Sorry for the modern intrusion, but Roy Jones - if he beats Joe where does he place?

Why? Because I think he should have done so much more with all his talent? Because I´m dissapointed of him following money instead of glory? That´s not hating. He was great and perhaps the most talented fighter ever but he never became what he was destinied for. For a fanboy like me that may be hating but it´s more beeing objective.

 

If you look at his resume the fighters he faced were top opposition, he just made them look average, take a look at what these fighters did:

Toney - ATG - Dominated best at 168
Hopkins - ATG - Wide UD best at 160
McCallum - ATG 3weight champ, old, but dominated, still WBC champ at 175
Reggie Johnson - IBF 175lb champ and 2weight titlist, has a win over Steve Collins who in turn beat Eubank and BEnn - dominated
Mallinger - beat Benn, arguably beat Eubank, became WBC Champ. Dominated and dispatched in 6rounds
Tarver - cleaned out 175 before and after - close win past prime before losing the next 2
Ruiz - top HW - 30
Virgil Hill - ex champ, top3 at the weight destroyed
Hall - got robbed against DM in 1 fight the year after
Gonzalez - would go on to beat DM
Woods - future champ
Tate - went 12 with Julian Jackson for WBC title, got taken out in 2 by Jones
Grant - middleweight titlist
Griffin - 1st round ko against the man who got a DQ against Jones
Trinidad - both old and Tito above his best weight but Winky was made P4P for beating the same Tito less convincingly

Who else in middleweight history could do the same and as impressively? Ever thought the other top guys didnt want to face someone this good?

 

I won´t get into this kind of discussion again. I had numerous of them on here and no most of what you posted is just bs. R. Johnson, Mallinger, Gonzalez - he beat a shot DM, huge achievement :good - Tate, Grant and the Trinidad and McCallum he faced were not top opposition, solid at best. Hill robbed against DM? Wow, never ever heard anybody claiming this. DM clearly won, everybody stating otherwise must either be blind or extremly biased. But yeah the win over Hill was a good one, as were the wins over Toney and Hopkins. Tarver, Griffin and Woods were solid to good wins.
But wins over the guys I named and over some of I didn´t name whould be better much better wins.

I´m out of this. Argueing with a guy who thinks Hill got ropped against DM is pointless, you surely think Jones got robbed against Tarver in their second fight and Johnson two atsch

 

I think Clalzaghe is slightly past his prime. Joe was at his best for the Lacy and Kessler fights, but seems to have lost that extra something which made him special.

Having said that, if Roy scores a win, it will add to his legacy. Wins over Hopkins, Toney, Tarver ( disputed by some ), and Calzaghe would leave little left for Jones to prove.

 

I think a Jones win over Calzaghe will reflect worse on Calzaghe's legacy than it will enhance Jones. In his prime, Jones was truly an all time great. But he is so far past his prime and a shell of what he was say ten years ago, that if Calzaghe loses to this version of Jones, it would really detract from Cazaghe's legacy.

 

Ray ducked him so bad you put him twice.

This content is protected

 

At 168 Toney pretty much beat up a done Iran Barkley and struggled against Prince Charles.

He fought a somewhat green Hopkins as his subsequent performances would indicate.

He didn't dominate McCallum and McCallum was older than ancient. If anything the bout showed that Jones would be in deep **** if he fought anything close to a prime Mike.

Niether Hill nor Hall beat DM.

As for Jones beating Tito in better fashion than Winky, LMFAO. Tito actually won some rounds against Jones, Tito did not win a 10 second stretch of a round in his fight against Winky. And it was a better Tito than the one Jones fought WAY outside his best weight.

 

Toney did not struggle against Charles Williams. He beat him up on the inside the same way he did Barkley, Jirov, and Holyfield. The only difference in Jirov and Williams is that he stopped Williams.

Barkley was so done he had just defeated the Hearns that schooled Virgil Hill. Barkley remains the only fighter to outpoint Hearns.

Tim Littles was an undefeated conqueror of 168lb titlist Frankie Liles when he was stopped by Toney.

 

Barkley was done. That is a fact. It's not even worth disputing.

Hearns did not school Virgil Hill either. The fight was close. I had it a draw and in any case it was Hearns turning back the clock and putting on his last good show. He looked like utter **** against Iran in the rematch.

And Toney did not dominate Charles, even though he did beat him comfortably. And whilst we are at it, Toney did not dominate Jirov either.

 

Who said dominate? I said he beat them up on the inside, and he did. He has the stoppages over Charles and Holyfield to prove it.

Hearns had not lost since facing Barkley, when he faced Barkley in a rematch. Besides losing to Barkley, Hagler was the last fighter he had lost to going into his fight with Hill. You can call that turning back the clock if you want to. I call that being consistent. Hearns' record was 5-0-1 going into the rematch with Barkley, with the draw coming against Ray Leonard in a fight Hearns should have won.

Barkley had won 5 in a row before losing to Toney.

 

Well, do you think Calzaghe looking like missing the little extra has something to do with facing Hopkins? Nobody looks good against the ol´ *******.

You think Jones ruled hw with that one win against Ruiz while Lewis was THE champ at the time? Imo a beltholder is nothing more than a top contender.