People who keep saying Jones would beat the best LH's of all time are seriously underestimating the abilities of the old-time fighters. Jones looks great against guys he can beat. He would look so special when he fights guys with the ability of a Charles, or Harold Johnso, Moore, etc. Charles outclasses Jones, then knocks him out.
Ezzard Charles had 4 fights with Archie Moore. Roy Jones might last 4 rounds with Archie Moore. Why do some people think fighters today are somehow superior athletically?
I lean towards Charles. Tough fight. A classy fight here. Roy Jones with his lightening speed and great footwork. Ezzard Charles was also a master boxer himself. Charles had height and was a very precise straight puncher. He could also had power at lightheavy. His jab and clever counters inbetween Jones one or two shots. Remember Roy wasnt quite the force of nature at `75 that he was at `60 and `68. He didnt put his shot together the same. He was more of a potshotter. I think Charles was smart enough to figure Jones out and press the fight and use his jab to set up his combinations. I dont know that he knocks him out but Id take Charles in a good fast fight.
Charles was at least as tall as Tarver , probably hit harder , was quicker than Tarver , was durable enough no2 get KOd by Jones whom was no Arnold Cream in terms of size & power and was also not aggressive enough 2 stop Charles like others who did it . Jones couldn't stop Charles . If Charles tries a long range fight it may b competitive , but if he knew how 2 press he stops Roy .
No I'm not. Jones was very good at what he did. Less skilled fighters would never have an answer for him. The thing that counters speed is skill, and Charles had more skill than Jones. At 175, Charles was a big puncher, too.
Moore might last 4 rounds with jones. No idea why anyone would assume in general today's fighter's are more athletic.
Athletically, Jones was the superior fighter. Roy was the most gifted fighter I ever saw. Charlers was just the superior boxer. Jones can't touch him as far as intangibles go.
He lasted longer while old against Markegiano , u xpect Roid 2do against prime Wright better than what Rocco Markegiano had 2 labor hard 2 manage against n old Wright ? u xpect Archie Wright 2 do worse than old bloated Vincenzo Pazienza ? Pazienza was a very good fighter and severely underrated , but was a natural lightwelterweight at most .
Charles. A combination of reasons why. The only advantage Roy has here is speed. Charles is superior in everything else with the exception of ring generalship and footwork which is about equal. Jones would be the boss in the middle of the ring due to his combination of speed, reflexes and footwork. But as many inferior fighters to Charles proved he could be trapped on the ropes largely passive with the highuard up. You can bet your tushy that Charles would be able to do the same but much more often. Especially since Charles was much more aggressive at lhw than at hw and his power had much more of an impact. Add to that Charles accuracy and comination punching and Roy is in deep trouble. Sure, Jones would try to counter on the ropes and with his speed he would land some punches but most of the time he would be locked in the gard while getting hit with multiple bodyshots and hooks around his guard. IMO it would be just a question of time until Charles stops him. ´ Charles was in with fighters of Jones calibre and with a similar style (Burley), albeit smaller, and he beat them. Jones never was in with a fighter of Charles calibre. Charles would know how to deal with someone like Jones, Jones would rely on his athleticism here. That only takes you so far. Not enough when you step up against this class of fighter. Him not fighting the best during his career would hurt him here because that means a lack of experience that he can´t make up or hide with his athleticism anymore. Charles TKO11 Jones Jr.
