Lacy is not on any ATG list, at 168 he was a well-managed bulked up Welter The Brits were told Lacy was a monster to make them buy the fight, good promotional work
I respect your opinion and this always stirs up a great debate. Most people rank guys on accomplishments etc. That's the traditional criteria used. And that's fair enough. But I rank guys mostly on ability. On a H2H basis. And I don't give a damn that Roy only had 6/7 fights there, Roy is head and shoulders above anyone else who ever fought there. There's never been a SMW in the history of the sport better than a 25/26 year old version of Roy Jones. He has to be number 1. He breezed by Toney in 2nd gear. He beat Malinga with ease. He beat Merqui Sosa with ease. He showed us some of the most amazing combination punching ever seen when he knocked out Paz with 6 shots whilst walking forward. He beat Lucas with absolute ease after playing basketball. He then moved up a weight and destroyed Griffin, Hill and Hall, and also toyed with Reggie Johnson. Andre Ward is one of my favourite ever fighters. But he wasn't as great as Roy, and he wouldn't have beaten him. Roy would have been too fast for him to handle. It's got a boring U/D written all over it. Toney didn't do a lot at the weight, but due to his ability, I personally would have to rank him over guys like Ottke, Froch and Collins etc. Wait until Bailey arrives. Ha!
It doesn't matter how thin his work was. None of those guys would have been favoured over a prime version of Roy. In terms of ability, nobody comes close. The numbers/stats aren't relevant to me. Roy only had 7 fights there. Whereas Joe had 44. But Roy's win over Toney is more impressive than any of Joe's best wins at the weight. Joe's best wins were against Lacy, Kessler, Reid and Eubank. The others were just mainly made up of C class, WBO guys. Ward's best wins were against Kessler, Froch and Abraham. Unless you think that Joe and Andre would have beaten a prime version of Roy, there's no logic in ranking them higher.
I respectfully disagree. You can't just put forward Joe because of numbers. The questions you need to ask, are: 1. Was Joe's best win at the weight better than Roy's best win at the weight? 2. Was he a better fighter than Roy? 3. Would he have beaten Roy? Roy did just as much over 7 fights as what Joe did in 44. Ninety per cent of Joe's SMW resume is made up of WBO defences against B and C class fighters.
Joe number 1. No way should Ottke be even mentioned. The likes of Eubank, Froch, Benn, Collins and Kessler were all better.
Andre Ward retired a 32-0. Roy was 49-1 at one point, until he decided to carry on without changing his unique, orthodox style that was built around his incredible athleticism, in order to compensate for his age. No, if Andre had fought in Seoul, he wouldn't have won gold. Because Roy beat that Korean as much as anyone could have without scoring a knockout, yet he was robbed blind. Andre is truly a great fighter. And I think his wins over Kovalev were great. But he didn't dominate like Roy did across 5 divisions, and he didn't overcome adversity and push himself to the limits like Roy did.
Roy is clearly the greatest ever SMW in terms of ability. Who would you have favoured to have beaten him? If you're looking at the level of competition, then look at who Joe fought between Eubank and Lacy. Roy did as much as Joe did in his 2 years there. Joe just has the numbers in his favour because he spent 14 years at the weight. Easy wins over Malinga, Sosa and Lucas were on the same level as most of Joe's wins at the weight. His win over Toney was better than Joe's wins over Kessler and Lacy.
