Finally did research on Roy Jones. He actually did avoid most of the top MW-SMW.

You know what? F*** it! Watching Pride FC made me come to enjoy one-sided beatdowns on inferior competition and Roy Jones Jr delivered that in spades So I'll give the guy some slack if not a total free pass

 

:good

 

Roy was actually too good for his own good.

If his fights had been more competitive, he'd probably be a lot more respected than what he is.

He fought lots of decent fighters, but just made it appear as though they were nobodies.

 

bailey,

Part 1.

Publications from the U.S. and the U.K.

The Ring, K.O. and Boxing Monthly etc.

In 1994, the boxing world considered Toney as one of the best fighters on the planet.

I didn't mean it literally. I know you were watching back then, you have great knowledge. I was just been sarcastic because you are implying that Toney's reputation was unjustified due to bias.

Yes, of course my knowledge on the sport has been expanded in the almost four years that I've been a member here. I learn new things literally every few days. I'm 35. Although I've been a fanatic for a long time, there's guys on here who have probably forgotten more than what I know. You must also have learned new things since you've been a member. I would think that everyone has. And if they haven't, they either possess encyclopedic knowledge, or they've simply been wasting their time trolling etc.

No. I make up my own mind after looking at all of the factors involved.

Correct. Toney's form was up and down. But again, he was in a better run of form than what Eubank was in.

In the 18 months leading up to the fight with Roy, he beat the following fighters:

Glenn Thomas - U/D

Danny Garcia - TKO

Larry Prather - U/D

Tony Thornton - U/D

Anthony Hembrick - TKO

Tim Littles - TKO

Vinson Durham - U/D

Charles Williams - KO


Here's Eubank's results within the same timeframe:

Ray Close - Draw (very controversial)

Nigel Benn - Draw (very controversial, with Eubank later admitting that Benn had won)

Graciano Rocchigianni - U/D

Ray Close - S/D

Mauricio Amaral - U/D

Sam Storey - TKO

Dan Schommer - U/D (again, Eubank admitted he got his ears boxed off, but was awarded the win based on aggression)


So it appears to me that Toney was in better form.

I really can't see how anybody would have declared Eubank 'The Man' at SMW, after Roy had beaten Toney late in 94.

Roy held the IBF, Benn held the WBC, Liles held the WBA, and Eubank held the lightly regarded WBO belt.

Toney knocked out Williams.

True. But that was over 2 years before he fought Roy. Whereas again, Eubank struggled with Ray Close leading up to the time that Roy fought Toney.

Yes, he did mention that.

Yes, I do rate Roy's win over Toney, despite the fact that he'd struggled with Tiberi earlier in his career.

http://www.nowboxing.com/2013/04/chris-eubank-sr-talks-persistence-and-skill/27000/

As I've previously mentioned above, it doesn't appear so.

You're entitled to your opinion. But again, It'd be interesting to see who else thought that Eubank was the best SMW in the world late in 94.

We could make a thread?

 

Part 2.

Yeah, it would have been a great win. But Roy easily beat a guy who'd beaten Nunn, Johnson, McCallum, Barkley and Littles etc.

Again, Toney was in better form, and many people considered him one of the best fighters in the world.

Well if I was taken in by hype, I wasn't alone, because again, Toney was universally regarded as one of the best fighters in the world late in 94.

So you're saying that Toney's ranking wasn't justified?

You really think that Eubank who'd struggled with the likes of Ray Close etc should have been ranked higher?

I would say they were both very good wins, especially as Eubank won in Germany.

We don't have to include Roy's wins at MW or SMW. I challenge you to put forward a case for Dariusz having a stronger resume than Roy's LHW resume. All you've got in Dariusz's favour, is numbers. He fought more guys at the weight. But that's all. It's clear to me that Roy had the better wins.

Why are you asking silly questions? Do I need to be psychic to see that Roy lost his head? Did you not see the fight along with millions of other people? He hit Griffin twice while he was on one knee and he was rightly disqualified. He was criticised by Gill Clancy who called the fight for HBO.

He basically beat the same version of Hill who Roy destroyed.

He cheated against Roch, pathetically diving to get him disqualified.

