Tyson was a more fundamentally sound fighter, yes, but Jones impressed me even more as a finisher p4p. He was without a doubt the better overall fighter p4p imo.
The positive drugs test and dramatic decline in his career that followed it are the short comings that occur to me.
No. You dont make it as far a he did being overrated. His style doesnt age well though so his decline makes him seem more vulnerable than he really was in his prime. We all know he was shaky in the whiskers, but his reflexes were so good in his prime, it barely made a difference. I'm really not much of an rjj fan, but I have to give the man his dues. He was never some protected fighter who only fought cans - he faced real competition.
It was hard to lay a glove on Roy Jones. At his peak he was Willie Pep with power. His decline was so abrupt. Only thing I noticed back at that time was that he was laying on the ropes more often than he had in his prime. When his legs went they didnt waste any time.
Feel quite free to illustrate the numerous times prime Jones was countered when going for the finish please. Obviously there are numerous examples. No-one would be silly enough to make this claim because they thought he "looked" open and it just didn't happen.
So what? Tyson would have opened him up a long time before the vast majority of ATG's would have. That was his style and strength. Does it make him any better than the Ali's, Robinson's, Whitaker's, Monzon's etc? Tyson was full on aggression, Jones was a boxer/puncher.
That's it in a nutshell. Until he tailed off fast and capitulated there's just nothing else to grab hold of hence detractors having to pillage ever bit they can out of it.
Hmmm, Tyson was superior with jab, body to head combinations and throwing correctly after a shift. I find prime Tyson to be a superior at cutting the ring and using sound defence whilst on the offensive. He also had a much stronger chin p4p. Funnily enough, I find Tyson and RJJ to be exactly the same type of puncher. Heavy handed and exceptionally fast. The difference being in their styles and in-ring attitude. RJJ more wanton to demonstrating his superior athleticism rather than going for the kill from the first bell and after the McClellan - Benn fight, fighting within his ability often. Prime Mike, more wanton to taking his opponent out as quickly and brutally as possible. Common misconception is that RJJ had a glass jaw. RJJ took some punches in his career and we only really saw durability issues after he came back down to face Tarver. RJJ in his prime is a fantastic whirlwind of speed, reflex and confidence. He is arguably top 2 H2H from 160 - 175 lbs of all time. However, there are aspects of his career that will always cause doubts over his fortitude when he squared up with the absolute best of the best that have the chin, smarts and speed to adjust to him and start finding his jaw with their own arsenal.
Anyone remember the 2 punch counter he hit Reggie Johnson with? It was too fast for the human eye to catch.
Jones was more accurate. Tyson had plenty of wild moments, which becomes clear if one watch his whole fights and not only highlights. But the big difference between Jones and everyone else was his reflexes and his amazing ability to leap in and out of range. There has been plenty, plenty more fundamentally sound fighters, but I haven't seen anyone else with that kind of speed.
Jones would've more clearly dominated Quick Tillis, Bonecrusher and Tony Tucker you Tyson nuthugging fantasist. And Jones wasn't beaten into oblivion by a Buster Douglas level fighter as a prime 23 year old, nor battered senseless by a past prime Holyfield type as a fresh 30 year old.
