I just watched Jones v Trinidad again

The same 'gulf in natural talent' you refer to exists between Jones and the list of people who have knocked him out.

 

No Roy is so shot that his former stratospheric skillset has deserted him and he is now far below world class.

Roy no longer has the ability to compete at world class standard, He no longer has the ability to fight without taking constant rests.

He's been beten by Tarver twice, brutally knocked out twice, and couldn't put away a pudgy, ring rusty juniour welterweight.

 

What kind of comment is this..it's like saying 'X looked pretty good..especially considering that he was in **** shape' and carrying leprosy'. For the purposes of using him as a measuring stick, the second statement completely negates the first. :think

 

I don't believe Joe Calzaghe is a great boxer.

I do believe that Kessler would have beat the Tito that Jones found in 4.

 

I'm just bumping this for PACFAN84's beautiful and immutable breakdown of Jones and his chances vis a vis Calzaghe.

As fight time gets more imminent I am starting to become vulnerable to all the ill-thought romantic notions that I made this thread to refute - 'Jones has once in a generation athletacism', maybe he could pull off an upset against a guy that's never been tested in his way, etc, but the writing is on the wall for Jones. He was shot 4 years ago and his chances in this fight are based on the hopeful emergence of a 'new Roy' for which there is no evidence for besides media hipe and wishful thinking by his fans. Roy's comebacks are like the repeated comebaks of Mike Tyson - born of pathetic attempts by the media and fans to flog a dead horse - and Calzaghe will be his McBride.

 

Well obviously that's a comparative statement based on a consideration of how he used to be. Try to take these things into account before uttering such stupid comments.