Hypothetical Roy Jones Question

Well, he could probably have beaten anybody from 160 to 175 from 1995- 2002.

But let's look at some he DID beat.


Undefeated James Toney.

Toney's two-time undefeated daddy, Champion Montel Griffin.

Undefeated Eric Harding

(Practically undefeated) Bernard Hopkins

Virgil Hill

Otis Grant




Almost forgot HW John Ruiz.

Not the man at HW but a champion and a top 3 HW at the time with a win and a draw against Holyfield.

Not bad for a guy who boxed as a pro at superwelterweight earlier in his career.



In fact, anybody who was anybody, outside of Darius.


And that was as much Darius' fault as Roys.




Now who else should he have fought, without a time machine ?

 

Ah, ok. So because YOU aren't familiar with Tunneys comp most of them were bums, is that it? Yeah, you're brilliant!:yep

 

he has a point in that older fighters resumes are glossed over and only the notable fighters are mentioned. the rick fraziers they fought are conveniently ignored. still, on the flip side roy jones never fought anyone in greb's league, let alone 5 times

 

Nah, that isn't it at all. But the facts speak for themselves if you actually look at them. It seems the criteria of many fans is that if they don't know about a fighters comp it couldn't have been that good. Thats just brilliant!atsch

 

this is true and it takes a lot of time and research to look at the fighters records and determine who was a real worthy opponent. joe choynski is one of my favourite fighters and looking at his resume on boxrec you see a fair number of loses but if you dig deeper it is quite impressive, as were his skills.

still i still think there is a legitimate older fighter bias; there is some good reason for it but anyone passed 1980 (with exceptions like holmes and whitaker) seems to be **** on based on era-ism.

 

It seem that some think I am putting Roy down. Far from it. His talent was unbelievable. But I don't judge a fighters career based on talent, but by who he actually beat and how good they were. Jones has some very good wins. But there are many fighters who had better wins over better opposition. This is no slight on Roy, but a simple fact.

 

i've had more than a few arguments with rico about roy jones and there is no defense for his competition. all time great skills, not too bad resume. based on talent he's an all time top 10 (yes i believe that...). based on resume alone, he doesn't crack the top 100

 

To a certain degree you're right. But you have to take into consideration why these biases occur. Fighters of the past fought more. Fought more rounds. Fought with smaller gloves, under tougher circumstances and with less weight divisions and only one title. There were more professional fighters in earlier era's make the competition tougher. When you take all this into account its not hard to look at these guys in awe compared to the way fighters are basically pampered today. On the other hand, if you keep an open mind it makes it much easier to sift thru all the crap and properly give a knowledgeable opinion on where and why a fighter rates where he does regardless of era.

 

Off the top of my head.......Stevie Collins, Nigel Benn, Micheal Nunn, Chris Eubank. I've seen people name others, but I don't put much stock into it. Roy took care of his obligations, but there were some fights he could have made besides just DM, who I agree was just as much at fault for that fight never being made.

 

**** u rico kill yourself

 

He just didn't have enought big fights in his prime. I could name half a dozen light heavyweights that would have beat him in my opinion.

 

Who in this day and age fought the level of comp greb did ?

I find it hysterical that you all are willling to pick the man's resume apart but most boxing experts would rank Jones in the top 50 all time ..How could that be if one he wasted his talent and never proved him self ?

The man was on of the most dominant fighters of the 90's, he never slipped off the p4p list until he lost and that was after a 15 yr run ..Its convienent that all the negatives are blown out of proportion but no one looks at how he dominated ..His resuume consists of more than Rick Fraizers .so stop hating !

 

Calzaghe's resume, while not the best, is far from awful.

His championship resume consist of numerous champions and former champions who had a pretty good winning record.

2008-11-08 Roy Jones Jr 52-4-0
2008-04-19 Bernard Hopkins 48-4-1
2007-11-03 Mikkel Kessler 39-0-0
2007-04-07 Peter Manfredo Jr 26-3-0
2006-10-14 Sakio Bika 20-1-2
2006-03-04 Jeff Lacy 21-0-0
2005-09-10 Evans Ashira 24-1-0
2005-05-07 Mario Veit 45-1-0
2004-10-22 Kabary Salem 23-3-0
2004-02-21 Mger Mkrtchyan 18-1-0
2003-06-28 Byron Mitchell 25-2-1
2002-12-14 Tocker Pudwill 39-4-0
2002-08-17 Miguel Angel Jimenez 21-1-0
2002-04-20 Charles Brewer 37-8-0
2001-10-13 Will McIntyre 29-2-0
2001-04-28 Mario Veit 30-0-0
2000-12-16 Richie Woodhall 26-2-0
2000-08-12 Omar Sheika 20-1-0
2000-01-29 David Starie 22-1-0
1999-06-05 Rick Thornberry 23-2-0
1999-02-13 Robin Reid 26-1-1
1998-04-25 Juan Carlos Gimenez 51-8-3
1998-01-24 Branko Sobot 14-1-0
1997-10-11 Chris Eubank 45-2-2



11 year total, 24 championship bouts: 724-53-10

Total combined winning record of opponents 93%


While most of his pre-championship fights were against lesser competition, only one out of twenty-two went the distance, and only six out of the remaining twenty-one made it past the second round.

 

Ah yes, boxrec. Who could ever go wrong judging a fighter with boxrec. You guys are real beauties. You obviously know your ****.:rofl

 

EVEN if all you said will happen.
(1) he will never avenge tarver losses
(2) will never avenge calzaghe loss
(3) still be 1:1 with johnson , and i even don't expect him to beat johnson more decisively than johnson beat him , not that i expect him to win johnson at all , i don't have a strong opinion in this case.
(4) will never prove he can beat james toney when toney is not drained
(5) will never face : mcclellan , collins , liles , nunn , michalczewski , watson .
(6) forever be remembered as the guy who chose to get DQ'd in his fight with Griffin rather than losing a close decision , and KOing griffin in their rematch cause griffin was not given enough time to get warmed before that fight.


and BTW - dawson will win a UD over him , and i don't consider johnson an underdog to jones. jones will always be tarver's *****.