Hearns v Roy Jones at either 160, 168 or 175 eras for eras who wins?

Daddy Roy is a different beast

 

The extended Ceuvas mention threw me too. Hopefully it is now clearer than mud for others.

 

That's awesome. Did you catch RJJ knocking out Virgil Hill with a single body shot? Or RJJ blanking Toney over 12? Or dominating rated contenders so thoroughly he rarely lost a round? You see, RJJ never struggled against a James Kinchen type contender. Did you catch Hearns escaping against Olajide? Remember Michael Olajide? Dude had nothing on RJJ.


Was James Toney a great fighter? If not, what is he missing? Not only did Roy Jones look better than Hearns moving up in weight, he didn't lose until 2004, 16 years after turning pro. Beat everyone in his path and looked spectacular doing so. Hearns lost to guys he shouldn't have. No problem in that, until you compare his career to RJJ's.

 

He was awful because Roy's left hook lead is HORRIBLE for a guy using the philly shell, it kept James' counter right (the bread and butter of the philly shell) was forced to stay at home because of it. And Roy used that left hook to latch onto James neck and pull down on him to nullify any counter punches. Roy was probably TBE at going from power shot to grappling in one fluid motion. If you think I'm wrong name somebody better. That was probably Roy finest technical achievement in the ring, and it was absolute cancer to a counter puncher like James Toney.

 

Hagler and Roy are two different kinds of different. The Switch Hitter and Freak Athlete who decided to be weird.

 

I was, I think Cuevas is overrated he was 30-15 though granted he had an impressive run, Duran was a lightweight who fought a Prime light middleweight, and A low activity counter puncher lost to a high activity guy with 6 inches of reach on him. Hearns should beat those guys. None of them went weight jumping quite as successfully like James Toney. Duran is arguable, because Duran is a bad, skilled scary little monster of a man. A top 5 all time great. With a lot of the same habits, and skills.

 

Ok thanks .. I also think Hearns deserves the credit for going all the way up beating Hill at 175 .. Not talked about enough imo …

 

I think RJJ would beat Duran far worse than Hearns did, if that's even possible. But if it is, Jones would be the man to do it because of his power and speed. But that has noting to do with this debate because you're arguing that Hearns did more than Jones when going up in weight and using a blown up Lightweight in Duran as your choice for Hearns. And that bout was was fought at 154. Hearns never even unified at 147!!!

Jones won a belt at 160. Won another at 168. Unified all 3 at 175. Skipped an entire division and won a belt at heavyweight. Roy never lost a bout along the way. Never came close to losing a bout. And the DQ setback to Montell was avenged via 1st round KO.

 

I think of Jones came in determined to do that, I wouldn't be shocked if he could. In all probability he goes the Sugar Ray route and hit and runs Duran to a decision though. But Roy was a serious puncher @160 and his punch carried up fairly well. Tommy is more text book and built around the 1-2, his speed, power and length make his 1-2 arguably one of the best ever.

But Roy who CHOSE to work using the unorthodox leads and his speed and power made it viable. He worked them specifically because the vast majority of boxers are more familiar with and trained to defend against a more textbook boxer. He had some brilliant, borderline super human footwork and could be in and out before anybody caught him. He did this over a decade of dominance.

Hearns was a more technical offensive fighter. Jones was better IMO.