Why is Roid Jones Junior Loved and Revered Considering He's Been Clipped For PEDs (?)

You let yourself down so badly with posts like this.

This was in 1997.

The Roycott was in 2001.

You say Roy refused.

Why don't you tell everyone why he didn't want to partake in it.

Was it:

A - Because he didn't want any hard fights, because he was a ducker who wanted soft touches?

B - Because he looked to have a big money fight at HW?

Which one?

Every time we have a debate on Roy, you only ever show one side of the story that paints Roy in a negative light.

After he decided he didn't want to fight Nunn, he went to Atlanta with his advisor Greg Fritz, to meet with Evander Holyfield and his attorney, Jim Thomas. It's in Jim Thomas' book that was published in 2005. Thomas states that Roy wanted to fight him, but Evander respectfully turned down the proposal, as he felt as though he was in a no-win situation at the time.

What happened next?

Roy then signed to fight 'Buster' Douglas for around $6m. But it never happened as Roy's parents talked him out of it at the last minute. Roy was under pressure from his family to build bridges with his father, because they hadn't spoken properly in nearly 6 years.

Everyone has different circumstances surrounding them, and everyone has their own goals.

Your link only looks from the perspective of Goosen. Again, there's always two sides to every story.

You've made it appear to people who don't know the specifics, that Roy had no interest in fighting any decent fights.

It's not the case.

How realistic do you think that tournament was?

Was it Roy who specifically stopped it from taking place?

He only held the WBC belt back then.

Did Goosen try and put it together after Roy had relinquished his belt in 1998?

 

why? wel, obviously he set his divisions alight, and did what few had done in history.

But yes he should always have a black mark on his record for his use of PEDs during at least one fight.

 

Suck his **** while you're at it you **** thats all you do around here. Gimperial1 the resident ****jockey.:rofl

 

Lmao not surprised but he replies to me though. Ha

 

He's an absolute joke.

He's on another level to guys like Rico and Joe.Boxer.

Ask him how Roy ducked Hopkins, because he won't answer me.

 

Bring something to the TABBLE.

 

dont blame your TABBLET for your sppelling

 

Seems like you finally found your life partner good for you :good, i dont reply to that loser cause i dont want anything to do with that creep its that simple. Hes the one that tried to befriend me but i'm not into that specially with a weirdo like him, he was the one who begged me to debate him as if i would debate with a sick fanboy with a creepy obsession with a fighter so obsessed that he confessed he cant get away from arguements about Roy Jones either here or on facebook, he thinks Roy Jones 24/7 365.Pathetic:rofl:rofl

the guy is here everyday since he joined defending Jones with the same arguements every day, its like hes living in the real life version of "Groundhog Day" where every day is tthe same,"the same debates over and over for years parroting his own skewed personal version of reality that fits into a world which revolves around an angelic Roy jones along with mindlessly agreeing with any fanboy post about Jones regardless of its actual content and how wrong it might be and replying to literally any post which is even mildly critical of Jones to leap to his defense" as if hes from Jones Family.

Why would i entertain such a loser??? Complete waste of time :dead

This content is protected

 

roy ducked Hopkins by beating him comprehensively.


in topsy turvy world , beating him means ducking him

 

come on young terrible, why not draw a clean slate bwetween you two. Why not go TABBLE RASA yeah.

 

Considering several of his opponents are suspect or flat out busted I would say not.

 

general zod,

Part 1.

Again, to fight who exactly?

Were the guys rated below any better?

Could the fights have been made?

Well he did, and it was granted. If you think it was out of order, that's fine.

Yes, but I'm ruling out the theory that Roy ducked him in 2000. If Roy had feared fighting Antonio Tarver in 2000, and he'd pushed him into an eliminator hoping that Harding would have beaten him, why did he then fight him in 2003?

What are you saying?

You think he feared him and didn't want to fight him in 2000, but he overcame his fear in 2003?

How logical is that?

We don't know exactly why he did it. But as above, it does't make sense that Roy would duck a guy out of fear, before going on to fight him 3 years later.

