Roy Jones is underrated

No, because he hasn't shown that he's that good yet. If he had, I would. Jones did show to my satisfaction that he's capable of handling the very best.

 

Because Ward was a hyped American youngster and Kessler was a Euro-bum. At least that was what you would have heard from most who picked Ward.

Kessler proved to have a few weaknesses that are Wards strength. In the Calzaghe bout you can see that Kessler has problems adepting his style during a fight, has problems with speed, has problems with awkward angles and has problems when he isn't able to get into his rythm. Calzahge's strength played right into this. Ward's too but not in the same dimenstion. Ward had to rely on dirty tactics to keep Kessler out of his rythm.
I knew all that before that. I still picked Kessler because he was proven and Ward not. I gave Ward a good chance and could him see winning.

Same with Jones. I can see him winning against the atgs between 160 and 175. But I wouldn't make him favourite in most of the fights.

 

Were insignificant since Jones had never had a single fight past 10 rounds, and was visibly tiring.

Showed what?

Such as what? Bear in mind this wasn't the best version of RJJ by any means.

 

But if we were applying your standards consistently, we would have all picked Kessler, since Ward was unproven at the top level. But that was clearly the wrong pick.

 

Did you see his domination of Mallinga? Mallinga beat Benn, got robbed against Benn and had a very close fight with Eubank arguably winning

 

I disagree. I think i has more to do with Hopkins adepting.

That he could be annoyed, timed and troubled. And Griffin is hardly a great.

Talk about this just came up after he barely edged Tarver in the first fight. Hindsight. Tarver was actually his first real challenge for years, even before the fight commentators said that. The fight proved them right. Tarver studied Jones and used his rope-a-dope-thing against him.

 

With a damaged hand its best to throw it but pull the punch so your opponent doesnt figure it out. Sometimes you can throw it so it lands on a different part of your fist

 

So, you are right? All the time? Doubt it.

 

So he's the best at SMW based on his domination of Malinga, fair enough.

 

His domination of Toney, Mallinga, Pazienza trumps Calzaghes wins over Kessler, Lacy, Old Drained Eubank. Especially with the manner of the wins

 

I don't think that any fighter in history has squandered more potential for legendary status by taking the wrong fights.

Based on his talent he should not have set a theoretical limit on where he could be ranked in the pantheon of poud for pound greats. If he had taken the most dangerous fights his standing could only have improved even if he did suffer an upset somwhere along the line. A ma who could do that to James Toney should not set any limit on his ambition.

Perhaps the most baffling thing is that he never actualy held a lineal title in any weight class, despite being the first man since 1898 to win titles from middleweight to heavyweight!

 

Thats debatable, creating a new lineal champ is very debatable, only in the cyber ESB is world of Jones haters is the WBOgus Dariusz a lineal champ.

Hill-Euro Bum arguably made a new lineal champ, Jones certainly deserved to be ranked over Euro bum though. So if thats the case Jones-Tarver 1 gives the division a new lineal champ

 

What RJJ did at 168 is non comparable to JC, and I'm not even a JC fan, it's common sence.

And the fact that you put down JC's win over Lacy and big up Malinga is laughable.

 

I think that in historical terms Dariusz has a prety iron clad claim to be the lineal champion.

The lineal champion is not necesarily the best fighter on the planet just as the king of england is not necesarily the best man for the job.

 

Only in your twisted fanboy-mind.

Oh and to quote a fellow poster: