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

That was HW not CW. Look at how J Toney was better at HW than LHW as an example.

 

Griffin on the other hand showed up for the second fight looking as if he knew the beating he wwe about to get that is the only fear I saw in both fights.

 

Roy was basically a CW when he fought Ruiz.

 

You do have a decent point though Bailey as in certain fighters do great at one weight and not so much the other. But I honestly feel Roy was much better than Enzo.

 

Round 3 in particular. I saw this fight on TV and he was shaking like a leaf... super jittery. I felt his fear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS2VZTE5n88

 

How was Roy's ring IQ?

 

Roy was never a true CW know that ..

 

Thank God Enzo Mac wasn't prime. Keep Roy old in comparison. Anytime you mention prime Roy, just say that he never faced a puncher. I thank God that my **** is big because if it was little, it would be little. Bottom line. Cal > Roy.

**** off you pathetic ***** *** ****** **********!!! Lol

 

I actually thought Roy had improved since the Lebedev fight. That was his first fight at Cruiserweight (coming from over a year layoff from making weight successfully.. barely at Light Heavy vs Hopkins a year before) The way I saw it, that fight vs Lebedev Roy had slowed way down from the much faster (footwork) version we saw in 2010 at Light Heavy.

So the Roy that fought Lebedev seemed way slower to me, and he kind of plodded through that fight.. competitively.. but did not see that confidence vs Lebedev like we saw in the early rounds vs Enzo. Despite the stoppage vs Enzo, I thought the Roy that showed up last month looked way better than the version of Roy that we saw in 2011 vs Lebedev. (despite that still being a very close fight on the scorecards) I think over the last 4 years, Roy has settled in to his new weight in the 190s and he’s actually got in better shape.

I think you can make the argument that his legs betrayed him in every fight that he’s been stopped in his career, with the possible exception of Green which was a very quick stoppage and his legs didn’t seem completely gone it just seemed like he was trying to cover up and wait for Green to punch himself out, something he did in the first round of many of his wins for example vs Ajamu and other fighters to much success.

But against Enzo, I don’t think his legs really betrayed him or anything like that. I think Roy became very winded after the 3rd round for unknown or un talked about reasons and at the start of the 4th you could tell he was forcing punches. Instead of being patient like he was doing earlier, all of a sudden he started overworking himself and you could tell there was something wrong. At that point as a fan I could tell Roy was going to be stopped (something I didn’t think would happened during the first 3 rounds) just by his body language. (this was before Enzo started landing bombs on Roy)

I don’t think it had anything to do with punches landed on him because he was fine at the end of the 3rd round. Whatever distress Roy had in his corner after the 3rd resulted in the stoppage. Enzo was not able to really land on Roy clean in the first 3 rounds. Roy was making him miss, doing his thing, looking way better in my view than he did vs Lebedev. Then it went all wrong. That said, the fact that he got stopped soon after it “started to go wrong” was probably a good thing so Roy didn’t take much punishment and lives to fight another day.

But based on Roy’s performance in the first 3 rounds vs Enzo, I don’t think it’s that crazy to think that Roy can’t do that for 10 or 12 rounds and win a big fight or win by stoppage himself. Enzo took some shots, even in the 4th, that if he didn’t get Roy out of there, could have resulted in a KO win for Roy.

Vs Lebedev Roy never really seemed to hurt Lebedev until right at the end where he had Denis in trouble before Denis came back and stopped Roy.

 

bailey,

:rofl

:good

We can mention Dariusz, along with Nunn, Roch, Tiozzo and Maske.

None of them were levels above Tarver and Dawson.

That's harsh. He fought who was relevant at the time. He has a good resume. You just don't give him credit because Tarver and Hopkins etc were old when they fought him. Yet you'll happily give Joe C praise for also beating an old Hopkins.

What, like Roch not being able to beat Seillier?

Roy wasn't the same, but he was still a great fighter. His fight with Tarver was close. Tarver was a good fighter.

Are you just going to forget that a faded Hill iced Tiozzo? Yet you think Tiozzo was levels above Tarver and Dawson? I don't think so.

Roch drew with Seillier but he was levels above Tarver and Dawson?

Maske lost to a faded Hill, yet he was levels above Tarver and Dawson?

It's all nonsense.

Clearly not.

One of two things is happening here:

1. You've exaggerated their abilities, but you won't back down.

2. You've had too many drinks during the festive period.

It's arguable, but only because it's you who's arguing. You could argue that it was a hot sunny day, even if it was freezing with snow falling.

The mistake you make on these kinds of debates, is that you look at the opponents overall resume, whilst overlooking where they were in their careers at the specific moment that's been focused upon.

Did Roy ever beat a more accomplished LHW than Dariusz? No, he didn't.

Does that mean that Roy doesn't hold a better win at LHW, than Tiozzo's win over Dariusz? No, it doesn't.

Why? Because you have to take many things into account.

Dariusz was obviously badly faded when he lost to Tiozzo in 2005. How do we know this? Because a faded Hill iced Tiozzo 5 years earlier in a single round, and we know that Dariusz was faded when he fought Gonzalez, 2 years earlier in 2003.

On paper, it states that Tiozzo clearly beat a great accomplished LHW. But it doesn't account for the fact that he was faded.

So taking that into account, I'd say that Roy had a number of LHW wins that were better than Tiozzo's win.

Roy's win over Tarver was obviously better. And as above, it doesn't make any difference that Dariusz had a better LHW resume than Tarver. Because we're not comparing overall careers, we're specifically looking at Tarver from 2003, Dariusz from 2005, as well as taking into account all/any circumstances.

In facing Tarver, Roy was facing a much fresher fighter than himself, who was a rangy southpaw, who presented him with a big challenge stylistically. Not only that, he had to lose actual muscle to make weight. Then add in the fact that he was almost 35, it was his 50th fight, and he made history when he reclaimed the LHW titles.

So how are you going to argue against that?

You can also include Roy's destructions of Griffin and Hill.

You simply have to look deeper than resumes/stats.

 

If Roy couldn't do anything with him at CW, why would Roy have looked like old had the fight been at LHW?

If Roy could have made LHW, it wouldn't have improved his abilities.

 

How am I trolling?

What's that got to do with anything?

 

They were no fear signs.

 

:good

It shouldn't even be up for debate.

The Ruiz version of Roy would walk through the current CW division.

If he could be competitive with Lebedev for 90% of the fight at 42, coming off of knee surgery, inactivity and back to back defeats, then what would have happened had the Ruiz version of Roy had gone to Moscow?

Lebedev would have been lucky to have won a round.

Yet there's still people out there who's convinced that Roy was overrated.

Nobody today from JMW-CW would be favoured over the versions of Roy that fought between those weights.

 

Roy was essentially a CW fighting at HW.

He weighed about 196 pounds.

Toney was better at HW than LHW, because he could weigh what he wanted without having to struggle to make weight.

He didn't have the discipline to make LHW healthily. He was much more comfortable at CW and HW.

You can't seriously believe that Enzo would have beaten the Ruiz version of Roy at CW?

I don't believe you.