No, it's not true. If you objectively an*lyse Wlad's, Vitali's, and Roy's careers, how does Roy not compare with them? How on earth can it be a joke? You are being ridiculous. Roy had years of dominance over 50 fights, easily beating the majority of his opponents. He started out at JMW and went through 5 weight classes, including winning a version of the HW title at 34, also being declared the fighter of the 90's, and was the consensus pound for pound king for almost a decade. Your post is a joke.
Roy beat some good fighters, but he also had a stretch where he faced some terrible opposition.. Yet you Jones fanboys seem to deny this. Winning a paper title that Lewis vacated against a joke like Ruiz doesn't mean ****... I'm not going to go over that again because you seem to have a hard time getting that through your head. Also, during this period or around it at least Roy tested positive for banned substances and thus will forever have an asterisk next to his record, especially pertaining to that period. Also if coming up in weight and beating Ruiz is just a big deal, then why was Toney able to do it easily as well? Face it. Ruiz was a joke and Roy's win over him is not nearly as great as you Jones fanatics make it out to be.
Ha! Tyson's an entertainer. Have you seen his various IFL TV interviews with Kuggan Cassius? They're great. They have a great rapport with each other. They're always fun to watch. :good
Ya Tyson's hilarious. Probably my favorite personality in the sport at the moment. It would be great if he beat Wlad, but it ain't gonna happen.
Of course Roy had a stretch where he fought poor opposition. Doesn't that happen to almost every fighter? Go and look at the resumes of anyone from Roy's era. Go and look at the resumes of Toney, Hopkins, Eubank, Benn, Collins, Dariusz M, Calzaghe, even the K's etc. Nearly everyone fights poor opposition. But I've posted numerous links, videos, and book excerpts that prove that Roy and HBO tried to secure big fights against the likes of Frankie Liles, Dariusz M, Bernard Hopkins, and Evander Holyfield etc. If you don't already know, big fights are hard to make for a variety of reasons. Reasons that aren't always common knowledge such as future options and the percentages of the upside of the PPV etc. Then you also have to take into consideration that when Roy was the unified champ at LHW, he had mandatory obligations to fulfil from all three of the main organisations. When guys like Rick Frazier (no disrespect intended) are made mandatory challenges, it's bad for boxing. But Roy wasn't just content to fight guys of that calibre. With regards to Ruiz, nobody has ever said he was a great fighter. He was truly awful to watch. But he was effective, and better than you give him credit for. He wasn't a domestic level guy, otherwise every HW who he faced would have easily beaten him. Now you have to look from Roy's perspective. He was 34, he'd fought almost 50 times, he'd come from JMW just over a decade earlier, and he beat him with absolute ease, even though he was outweighed by over 30 pounds. Now if you take all of that into consideration, you have to give him credit. It was a great win for him.
I can't wait for that fight. It's going to be really interesting. The funny thing is, I've been watching Tyson since 2008, and I still don't know how good he is.
Ya I've been watching him a long way back and he's made huge steps, but I have no doubt Wlad beats him.
After the Jennings fight, I read that a lot of people thought that Wlad was nearing the end. But do you think he underestimated Jennings, or it was a bad match up stylistically? Or maybe a bit of both? After his great performance against Pulev, not many people thought that Tyson had a chance.
I think Jennings was awkward for him and is very defensively responsible with a rock hard chin. I think Tyson will do more offensively but ultimately end up on his back. How do you see it?
Honestly, I don't know. But I'm wondering if Tyson can get to him psychologically. In the last few weeks I've read and heard the following pieces of information: When Tyson was out in Wlad's camp a few years ago, he wouldn't spar Tyson for even a round, despite Tyson asking on numerous occasions. Peter Fury says that Manny Steward told Tyson of the problems they had in preparation to fight Chisora, and Manny didn't want the fight for him. Manny also apparently told Wlad that Tyson would be the future HW champ after he'd retired. Now even if all of the above is true, it might not mean anything. But on the other hand, it maybe significant. Tyson is bigger, he isn't going to be intimidated by him, and he'll probably trash him at every opportunity. Now we all know how much respect that Wlad had for Manny. So will the fact that Manny held Tyson in such high regard, along with the fact that Tyson is young, hungry and supremely confident, all play a part? Wlad is almost 40, and this isn't going to be just a routine defence for him. So I think it could be very interesting.
It's true that RJJ is an oustanding fighter, the best of his era, but there are some points ppl really don't like about him: 1. His ****y attitude. 2. Fighting nobodies while better oppositions available. Of coure it's not his fault alone, but the point still stands. 3. Despite outclassing his opponents in every conceivable ways, choose to fight in the most conservative way possible. 4. Pioneer the "my health come first", "businessman first, boxer second" style. Hell, does this remind you of a certain P4P superstar?
That's true. Those are the points that people generally bring up. But my take on it, is as follows: 1. He was c*cky. But he always felt underappreciated, and he was also very respectful of his peers, as well as fighters from the past. 2. Most of those so called nobodies were mandatory defences after better opponents weren't available. 3. He was content to win on points, but he also used some great variation, and did things that other fighters couldn't. 4. I never bought that. He took some risky fights, and he tried to make risky fights.