Barber?

How do they compare to the destruction of Hill and Griffin, and wins over Johnson, Hall, (who Dariusz struggled with) Gonzalez, (who beat Dariusz) Harding, Woods, and Tarver?

They can't compare.

Let's do a thread.

Dariusz gets credit for that win. But again, Hill was slightly faded then, and they both beat Hill within less than a year of each other.

I'm highlighting the fact that Roy had a better win over Griffin.

Yes, it was at the end of his career. So I'm guessing with your comment, that because of that, you don't give Gonzalez much credit for it?

Would I be right in thinking that?

 

I can't remember by whom, but I was sent a private message on here a couple of years ago requesting a detailed breakdown of whether or not Jones in fact ducked as many people as his most vocal haters claim, and if so which names and over what timeline. I put together a long reply, several paragraphs, outlining my objective stance on the issue. The PM is long since deleted. I now kinda wish that had been in an open thread, available to quote.

 

Serge,

http://youtu.be/0q1I5n6s4vg


:rofl

 

:good

 

:rofl :rofl :rofl

 

bailey,

I'm questioning how Eubank was seen as the best SMW in the world after Roy had beaten Toney.

This is what we're debating.

So how far do you want me to go back?

Is 18 months not enough?

So what if Thornton had been beaten by Eubank?

Toney's early knockout over Tim Littles was only 'decent' ?

Yes, of course some of Eubank's opposition within that period were better than Toney's, such as Benn etc. But some weren't like Close.

You're saying that Toney was hyped by biased U.S. publications such as The Ring etc.

You're saying that he shouldn't have been considered as a top pound for pound fighter in the world.

You're saying that Roy shouldn't have been considered the best SMW in the world after beating Toney.

You're saying that neither should Benn or Liles.

Yet you're trying to convince me that Eubank was 'The Man' at the weight, even though he'd struggled with Close etc, and he had NO intention whatsoever of fighting the likes of Roy, Toney, Nunn and Liles etc, because he was content to ride out his deals with SKY/ITV, only defending his lightly regarded WBO belt?

Let's do a thread.

Eubank was a great fighter, and his overall SMW resume was very impressive. But how was he the best SMW in the world after Roy had dominated Toney?

Would the best SMW in the world have lost twice to Steve Collins?

I've acknowledged that. And again, they were also guys that weren't who he struggled with.

You really truly believe that Eubank was the best SMW in the world late in 94, because he beat Roch who was a former IBF champ?

:think

We're not assessing his whole career. We're looking at where he was late in 94. Again, I don't see how a guy who struggled with Close and Schommer before losing to Collins twice, could have been considered the best SMW in the world.

Roy had beaten Malinga and Toney with absolute ease, barely losing a round in the process.

He did struggle at times, but he knocked him out in the end.

What happened with Ray Close? It was a highly controversial draw and then he won the rematch on an S/D.

You're trying to convince me that Eubank's draw and S/D win was better than Toney's knockout over Williams?

Look, we're just going around in circles.

Again, if you want we can start a thread just out of interest?

To be honest, unless we do that, I don't see the point in taking it any further.


What I'd like to do, is to discuss some topics that you've ignored. Which are:

1. You're belief that Tiozzo's win over a faded Dariusz Michalczewski, was arguably better than any of Roy's LHW wins.

2. Your bizarre insistence that Tarver was a slow LHW who was LEVELS BELOW Tiozzo, Roch and Nunn etc.

3. Your bizarre insistence that Chad Dawson was also LEVELS BELOW those same fighters.


:good

 

I've been exposing this myth for almost 4 years now.

Most of the time it's just a list of names of guys who he didn't fight, along with assumption that he had to have ducked them all.

I've even seen him get criticised for not fighting guys like Frank Nicotra and Ray Close etc.

Some of these so called boxing fans are clueless.

I could rip Felix's post to shreds, but he was a troll who no longer posts here any more. Unless he's an alt?

When you've got Liles's former manager, Holyfield's former attorney, and HBO (who criticised him at times) claiming that he tried to make big fights, you know that it's complete nonsense when people claim that he was only content to face lower level guys.

:good