Jones Tyson is a fight that probably should have happened. It would have meant a huge pay day for both men, and the losers brand would not have been tainted too irretrievably. As it was they both ruined their brands chasing lesser pay days.
You’re getting wound up over something that we’ll never know re drug use. What if it came to light that RJJ wasn’t juiced for the Ruiz fight? Would you change your time or just blame the referee entirely instead? Ruiz was still taller, 20-30lbs heavier, longer reach, stronger etc He had 12 rounds to make adjustments if Nady wasn’t letting him maul. Did he try to establish a jab? No. Did he up his volume punching and workrate? Nope because every time he tried he got countered to death. Jones was better than him despite being at a massive size disadvantage. I’m judging the performance on what we know. You’re assessing it on things you “believe” or “suspect”. I’ll stick to my judging criteria if it’s all the same.
On the refereeing point, how much do you take that into account in deciding if other results are ‘legit.’ Most refs have their style and often it favors one side or another depending on the involved fighters’ strengths and tactics. An easy for-instance is Carlos Padilla in Duran-Leonard I. Do you deduct from Duran’s brilliant performance because Padilla allowed him to get away with all manner of roughhousing? If he reffed the fight differently, it’s possible Leonard wins … it was closer than many seem to remember as it was. Just curious.
I’m not wound up at all. Baseless detour. Of course, if RJJ was concretely proven not to have juiced - that would remove that cloud from his performance. And of course, I would still say Nady's refereeing performance was biased in Roy's favor and made Jones' task a lot easier. That's a judgment based on what I saw and know - material evidence that you acknowledged but give a pass to. Ruiz was never going to make adjustments, that was the whole idea, upholding the limited qualities of the fighter chosen. The ref. ran block on the only things Ruiz could do and knew how to do. Btw, you didn't answer my question re IF Jones was proven to have juiced - what would your own position be on that? If you can't or don't want to answer, never mind. No dramas.
That’s a great question. It really is a case by case treatment. I agree that Leonard v Duran was a lot closer than most might have it. Tbh, I didn’t necessarily perceive Duran getting away with any OTT roughhouse tactics - doesn’t mean I’m right - I’d have to watch it properly again - I do recall seeing Duran get away with a lot worse in a other fights though. Just for what it’s worth, I don’t recall Leonard or his camp complaining after the fact either. Ray could’ve elected to move but he chose to stand and fight. But your direct musing I guess is what if Padilla prevented any roughhousing? Perhaps it might’ve given Ray a bit more breathing space to do more - but I recall Duran doing a lot of legit work in close anyway. Ali vs Frazier 2 is another good example. By omission, Perez allowed Joe to be unduly stifled by Ali’s incessant clinching. Imo, that made a huge difference to the complexion of that fight - and we saw the alternate universe version play out in Manila when Padilla refused to have any of Ali’s attempts to clinch and smother Joe. As it pertains exactly to Jones vs Ruiz, Ruiz only had his mauling style to his credit - unlike say Duran and Leonard, both of whom were multi skilled to the extreme - so effectively, I do think Nady’s reffing took a LOT away from Ruiz - removing whatever main challenge he was supposed to present. But I can take the opportunity to say that it wasn’t necessarily unjust for Nady to police, to a degree, mauling and any tactics that were illegal - but he def. stifled Ruiz on mere suspicion of such being practised - Ruiz simply wasn’t allowed to get in close enough to practice legit inside work even if that was his intention. But the crux point is, the primary strength of the threat that Ruiz was supposed to present (even if by way of impure and even illegal tactics) was effectively nullified by Nady’s refereeing. Imagine if Roy was faced with the prospect of engaging someone like Galento? - the perceived challenge would be how Roy dealt with Two Ton’s roughhouse, physical approach - not Tony’s pure boxing ability. That would be a huge challenge - but then if Galento was stringently policed - which he wasn’t in his day - then an important component to Galento’s game would have been taken away - not that it would be a bad or unjust thing for the ref to forbid - it would just mean that the challenge wasn’t quite what it was advertised to be.
All good. I’m a cynic. I work on the assumption that most fighters (and athletes for that matter) are juicing in some way or other. I wouldn’t hold it that much against Jones just like I’ve never made a big deal about Fury and the boar knackers and Floyd and the IV. Everyone has access to peds in some form or other these days. Watching documentaries on Lance Armstrong, the 1988 100m Olympic final, Icarus etc plus seeing Flo Jo, and Marion Jones’s careers in real time has me no longer outraged by their use. I think they’re prevalent now. I actually get more annoyed by catch weight fights and rehydration clauses these days as I see these as sanctioned cheating nowadays.
I believe Roy eagerly wanted to fight Tyson during that time it was Tyson that didn't have the heart for the game no more
Its not that much. Tarver was noticeably bigger in the second Glen Johnson fight than the first. It didn't end up ruining his career. He also gained for Balboa. He lost to BHop, but won another title while old. Roy was fine for the second Tarver fight until the ko.