Prime for prime - Roy Jones v. Joe Calzaghe

He wasn’t though was he?

He’d just beaten Kessler and Hopkins.

The absolute best version of Joe we ever saw was against Lacy, a few years prior. Whereas the best versions of Roy had been about 12 years prior.

 

Joe was great in his own right, but he isn’t a legendary fighter. And one of the reasons he retired undefeated is because he never tested himself enough. He spent the majority of his career defending a lightly regarded WBO belt against mostly low level opposition.

Their 3 year age gap is completely irrelevant. Age and ring age are two completely different things.

Their 2008 fight is also irrelevant.

Calzaghe would have won, albeit with a bit more trouble?

A bit more trouble?

Really?

Did you see their careers unfold?

Prime for prime, Roy was operating on another level entirely.

 

He looked a shadow of his former self v MK and BH. A weak old man.

 

Tarver and Griffin weren’t average, and Griffin wasn’t a southpaw.

Joe was as talented as Tarver, if not more so. But like I’ve said earlier, Joe didn’t have the confidence needed. People don’t realise how much psychology plays in the outcome of a fight. Fighting is as much mental as what it is physical.

Tarver chased down a fight with Roy. He crashed the post-Ruiz press conference in order to get it. And then during the fights, even the first one when Roy was still the no.1 P4P fighter in the world, he pressured Roy at every opportunity. But would Joe have done that? A guy who wouldn’t fight him when he was still great? I don’t think so. Not at all.

You can’t beat a guy if you don’t believe that you can beat him.

Tarver chased Roy in and out of the ring, whilst Joe would only sign a contract when Roy was completely finished as an elite level fighter. And that’s highly relevant here.

On paper, Joe possessed most of the attributes to be Roy’s worst nightmare. But in reality, he spent a decade fighting mostly weak opposition, as he didn’t possess the confidence and the ambition to really push himself to the max. All of which means that he’d never have had the confidence in order to have given himself a realistic chance of beating a version of Roy from the mid 90’s.

 

Well then you’re not being realistic are you.

You’re taking the human factor away from it.

 

Don’t be silly.

 

??

 

He didn’t look like a weak old man. He was just fighting 2 of his best opponents.

 

Nope I'm saying that when the bell rings, all fighters are confident or else they get knocked out....for example Spinks-Tyson. Spinks knew he didn't have a hope and he got sparked

That isn't happening in this fight

 

Just telling you how it is...

 

Michael Spinks is a perfect example to use.

If we lived in a world where Michael Spinks wasn’t afraid of Tyson, then that fight could well have played out very differently. Mike would still probably have beaten him, but nowhere near as quickly.

Look at James Douglas in Tokyo. He’d have fought 2 Mike Tyson’s that night, due to the sad passing of his mother. The loss of his mother gave him an absolute will of iron that night. He had no fear. He wasn’t in any way intimidated. He used his grief as fuel. In my honest opinion, the Tokyo version of Douglas would never have laid down for Evander in 3 rounds.

If you want to take the human factor away, then Joe at his absolute best, fighting to his full capabilities, would have given Roy a hell of a fight. His attributes on paper are a nightmare for Roy. But realistically, he would never have approached the fight with huge confidence where he’d have gone at Roy like how Tarver did. And I know that due to analysing his actions and his comments throughout the years.

Sure, it’s a fantasy fight. But it has to be two realistic versions that we put together.

Roy was the P4P king who had supreme confidence and a huge ego.

Joe was a great fighter, but a guy who wouldn’t fight Roy earlier, publicly admitting that he didn’t want tough fights, as well as also admitting that he doesn’t know whether he could have beaten Roy at his best at SMW.

That is extremely relevant here.

Fighters fight in a way that’s dependant upon their mindset.

You can only put the versions of Joe in the ring who we actually saw.

IF they’d have fought, you’d realistically have had a very cautious version of Joe, facing off against a guy who he had huge admiration for, and who was faster, more powerful and much more confident.

On paper, Wladamir Klitschko would have been absolute hell for Muhammad Ali. But in reality, Ali would probably have done a psyche job on him like he did with Liston and Foreman. And Wlad in his prime was always naturally cautious due to his early knockout defeats. So as far as I’m concerned, these kinds of things have to be factored into the debate, as again, they’re highly relevant.

In my honest opinion, based on what I know, it's just unrealistic to see Joe fighting a peak version of Roy with extreme confidence, where he'd have tried to have unloaded huge volume on him. For me, he’d never have fought him with the same level of confidence which he had when they fought in 2008.

 

Boom! Thread/.

 

I do not see Roy Jones as operating on a whole different level. Calzaghe is an ATG. He was undefeated and DID beat Jones and Hopkins.

Roy Jones lost a step in their fight, but so had Cazaghe. peak for peak - Jones was only arguably a little better. Splitting hairs really. Joe would always beat Roy Jones because of styles.

Calzaghe beats Roy again.

 

Dude us whites don’t have those black genes

Watch the knockdowns - no change in his eyes or feet, just legs not strong enough anymore

 

Jones clear UD. Too much speed