I get that.

How many times did he do that though?

In my opinion, it was to pi$$ Tarver off.

What do you mean nobody was pressuring him? Tarver was pressuring him. He crashed the post Ruiz press conference and goaded Roy at every opportunity. He chased down the fight. When Roy couldn't secure a big money fight at HW, he took the bait and went back to LHW.

Now if Roy had already taken care of Tarver earlier, that may not have happened. He may never have rushed back to LHW when he did. We'll never know.

The point I was making, was that Roy would not have fought a guy 3 times, had he have really feared him and not wanted to fight him.

It would have been illogical. So I think it's safe to assume that Roy didn't push him into the eliminator in 2000, purely because he feared him.

I know who paid him.

Stop answering a question with a question.

Tell me how dropping his titles would have benefited him?

What evidence?

Are you for real?

How can you even ask me that question?

It doesn't take a lot of working out.


Let's have a look at what happened over the years:


In 1996, Frankie Liles was the WBA, SMW champ. Roy had the IBF. From links that you've provided, we know that Frankie turned Roy down. Frankie's former manager, Jack O'Halloran, has stated that. The was the man who got the best out of him, and who moved him in with him etc. O'Halloran said that Frankie blew a great fight, by being greedy and going back and asking for more money. And O'Halloran was so pi$$ed with his behaviour, he left him. Again, that was to unify the division. So Roy couldn't get that fight even though he'd have been putting his IBF belt up for grabs. Yet you think that Roy could have fought guys of Liles's calibre without a belt?

According to Roy and HBO, he tried to fight Nardiello for the WBC. Nardiello turned him down. Again, if he turned him down when Roy had a belt to unify, he obviously wouldn't have fought him without it.

Roy wouldn't go to Germany to fight Dariusz, and Dariusz wouldn't go to America. That fight was for all of the belts at LHW. So again, if Dariusz wouldn't go to America to fight for the IBF, the WBC and the WBA belts, what would have been the chances of him going without anything at stake?

In the early 00's, Joe Calzaghe wouldn't move up to LHW to try and fight Roy when he was the unified champ. So again, do you think he would have done so had Roy not been the unified champ?

Bernard Hopkins would not fight Roy when Roy was the unified champ in what would have been a huge fight. Once again, would the fight have been likely to happen had Roy not have had any belts?

You are talking absolute nonsense.

Roy could not obtain big fights and unifications with the likes of Liles, Nardiello, Dariusz, Calzaghe and Hopkins etc, even though he had main belts that would have been put on the line.

So paint me a picture.

Let's say Roy had have given up his belts to pursue the biggest fights out there.

He'd have sat back, watched everyone fight for the vacant belts, and then what?

Tell me.

Logic states that if they wouldn't fight Roy in huge fights with titles at stake, then they damn sure wouldn't have fought him without anything at stake.

Nothing would have changed, apart from the fact that Roy would have given up his belts for nothing.

He'd have had lots of keep busy fights while his team and HBO had tried to make big fights on his behalf. But again, logic states that without anything to offer, those big fights would have been even harder to make.

Tell me which big name fighters you think would have fought Roy with nothing at stake other than money? They'd have had everything to lose and nothing to gain.

It's just ridiculous.

But how could you even ask a fighter to drop his belts anyway? Every fighter has dreams and aspirations when they turn pro. You couldn't expect a pro fighter to drop all of his belts.

It's madness.

Again, HBO were just frustrated. But Roy relinquishing his belts would have achieved absolutely nothing.

The types of fights that he'd missed out on, wouldn't suddenly have appeared by magic.

It's really not hard to envisage what would have happened.

HBO would have been left with an unhappy fighter on their hands, and Roy and his team would have had less power at the negotiating table.

 

Part 2.

We don't know the specifics. But we know they must have been realistic demands, because we've read how Kerry Davis had numerous meetings with Roy's advisor, Brad Jacobs, and how hard he tried to get Dariusz's manager to the negotiating table. He spoke of his frustration of trying desperately to land the network the fight. If Roy had blocked it by crazy demands etc, I've no doubt that HBO would have hung him out to dry publicly.

