkets Roy got for that fight basically to Jones face :rofl

 

It is called a pattern of not taking/making big fights. It shows us intent. Do you understand this you Glass Jawed re****? Seriously how can you not understand that by Roy NOT fighting THE champion in 3 of 4 weight classes shows how he was reluctant to make big fights. That goes beyond 'circumstances'. It is a pathological problem that went on for his whole damn career except the lone Toney fight in 1994. Why were are other fighters moving up and fighting THE champion in various weight classes yet Jones refused to do this? Don't you think that is strange?

Quit with the King BS the guy has been demanding options since 1974 it isn't like Jones was the only fighter he wanted options from he did that practice for 30 years and it didn't stop big fights from happening. That is just another pathetic excuse by you.

 

Of course.

Having Roch on his resume would have been okay.

But you're making out as though it was a glaring omission, which it wasn't.

How was his resume a laughing stock from those periods?

Go and look at Roch's resume from that period.

Go and look at Calzaghe's.

Go and look at Dariusz's.

Also, Roy used to have a pre approved HBO list, with guys like Harmon on, which was surprising. And, I've read links in the past, where HBO weren't that interested in screening a Roch fight.