Bob Fitzsimmons vs Roy Jones, Jr. at 168

don't be stupid, Tyson is a whole different fighter and a natural heavyweight. Roy Jones KO's Tyson in the second round, no doubt about it.


no lol i'm joking, Tyson ends the fight whenever he feels like it.

 

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Fighting in Fitz stance doesn't really suit him.

 

is that chick a dude in your avator?

 

good point about the video quality..and it would be interesting to film a fight with the same kind of camra...although...actually, im sure a good video editor could take some roy jones footage....cut out say, half the frames turn it black and white and lower the quality..and we could see how good jones looks...i have a feeling, he wouldnt look as good.

 

Interesting purpose that often comes up. I guess I'm one of the "idiots" even though I'm not sure I pick Fitz. I just don't think that you can see the video really well of him and I also think you could have shown comparable videos of Tarver and RJJ to "prove" that RJJ would dominate Tarver and anyone who thinks otherwise is an "idiot." I think Fitz was known to be very clever and hit like hell and would have done fine anywhere in history.

 

Okay, Fair enough. Same with John L Sullivan vs Roy Jones, I suppose. Or Jeffries. I wonder how a lesser light such as Duncan Dokiwari might have fared against Roy Jones?

 

Firstly, how are we going to persuade Jones to fight Fitzsimmons?

 

Good point...Jones didn't grow a par until he was shot.

 

Nobody beats Jones at 168.

 

at some posts ...

Let's see .. RJJ had to compete in the ams in multiple fights with guys like Frankie Liles and Gerald McClellan. He fought a physically prime version of Bernard Hopkins. He fought James Toney. He was so good that rather than stay and fight the incredibly mediocre bums and average stay at home belt protectors that remained at SMW (a division that through retirement, injury, and the best moving up was a complete wasteland by the later portion of the 90s devoid of any relevant talent) he moved up to fight larger men in a more prestigious division because like all great athletes you desire to meet competition whether it be by facing equal talent or at least by giving away size as an equalizer.

Roy was such a wuss that he even went up to take a shot at heavyweight with a frame that was still able to drop back to near SMW in late middle age (and all men know that it is more natural to get heavier rather than lighter as we age). Roy is such a **** that he is STILL willing to get in the ring and fight at the age of what .. almost 42 in his next fight.

Now, I will admit that with Roy's frame and loss of his legs it might seem more than it is him hanging around. After all, the long-term decline in participation and interest in professional boxing - the lack of subsidy (institutional, private, or state-sponsored) and the educational opportunity afforded by competing sports - has meant that the absolute quality has gotten worse going from bad to dismal in the past decade which means it is actually easier for old greats to stay in the game as there isn't the young athletic quality rising to chase them out of the sport.

Still, I can only attribute the regular and almost universal abuse pointed his way as being not at all dissimilar to the type of stuff that was regularly thrown around in the late 60s at Ali. It took a long time for his begrudging acceptance from the country's majority.

ESB seems to have a real ignorance about itself - that simply means there are few to zero legitimate athletes posting (as athletes who have competed in US universities would generally be far more cognizant of the reality) and an ESB demographic that is not at all reflective of the over representation and success that a mere approximately 13% of the US population garners in the spectrum of athletic competition.

Me thinks biases die hard. You got them from your parents and grandparents and you carry them today - just to a slightly lesser extent. It is all amplified here because the ESB demographic is more heavily skewed then it actually is in the realm of sport competition and athletic achievement.

It would be interesting to have a site wide athletic competition - then some of the more ignorant opinions - coming solely from the athletically inept - could really be brought into perspective when it might also be evident that some are speaking their biases, inferiority issues, and worst fears rather than the voice of an athlete who knows better of what they have seen and experienced in athletic competition over a lifetime.

Alternatively, an actual demographic report on the ESB posting population might be highly explanatory into why so many ESB polls are ridiculous and certain comparatives and the support they receive - ludicrous. I have little doubt that the under-represented on ESB factor large in the quantitative polling nonsense so regularly and pervasively noted - by and/or due to the statistical product of their absence.

 

Brit, i was one of the guys who made the crack..and yeah, jones did fight plenty of good fighters. I guess the disconnect comes that many feel, that, as great as he seemed...he didnt push for all the fights he could have....didnt go after any of the legit young blood like Calzaghe in the early 2000's....he never pushed for a rematch with Toney or hopkins...and when he wanted to become "heavyweight Champ" he definitly picked out the weakest link...Jones heavyweight title is much less legite then Fitzs...still...he clearly fought some top fighters.....and yea...calling him a ***** is unfair.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again...Roy Jones Jr. could be had at 175 by certain types of boxers but he was UN-FREAKIN'-BEATABLE at 160 and 168.

 

I would pick jones over fitz..but that footage gives one a far worst impression of what bob could of done. This footage here is from 1909, when fitz was 46, which is old today..but was super ancient for that time..given how many fights bob had. Anyhow, he loses this fight...gets whacked out, but the quality is allot better..and you can get a better idea of how he actually moved.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5clfV1gZV0A[/ame]

 

Honesty..he dont look that much different then jones most likely will in 2015 if he keeps fighting.

 

After looking at the footage of 46 year old Fitz @156 lbs and a prime
26 year old bill Lang 2 187 pounds in 1909,two thoughts come to me-
1-Old Fitz,30 pounds lighter and 20 years older was brave as hell. Imagine
today allowing a 46 year man fighting a 30 pound heavier contender !
2-Looking at this particular old film, bill Lang could hit, the exact same way todays heavyweights punch...It is nonsense to think they were clumsy and primitive comkpoared to today...It is the films of those days that have survived that are primitive.....Lang , not the best heavyweight of that day of course, looked easily the equal of todays heavies in
punching ability...Score a point for the OLD BOYS, methinks...