Bob Fitzsimmons vs Roy Jones, Jr. at 168

atschatsch:--(

How can you even have a fantasy matchup like this?

All you have from Bob is a piece of horrible **** video from 1897!!!! :rofl

There is a 100 year difference between these fighters.

In that video those boxers stances are just mother****in terrible and they both have their hands down looking like ****.

If you really want to have this matchup Roy Jones KO's Bob in 1 round, no doubt.

Just a completely different generation of fighters.

 

Jones kept his hands down most of the time as well..except for when he would lay on the ropes with his back right aganist the ropes and his head able to get popped through the guard.

 

How many times do we have to go through this?

It has been done better than with 'a few highlights to help you out' :rofl

 

yea that was Roy's choice. But that's how boxers actually fought in the 1800's :rofl:rofl

 

It is an interesting fight though.

If you pick Jones, you are picking a guy, who is probably at least a top 50 All time puncher at heavyweight(maybe better), probably a top 10 or better all time puncher at light heavyweight(probably better) and almost certainly the biggest punching middleweight or supermiddleweight ever. Very interesting pick, if you are one of many, who dont give Jones a snowballs chance of beating modern big hitting superheavyweights even though some of these probably dont hit as hard as fitz, despite being bigger. Particularly if you think the main reason he doesnt beat them is his chin or lack of ability to take a heavyweights punch. Fitz must start favourite in this match, because of his sheer power and his proven ability to catch and KO lightning quick opponents, which Jones is.

On the flip side though, Jones will have a 10 lb weight advantage (at least at the scales and probably more on fight night), and it is hard to imagine Roy Jones being beaten by someone smaller. It is a very good matchup, imo.

 

really? some guys fought with their hands down back then...for the same reason that some guys fight with their hands down today...so they could slip more with more fluidity...so that you would have a harder time seeing their punches coming up...do you think it took 50 years to figure out "hey, maybe i should hold my hands up?" some guys fought that way, other guys didnt..same as today.

im not saying that boxing hasnt in some ways advanced..slipping definitly improved after the dempsey era....and i would pick jones to beat bob, but to suggest that things are totally diffferent...to suggest that fitzsimmons had his hands down because he was too stupid to put his hands up..well, thats just dumb.

 

seriously though? how many fighters even today really fight out of a peek aboo defense? Not that many.

 

Roy Jones jr. by brutal KO in the first round

 

I'll say it like this. Roy has a speedster's chance, while Robert has a clubber's chance.

In a nutshell.

 

Fitz by KO1.

Now a prime Fitzsimmons vs a prime Jem Mace, that would have been some fight.

 

Interesting purpose.

I can understand the concern that some have with the style of older fighters. How about answering this question, What about Roy Jones Jr Vs Prime Iron Mike Tyson, where Tyson has to fight in a Bob Fitzsimmons stance, anyone here pick Jones Jr?

 

A couple comments ..


First, I don't think that video from that far back - of that quality and level - makes for an even field of comparison .. surely even a novice or layperson would note that right off. What if we filmed some fight today at nearly 1 frame per minute?

Second, while I agree that if we could pick up an athlete (such as Fitzsimmons) from one hundred years ago and one from about fifteen years ago (like RJJ) and drop them in the ring it doesn't appear as if it could be competitive. But, that is also what makes some of these type of match ups between eras impossible. For example, while not many athletes bring something new to the sport or change anything definitively - I can't get past the obvious that some seem to be quite influential. Without an Ali (or whomever he would credit with being informative - maybe SRR) you don't end up with Sugar Ray Leonard. Without Ali and Leonard you don't get to RJJ. What could the modern or recent fighter/athlete be without the shoulders of those before him to stand or build upon? If are making imaginary comparisons then how about we remove the influence of those that came before as well? Now it is all out the window you know?

If you look at the NBA there was a time when the gifted would hang in the air and kind of double pump to get a shot off while their opponent misjudged their move and came down first. More recently, the cross over dribble has completely changed things for the modern player vis-a-vis the not so distant past. None of this is like growing an extra arm or some other improbable development. But, it is pervasive today and essentially was completely absent before. Could it have been taught to the older era players? Sure. What would it mean if modern players never learned to do it? The point is it is really hard to discern comparative greatness between eras.

On an entirely different point, I would contend that the heavyweight division is the worst that it has EVER been in its entire history RELATIVE to the kind of athletic talent that exists on the earth at this moment in time. I don't need to compare it to the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, or 00s. It is lousy because the top twenty heavyweights are either average athletes or nearly average. There isn't one exceptionally or extraordinarily talented man in the bunch. The best hand to eye coordination, exceptional agility, incredible quickness, unequaled power, phenomenal speed, extraordinary athleticism combined with great size and the highest level of conditioning are all evidenced in other sports today - but not in the heavyweight division of professional boxing however.

The sport has been in a long decline. While Fitzsimmons would likely not fill the bill, Ali from a mere 40 years ago would certainly be the quickest, most athletic, and most talented heavyweight in the division today. That shouldn't be the case considering the population growth that has occurred, the higher standards of living, and the number of top flight large sized athletes that participate in professional sports today.

 

I dont think Fitz and Corbett even look bad on the film.
It's hard to really say because it's not easy to see. Corbertt looks like he's a pretty sharp boxer, Fitz is flat-footed but obviously he could punch.