Better LHW Career, Bivol or RJJ?

I am not trying to diminish these - and other - fighters or run down their achievements. But I stand by the wider point.
Tarver was, perhaps, seen as a vaguely interesting opponent but no one was clamouring for that fight - or viewed him as a particularly serious threat. Jones was fresh off beating Ruiz and deciding what to do next and Tarver made a scene at the post fight presser which helped to snare the bout. His stock only really rose - as a credible threat to RJJ - when he did far better than expected in their first fight (people often forget that Jones still beat him fairly here - and without his best stuff).
Agree the Woods fights were possibly not all life and death. I think Johnson won probably 2, though they were close. But they both still showed themselves to be on a similar level, overall, at that time. Though Woods did put in a poor performance vs Tarver and was a bit overawed, IMO.
I do think both Tarver and Johnson were good - very good - fighters. But I do feel a lot of their stock comes from defeating a declining Jones, when compared to others of that era. Both had short, decent runs. Neither had any other big, signature wins. Neither were particularly dominant champions (though both were, in fairness, getting old themselves). I still feel that a few years earlier both would have been fairly comfortable Jones wins, and would not be recalled as highly.
I respect your opinions as a poster and there's probably not much point in flying off down these different rabbit holes. I think I would possibly say that I found this thread somewhat frustrating (not you) as, yes, Jones had some dreadful losses at LHW as he got older. But the level of dominance he showed for years prior to that isn't often acknowledged.

 

I agree with your conclusion. RJJs era(1995-2010) was the best LHW era in many decades IMO.

Tarver and Glen Johnson were both alphabet champs before they fought RJJ though. Tarver was undefeated and 4-0 against RJJ opponents. Johnson was a comeback story but theres nothing wrong with going life and death with Clinton Woods. Woods like Tarver is 5 inches taller than Johnson. Woods is one of RJJs top opponents too.

Johnson took awhile to get rolling after being sacrificed to Hopkins without any top(or medium) flight experience.

 

For Glen it took a while to put it all together. He became an elite operator when He added great physical preparation to his excellent skillset. If You watch his older fights, his pace was not there. He would often try to box, even against taller opponents like Harmon - was taking rounds off etc. I believe He was working full time, doing construction, for most of his career. I believe He only dropped that once He became a champion - and was a different animal from 2004 to about 2008. Plus the new coach, like @bolo specialist mentioned, probably made the difference.
While Tarver went 1-1 with Harding, I believe showed himself as more versatile fighter over the course of his career.

I don't think either of them could beat prime Roy, but I do think They'd emerge on top in Roy's era without Roy, if that makes sense.

I think You're right for Your final point, but in the context of this topic - I don't think that me saying that Bivol's Light Heavyweight resume is superior to Roy's is "unduly criticising" Jones. I'm just making a comparision between two 175 pounds champions from two different eras. I agree that Roy beat many good fighters... but so did Bivol. The difference for me is - Bivol did better against his biggest rival.

Mind You, for Roy - his LHW work is just part of his illustrious career, while for Bivol - it's "all He got". Don't think many people would argue that Bivol is better Head to Head or has a better overall career.

 

His handler(s) kept trying to make him a boxer/sharpshooter for the 1st half or so of his career, & he ended up losing a lot of close, sometimes debatable decisions due to not being aggressive enough. he also struggled to find an ideal weight class.

He teamed up w/ Orlando Cuellar for the Harding fight, & he overhauled Johnson's style to be a more aggressive, stalking, swarming attacker. That led to his big upset of Harding & put him on an upward path that culminated w/ his wins over Roy & Tarver.

 

No way was it better than the late 70s-early 80s. Dariusz & an aging Hill would've been smoked by the top fighters of that era. & I don't think Griffin was even better than Eddie Davis, a fighter who generally wasn't even rated among the upper echelon of that era & seldom still gets talked about today.

 

Thanks a lot. I did not know exactly when He switched trainers, but that would make sense. The things began to change and work out for Glen right around this time, indeed.

 

Complete nonsense with Tarver. He'd cleaned out several of the better fighters in thr division and won belts before even fighting Jones. And guess what? He's older than Jones and knocked Jones out with the same punch that Del Valle dropped "prime" Roy Jones with.

And if you think Toney was weight drained and Hopkins was green, there's a case to be made that Tarver was the best fighter Jones ever fought. He definitely had the most one punch power and, for anyone, should be regarded as the best guy Jones had fought nine years heading into the first fight.

 

John Ruiz would be ahead of Tarver h2h. Do people see Tarver beating Ruiz, Oquendo, Holyfield

 

He’d beat Ruiz. Ruiz wasn’t the other two guys.

 

Seems strange he didn't move to heavyweight earlier then. Would have made him a lot of money

 

The issue that kept him from really being an ATG is that he turned pro late. He just didn't have enough time to do everything he was capable of and faded not long after reaching the top. He shouldn't have been smoking crack as a twenty year old.

He also was really active with his hands as an am. I wonder if he could've been like that as a pro if he were fighting world class guys in his twenties.