Calzaghe or Roy Jones, Jr.

'Titles' made him a somebody but Joe was 'the man'.

From 1993 to 2003 RJJ had many rivals but he didn't fight them. RJJ got himself on top after the Toney bout and never really took the risks that could lose him that spot. I'm talking in a historical sense and I'm assessing his legacy. RJJ is one of the few who could be considered the best and stay the best based on weak work. The others couldn't challenge him cos they were fighting great fights and losing because of the tough match ups.

First former middleweight to win at heavy you say? Going back to the 'titles' you mention, he beat a WBA champ. Someone who won a vacant belt. Someone considered a top 10 contender despite being a champ. RJJ did the equivilent of what many did before him but trinkets weren't around for them to call themselves champ.

Lewis was one in a long line of fighters that RJJ didn't fight. LOADS of small fighters moved up and beat contenders BUT very few moved up and beat the man.

Wholes can be picked in everyones resume but Calzaghe was a champ who needed Ottke to step up. When Ottke was out of the picture, Joe got his chance to beat on new young undefeated champs. It probably helped his legacy. He is the best 160 ever. Thinking Joe lost to Hopkins gives us glimpses of bias.

 

Same division that housed Hearns, Leonard, Jones, McClellan, Benn, Collins, Eubank, Toney and a host of other greats. Only problem is none of them could or did put together the legacy that Joe did.

 

Taylor beat a better version of Lacy? I've heard it all!

 

Please tell me that's a joke?

 

I cant believe all the hate for a British legend by fellow Brits:-(

I have stated i think Jones would have UD Joe but for everyone who is slating Calzaghes resume at 168 Jones was awful aswell and brief.

at 168 Jones fought
Thornton :- 37-6-1
Sosa :- 26-4-2
Lucas :- 19-2-2
Brannon :- 16-0
Byrd :- 26-4-1
Paz :- 40-5

Now forgive me for saying but that is hardly a hall of fame run, non of the guys where greats or ever went far in their careers and established themselves as good champions with quality reigns.

Its easy to tear apart Joes resume but Jones at 168 was weak.

Also at 175 he defended against the following legends:- Otis Grant, Fraizier, Telesco and Hall, i mean yes Jones is an all time great but he has some serious flaws in his resume aswell.

 

If they fought in their primes Jones wins a UD.

 

This thread is insane.

Do a comparison between their best 5 oponents and then you will see the gap in class.

 

fanboys....rjj & calzaghe fanboys...that's what this whole thread is all about. No one's really interested about their careers , their ups and downs.... eastsideboxing fanboys never fail to amaze me with their horse****...

 

I'm going to have to go with Jones on this one.

 

He did nothing because Calzaghe was swarming all over him. He was completely outclassed. The fact that you are trying to deny that shows you have a personal dislike for Calzaghe which borders on the deluded.

Oh, and I think you mean screen-name if you want to be smart. An avatar is a photograph. :good

 

The legacy that Joe put together was based on The Super-Middleweight WBO world title .. Everybody knows that the Super Middleweight division is a stepping stone from Middleweight to Light Heavy, 2 'history' divisions .. So when you include Toney and Jones as 'Super Middles' your failing to acknowledge that these 2 guys had zero respect for the 168 division and used it strictly as a steady jump to 175 .. Do you really believe that Roy Jones and James Toney wouldnt have dominated at 168 if they're bodies could have boiled down to that weight ..
The facts remain that Joe Calzaghe and the Frank Warren machine stayed on the WBO/168 road because it was so easy getting in guys like Tocker Pudwell and Will 'Kidfire' Mcintyre as defences, in the states these fights wouldnt have sold 2000 seats but we brits support our guys no matter what, and Warren manipulates that fact.
Calzaghe never had the bottle to go to the states to hunt for a big fight, he was happy to take his paydays against nobodies kinda like Sven Ottke's strategy and Dariusz Michaelchewski ..

Comparing Calzaghe to Jones is ridiculous, people just have to watch films of them fighting to realise that Jones was an ATG with reflex's that has never been seen before. Joe was a great fighter but his fans are praying every night that Mikkel Kessler stops hiding under his bed in Denmark and finally starts to make his mark, if Kessler becomes a great fighter then Joe's legacy becomes even greater .. I remember when Calzaghe had all kinds of problems with Robin Reid, now does anybody believe a Prime Jones would have difficulty with Reid ??
It seems that people's memory's are being clouded by the fact that Roy Jones has been a shell of his former self since the Ruiz fight, but you have to remember the way he dominated in the 90s, he was PFP king for 7 years, the only reason why he had so many 12 round fights was that he toyed, clowned and showboated with his opponents to give the crowd they're money's worth .. If he had a ferocious attitude to go with his stellar talent he could have knocked all these guys out in a few rounds ..
Roy Jones was a special talent and its an insult to boxing fans to put Joe Calzaghe in the same sentence and i am not American

 

Why can some people just not accept that Jones is the better fighter. He beat better fighters. He won more world titles, at more weights. These are indisputable facts.

Is objectivity really so hard to come by these days?

The fact that people, like this fool, are even trying to argue that Calzaghe is/was better than Jones is just laughable, and generally reeks of idiocy and nuthuggery of epic proportions.

 

Objectively speaking, the first claim is clearly an opinion rather than a fact....

 

Objectivley speaking, the use of the word "claim" preceded by the word "first" suggests that what follows the first "claim" is in fact not a fact, but a claim. It is not a claim to claim that Roy Jones has won more world titles than the Legendary Joe Calzaghe. Nor is a "claim" that he won world titles at a greater number of weights. The only claim that is a legitimate claim is the claim that Roy Jones has the superior resume and beat better fighters. It is a claim based on the available facts....

At what point does an opinion become a fact? Lots of people were of the opinion that Adolph Hitler was a very bad man. I suppose this is just an opinion. It may be based on objective reasoning and straight forward conclusions, but technically it is simply a claim, and not in fact, an actual fact, but merely an opinion non the less.

Mikkel Kessler ain't no James Toney, and Joe Calzaghe sure as hell ain't no Roy Jones Jr. But that's just my opinion, based on facts, not just a claim, based on opinion.