Better fighter, Roy Jones or Floyd Mayweather?

One got KTFO by Hagler, and the other by SRL. :conf

Six-of-one, really.

 

Floyd has the better resume, Floyd has a resume that rivals that of the FAB4, and possibly even Ali, Srr in the near future.

 

No.:-(

 

Jones

 

It is kind of unfair at this point in time anyway in favor of Floyd..

He has yet to fight on too long past his best as Roy has, which has completely changes peoples perspective on Roy... What happens if Floyd were to get knocked out and fought on into his 40's getting knocked out some more along the way by mediocre fighters?

Everyone would be on here questioning what an 09 Pacquiao, or what a prime Mosley/DLH would have done to him..

 

:good

 

That could well happen.

 

Thanks, sometimes I really do wonder if all my contributions here are pearls before swine. :yep

 

Hernandez, Corrales, Castillo II, Cotto and Canelo were great wins. But the 'big names' on his ledger like Gatti, Hatton, Oscar, Mosley, Marquez etc were all so far past their best and/or so removed from their natural weight that it's not even funny. Judah blew hot and cold, lost all his bigger fights. Maidana is really nothing very special, and neither is Victor Ortiz.

One might argue Hopkins, Toney, McCallum, Hill and Reggie were not at their best against Jones, either undeveloped, weight-drained or over the hill. But Corrales and Castillo were limited warrior-types in all honesty, Canelo is a bit unproven. Cotto is very, very good, but Hopkins, Toney and McCallum are three of the most skilled fighters ever caught on film - right up there alongside Joe Gans, Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles, Ray Robinson etc. Hill had one of the best jabs ever, some of the best lateral movement ever, and Reggie was one of the slickest southpaws of the modern era. Cotto, even near his best, doesn't compare to those guys anywhere close to their best day.

Then you have Ruiz, Griffin II, Tarver I, Harding, Castro, Malinga, Thornton (gave peak Eubank/Toney as close a fights as Cotto gave Floyd), and Pazienza (really that much difference to Oscar/Marquez?).

Jones has the better resume, although Mayweather has more star names on his ledger.

 

I agree with pretty much everybody so far...

my opinion is, rjj in his prime was the greatest FIGHTER of all time. That is to say, he would have beaten any other boxer in history....doesn't mean he's more SKILLED...but boxing isn't just about SKILLS and TECHNIQUE...it's also about NATURAL ATHLETICISM AND PHYSICAL GIFTS.

fmj in his prime and even at this late stage is the best BOXER...at least of his era, if not ever. but he gets stiff comp from sweet pea and some other notables.

 

Mayweather is tremendous, right up there with Toney, Gans, Burley, Kalambay, Pep etc.

 

cotto gave floyd a close fight = rewriting history.

 

Couldnt agree more. Im of the opinion that the PEDs came in the latter part of his career. Had he retired after the ruiz fight he`d of gone down as a top 10 all time and definitely the best of this generation.

Comparing him to floyd i look at it like this. At 154 prime for prime who wins? Ive got Roy all day and twice on sunday.

 

Who knows when Jones started using.... and even Toney for that matter. And who knows if Mayweather is clean, I doubt he is - his head seems to have enlarged (signs of HGH?) since his lighter weight days.