Roy Jones as a Middleweight champ

McCallum when he was absolutely ancient.
Sweet Reggie at 175 was not the man he was in the early 90's.
Fair enough about Hopkins, Tate who were fringe contenders and Toney of course, although that fight was at 168.

Young 160 lb Roy vs Jackson, McClellan and a still useful McCallum would have been interesting. Perhaps aging Kalambay would have presented a very different stylistical match-up for Jones.

 

We can go through anyones resume and say they were 'past prime' though, McCallum was still a world class operator old or not, hardly an easy fight for your first fight in a new weight class

Do we really think all these guys wanted to get in with Jones anyway, Jones wasnt a draw in the beggining and the odds of anyone beating him were slim to none, not to mention a good chance of being embarrassed and being ko'd

Jones was going after the big names before he was a champ - Eubank/Benn/Toney, neither of the first 2 were interested even when Jones said he'd come to England. Toney took him on once he established himself. McCallum had other priorities when he was at 160, ie Toney

 

McCallum was 40+ years old, had lost to Tiozzo and retired shortly afterwards. He was not really a world class fighter at that stage in my opinion. He was the easiest first fight to have in the division, due to being past his prime and a former 154 lber, yet the fight was still for a vacant light heavyweight title.

Jackson said he wanted to fight young Roy Jones and was confident he could knock Jones out. McClellan, McCallum and Kalambay weren't the kind to duck anybody. Had he sought out those fights actively, I don't think he would have had a problem with getting them.

As I said in the first post, had Jones fastened up the process of developing as a pro, since many thought he was good enough to win a title already with the kind of form he showed in the Olympics, he could have had some interesting match-ups at 160 in the early 90's. Jones admitted that his father slowed up his development early on by matching him against lesser opposition. Imagine Roy Jones going right to work like Ray Robinson who beat the likes of Sammy Angott and Fritzie Zivic during his first year as a pro, Roy could have potentially had a very good middleweight resume.

 

1. McCallum had lost to Tiozzo but gave a good account of himself, Tiozzo then moved up. In his prior fights to that he had won and defended the LHW title. 4years prior to Jones he was fighting Toney in 2 very close fights.

As for being the easiest in the division, he put up a better account of himself than Virgil Hill managed, or was Jones just more aggressive for that 1?

2. Jones was supposed to fight GMAN, after GMAN beat Benn, it didnt pan out. Benn-Jones was a possibility, Benn wanted £15million ($25m), not sure if there was that much money for the fight because Jones wasnt a massive draw. I think we can take it as red that there wasnt as much money on the table as Benn thought there was. King wanted to sign Jones on a long term deal for the fight, Jones didnt want to go with King, which knowing King is understandable.

3. As a fan I'd have loved for some of those fights to have happened. Its not as easy to get a young dangerous prospect in with top contenders as you may think. Theres more to the business than 'wanting the fight'. Promoters demand 3-4fight deals if you want to fight their.

I'm not sure about the specifics of Jones Sr protecting his son, if true I'm not suprised, if it was your son would you be wanting to put him in with GMAN or Jackson? Kalambay sure, but even if I thought my son would win, I wouldnt risk his health against the other 2 killers

As for how the fights would pan out at MW, Kalambay/McCallum no chance in hell, Jackson/Gman have punchers chances for obvious reasons

 

atsch...Ridiculous, he doesn't have an ATG resume but he was DEFINITELY a great MW.

 

I don't really know about giving a good account of himself. Tiozzo was good but not McCallum good. The Harding win was great for an old fighter, but Harding hadn't been in the light heavyweight picture for 2 years. It was the old master's last good effort.

4 years can be a long time. Remember how fast Roy Jones fell off.

On paper he was the easiest. McCallum was always extremely durable and was not going to get knocked out. If Hill was as durable as McCallum, and had not allowed himself to get caught with an all-time great bodyshot, he would have given Jones some trouble, more than McCallum did atleast although I had McCallum winning some early rounds. I think Hill was fighting fairly well until the sudden KO. It's not like he was being broken down and embarrassed.

I'm talking about middleweight resume though. Jones debuted in 1989 and only truly stepped up in class by mid 1993. Had he done it earlier, around 1992, he would have been competing against great opposition at middleweight. This way he could have had a great middleweight resume because even despite lacking pro experience, Jones did not lack any of the skills.

I believe it was during the "Beyond the Glory" documentary about Jones where Roy said he had to separate from his father because he was being too protective. Like I said, there were experts who felt the Jones who competed in the Olympics could have won a middleweight title right there and then. He was that good.

 

To be great you need to prove to be great. Jones did not prove to be a great mw, so he is no great mw. It´s quite simple actually. There is a difference between looking great and beeing great.

 

Well he easily beat what is considered one of the greatest middleweights with relative ease. Hopkins didnt lose another fight for what 12 years, but Im sure you will say Hopkins wasnt a third of the fighter he became right? Going up and beating Toney at super middle just 8 pounds north is a pretty good indication he would have been just as great at 160 in my book.

 

It's true though that Hopkins wasn't third of the fighter he became. Just look at this:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvxl9NhXdLQ[/ame]


Toney was such an erratic fighter but you're correct that it's indication of what Jones could have done at 160. I don't think that "could have's" count as much as actually doing it though, and thus I don't rate Jones as one of the top 10 all time middleweights.

 

The Hopkins win is one of the most overated ever ... Hoipkins was far away from what he would later be, at least four years from his prime, while Jones just entered his.

The Toney fight was at smw not at mw, so that proves nothing for Jones mw career.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda means nothing. What means something is what happened and what not happened. And what did not happen was Jones proving himself to be a great mw.

 

Head to head, who do you favor to beat RJJ at 160?

 

What has that to do with him not beeing a great mw? Or do you base a fighters greatness on speculation? I certainly don´t.

 

That fight bears virtually no reflection on Hopkins' real ability at the time. He went out there in pitiful condition and it showed. Hopkins had a lot of skill even before winning the title; he had a different style, but still was a very good technical boxer with educated pressure and a very good inside game - as well as power. It's difficult to compare that version to the later version concretely because of the change in styles, but I'd say that version of Hopkins would have beaten Taylor and Pavlik, and would have given Hagler and Monzon a very rough night at the least.

 

Hopkins back then was good but a few steps away from beeing great. A decent contender but nothing more.

 

Yep. Doesn't have the pedigree of the elite at 160 but as far as talent goes that's a different story. I have little to no doubt that if he would have dominated the division had chosen to stay there.