Was Roy Jones a paper champion??

Was Roy Jones a paper champion in the divisions he won world title fights in, between winning the MW title up to his fight at HW with Ruiz?
Read on....

At MW Jones won a vacant title against a then unknown unaccomplished fighter in Hopkins. Should Jones have been declared as the MW champ for this win or should that honour have gone to J Jackson who although also won a vacant title fought at a higher level and won his vacant title against a then higher rated more accomplished fighter in H Graham.
Should Jones have been declared as the man at MW?

At SMW Jones beat Toney who wasnt a great SMW and didnt have a very good SMW resume. N Benn and C Eubank were more accomplished champions who were fighting at a higher level.
Should Jones have been declared as the man at SMW?

At LHW it is without a doubt that Michalczewski was the man at LHW.
The Ring LHW title disappeared in the 80s and reappeared in the 90s where it just handed its belt to R Jones, but if the line of you have to beat the man to be the man had been followed, the belt should have been handed to Michalczewski for his victory over V Hill. Dariusz was the WBO LHW champ but he also won and vacated the IBF & WBA belts before Jones won them. Also Michalczewski beat Rocchigiani who was wrongly stripped of his WBC belt.
So Michalczewski had claim to every one of Jones belts and should have been Ring champ.
Michalczewski was the MAN at LHW.
Should Jones have been declared as the man at LHW?

At HW Jones beat Ruiz but I doubt anyone felt Jones was the man at HW with L Lewis as champ. Still same question to the fans. I remember a comment that Ruiz beat Holyfield who drew with Lewis.
Should Jones have been declared as the man at HW?


It does appear that Jones fought some good fighters but never against the top man of any division up to his fight with Ruiz and was only ever a paper champion in these divisions. Also Jones was fighting alot of gimmes and beaten fighters.

Discuss

 

Interesting. Why do you not think so at 160 & 168? Toney doesnt have as good a resume overall at SMW as Eubank or Benn.
Jones didnt beat anyone of note at MW. Hopkins went on to have a career as a dominant champ but it hadnt begun then and he wasnt an accomplished fighter at all then, Jackson was an already existing champ at 160 when Jones beat a then nobody to claim a title and didnt fight on the same level as Jackson

To what? All or some? Explain

 

Whether you personally feel he was better or not, do you consider him the legit champ or a paper champ considering the points listed

 

Ranked #1 can often be an opinion. I guess you are basing that ranking on the Ring magazine.
Look at who Toney beat at SMW and its not a great resume and not as good as Benn or Eubank

 

Thats true