According to the article I posted, Bernard wanted $10m. So how realistic was that?

You know that they didn't always publicly support him.

You once told me that they only offered Roy an extra $500,000 to fight Jirov instead of Woods.

HBO were really frustrated at that point. But they weren't when he went on to fight Ruiz and Tarver afterwards.

Everyone at HBO, were extremely frustrated at one time or another. But you've seen the numerous links that I've posted up over the years.

Here's another one:

http://articles.philly.com/1995-12-12/sports/25667395_1_jones-fight-jones-move-roy-jones

Everyone has different circumstances.

Yes, those guys gave up belts to go with what were better options for them at the time.

Roy also did that.

He relinquished his IBF, MW title, to fight Toney.

He relinquished his IBF, SMW title that he'd won from Toney, to move up to LHW, when he couldn't unify at SMW.

He relinquished his WBC, LHW belt to pursue a huge fight at HW.

He relinquished his LHW titles in 2002, to fight Ruiz in 2003.

But again, I want you to tell me how Roy would have benefited from giving his belts up, when he didn't have big fight opportunities available to him.

Again, what would have been the point?

If that's true, that's fair enough.

But would you have pushed for an eliminator if you'd have been in his shoes, with a potential big unification fight against Reggie Johnson just around the corner?

Again, we'd need to see what all of his other options had been for all of his other mandatory defences, and if it'd have benefited him in any way, had he refused them and requested eliminators instead.

Again, what were his options?

Hall was a WBA mandatory.

Their website is below.

Just go on to the ratings and find the LHW ratings from April, 2000. Richard Hall was the interim champ and Lou Del Valle was at number 2. We know that at that point, Roy had already beaten Del Valle less than 2 years earlier.

http://www.wbanews.com/wba-ranking


Thornton, Brannon and Kelly, were all IBF mandatories.

Their ratings aren't as easy to find.


Roy fought Thornton in September, 1995. I can't find the specific rankings for that month, but I've found some from December, 1995.

At that point, Brannon and Littles were behind Roy:

http://sporttoday.org/13_42482a94e1b61f08_1.htm


Roy fought Brannon in October, 1996. Again, I can't find those specific rankings, but I've found some from January, 1997.

At that point, Charles Brewer and Garry Ballard were ranked behind Roy:

http://sporttoday.org/13_c276008ed95237ce_1.htm


Roy fought Kelly in February, 2002.

Below is an article from S.O. looking at the ratings from just after the fight.

According to the article, Glen Kelly and Reggie Johnson were numbers 1 and 2 beforehand:

http://www.secondsout.com/world-boxing-news/world-boxing-news/releases-january-ratings

We know that at that point, Roy had already beaten Reggie Johnson less than 3 years earlier.


It would be really interesting to see all of the ratings for all of his mandatories. I'll have to keep looking. If you happen to find any, please let me know. But from what I've found above, I don't think that there would have been any point in him putting in requests for eliminators.

Again, we would need to see a full list of what his other options had been, and if they'd have benefited him.

You should be criticising the Organisations, not Roy personally.

Do other fighters regularly kick up a fuss and request for guys to be put into eliminators if they feel as though their mandatories are weak?

How common is that?

Are you seriously telling me that Roy should have refused all of his weak mandatories, and then asked the Organisations to put up their top 2 fighters in an eliminator to decide who he'd fight?

Nonsense.

They were rightly frustrated. Everyone was. But there was no scam. Efforts were made to try and secure big fights, and we know he also fought big fights.

 

Problem with this is jones never learned how to box. Cycling isnt powerlifting, basketball isnt powerlifting, tennis isnt powerlifting, baseball isnt powerlifting, all have doping problems. Jones got popped hes a cheater and should be remembered as one.

 

Jones' And Bernard's legacy is another debate. It is clear Roy won the particular rivalry as Jones' win came at a more relevant time, and honestly believe Hops wanted none of him in 02