Where Do You Rate Roy Jones Jr In The All Time Rankings At Light-Heavyweight

I rank him very highly. Top five probably.

 

They had a poll on LHW rankings earlier. He got ranked #11.

1. 971 Ezzard Charles (30)
2. 652 Archie Moore (4)
3. 557 Gene Tunney (8 )
4. 452 Sam Langford (4)
5. 328 Michael Spinks (1)
6. 288 Bob Foster
7. 181 Harry Greb
8. 148 Billy Conn
9. 140 Tommy Loughran
10. 81 Bob Fitzsimmons
11. 79 Roy Jones Jr
12. 50 Harold Johnson
13. 15 Jimmy Slattery
14. 10 Saad Muhammad
15. 7 Victor Galindez
16. 6 Jack Dillon
17. 5 Jack O'Brian
17. 5 John Henry Lewis
19. 4 Eddie Mustafa Muhammad
19. 4 Dwight Qawi
21. 3 Jimmy Bivins
21. 3 Tommy Gibbons
21. 3 Maxie Rosenbloom
24. 1 Donny Lalonde
24. 1 George Carpentier
24. 1 Henry Maske

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=156260

 

He gets by on his consistency there for most part, because there wasn't any great fighters in the division during his reign. Antonio Tarver doesn't even constitute as a great fighter, not in my judgment. Top 10, that's about it.

A guy like Michael Spinks who had to deal with a really tough, experienced, and competitive division and passed with flying colours is infinitely more impressive than Jones at LHW.

 

Top 2 on ability he would dominate most of the top10

 

Not so sure about dominate, especially matched with "most". I wouldn't doubt he'd potentially embarrass some based on styles and skillsets.

 

Michael Spinks. The last thing Jones needs is a 6'3 skilled boxer puncher throwing awkward combination's at him from all angles. Spinks was too good not to land his right hand at some point in the fight, and I envision nothing but a knockout when it happens. Jones never really proved he could take a good solid shot, and perhaps only Foster hit harder at Light Heavyweight than Spinks. Jones relies on his reflexes and timing, but Spinks was awfully hard to anticipate.

 

Spinks and Eddie Futch are beating Jones, i'd wager big money on it. Futch had a MUCH MUCH lesser fighting going effectively with great tactics against Jones and Spinks is 7 levels better.

His awkwardness and effective unpredictability would be a telling factor vs Jones incredible reflexes and anticipation. His 4 inch height and 2 inch reach advantage and ability to use it would also be telling long term. His power at 175 is immense. His defense at 175 is vastly underrated. His chin is superb. When needed to he can jab extremely effectively.

There's just nothing there to penetrate for Roy imo. He'd be awkward, win rounds, have times of brilliance but he just wouldn't get it done overall IMO.

 

He reigned in a fairly weak division and either lost or failed to make the fights that were most crucial to his legacy there - ie: Dariusz, Tarver, Calzaghe, Rocchigiani. Moreover, he had several very embarrassing losses and some very glaring weaknesses that were exposed. I can't see him being rated among the ATGs at the weight.

 

I don't take his past prime losses too seriously, as he'd noticably dropped off by that point. However, I just don't think he proved enough that he had the capabilities of dealing with a great LHW technician or puncher. He was better at 160 and especially 168. I'd say the poll we did is close enough, #11 is a decent enough placing. Not a top 10 guy in my book, just too many great fighters and too little proved for Roy at this weight.

 

I wouldnt have him any higher then 9 or 10...I actually had him there briefly when I was putting up a list for Rummys poll but he got pushed out..Id say he would be 11 or 12 now on my list.

Definitely top 10 H2H...especially in the cleaner 12 round era he fought in. But his resume doesnt stand up to some of the greats there.

Spinks beats him.