How do you feel about Roy jones?

oh definitely, Tarver was the man when he beat Jones. he was the number 1. just not Lineal champ.

Hopkins was the champ because Tarver had proven himself Lineal by beating Jones AND Johnson by the time Hopkins got there. it's just the way it is.
i mean, you wouldn't call Harding the man because he beat Tarver as well would you? exactly.

i scored the first fight to Tarver as you well know, so don't give Jones the credit for a win that wasn't.
and the other point being that Tarver shouldn't have been that high up the rankings. he was the number 1 for the WBC, but to put him that high in the overall rankings at Lightheavy is just more bluster from Ring mag.
come on, you know how distorted the bull**** rankings are over there in favour of American fighters?

Erdie and Gonzales should have been higher up than Tarver when the first Jones fight happened. so Jones beating Tarver couldn't have been the number 1 and number 2 facing off.
Jones became the number 1 because DM was beaten by Gonzales, who Jones had already beaten. so i have no problem with his ranking, just Tarver's.

it's only when Tarver won the rematch did he become the number 1 guy.

whether you like it or not, Hopkins was THE champ when he beat Tarver because of the way that the division had played out at the time.
when Roy had all his belts, DM was still the champ. Jones only took the number 1 position by default due to DM losing much later on.

 

You are clearly one of the shittiest posters on this forum..


You barely talk any boxing, and just insult people.. It is embarrassing...

I don't usually speak up unless I know what I am talking about, and I have clowned you like a chump every time I have decided I had enough of your ****..

You claim to be original, but you are just a follower of 46-0 and Headbanger except you are not funny, and have a disgraceful V.Cash amount.:rofl:deal

 

Anyone would have beaten Tarver that night. Tarver was incredibly out of shape after gaining a lot of weight to do the Rocky Balboa movie. The Tarver that fought Hopkins was not the same opponent that was motivated and at his best to fight Jones. Hopkins did what he had to do and beat Tarver clearly, but it was one of the worst if not the worst version of Tarver ever. That needs to be said.

 

i have no problem with that. but Tarver was still the champ when Hopkins fought him.

 

Tarver was never lineal champ, he did beat the man though, Roy Jones.

Tarver would have had to beat Erdei to be "lineal" champ... Or pull out of the first Jones fight with haste and beat Gonzalez instead...

Why would I call Harding the man? He was stopped by Jones and Tarver.. Tarver beat the hell out of him in the rematch.

So you don't give Jones credit for a victory? ok...

Tarver held the WBC and WBA LHW belts when Roy dropped down and took them.. The only other major belt was the vacant IBF, which Glen Johnson failed to win in a draw with Clinton Woods, a fighter Jones wiped the floor with..

Keep in mind as well, the WBO "lineal" title was now held by Gonzalez, who beat an aging DM.. Roy also had wiped the floor with Gonzo...

Why couldn't Jones and Tarver been 1 and 2 facing off? you know Tarver held every major belt save the vacant IBF right? Gonzo had been worked by Roy, Erdei had done absolutely nothing, and had no world title... Tarver was rightly the man to beat, as he held 2 major belts..

Not in my opinion.. He was clearly better than DM, or Gonzalez at the time Roy fought him... and held the WBA and WBC world titles.

Whether you like it or not, Roy Jones Jr was the man at LHW when Tarver knocked him out...:yep:good

 

He was undoubtedly great.

You could make a case for him being close to the top 15.

IMO, the greatest of the past 20-25 years.

 

You are deluded..he was super human when he took peds...just like Armstrong and Johnson

 

Calzaghe ud any version of Roy....

 

Another clown who can't read.

I never said a Hill fight was set in stone did I?

What I said was, when Eubank was calling out Roy, Roy had got the WBC belt, was preparing for Griffin, and he was looking at a Hill fight afterwards. Those were his intentions AT THE TIME.

AT THE TIME, Roy didn't know that he was going to get DQ'd, and he didn't know DM was going to beat Hill. He didn't have psychic powers.

He was talking about fighting Hill in Jan of 97.

Hill was supposed to fight DM in April, but it got moved to June. I'm sure that when Roy made the comments about Hill, the DM fight hadn't been signed. But even if it had've been signed, again, Roy didn't have psychic powers.

I'm going to have to go and read the thread titled 'Greatest SMW' where you tied yourself in knots. Ha! That was funny! Inventing faxes, and doubting what you'd put, and then pretending that you'd schooled people, only to disappear and get laughed at.

Comedy gold!

 

WTF are you talking about?

You said to me "Forget what Roy's plans were."

How can we forget what his plans were?

I told you what his intentions/plans were at the time that Eubank said he wanted him.

But you just dismissed what I'd put, because you didn't want to take it on board.

Once again, in Jan of 97, Roy was preparing to fight Griffin, and he had his sights on Hill afterwards.

That was Roy's mindset early 97.

A fight with Griffin to defend his belt, and then a POTENTIAL fight with Hill down the road, was bigger than a Eubank fight AT THE TIME.

Yes, we know that Roy went onto fight Hill, even though Hill didn't have a belt.

But that's because he'd wanted to fight him for a while, and people wanted to see that fight, even though he'd lost to DM.

I understand that he fought Hill with no belt, but didn't want to fight Eubank with no belt, but there were different circumstances involved.

 

Loved him to death as a fighter.

 

How convenient that you had Tarver winning the first fight. Ha!

You need some glasses.

It would just pain you to give Roy any credit.

Tarver became the man after beating Roy, but yet Roy was never the man beforehand?

When Roy had ALL his belts, DM was still the champ?

 

A 25 year old version?

Joe would never have gotten in the ring with a prime version of Roy.

"I'm not chasing Roy Jones, I don't want tough fights."

"I think I could give Roy a tough fight, but I know what my CAPABILITIES are, and I'd want THE CROWN JEWELS to face him."

What a joke!

NOBODY was going to pay Joe big money to fight Roy back then, because he was relatively unknown.

But it meant that he could play the victim to reporters, by saying "I want Roy, but they won't pay me enough."

Joe passed up on the opportunity to fight in America in 99, and he passed up on fighting at 175, until his final year.

He wanted no part of Roy, until he was 40, and it was a non threatening fight.

So he would never have gotten in the ring to UD him.

But if he had gotten in the ring with him, then HOW could he have beaten Roy?

Roy had better footwork, faster hands, faster reflexes, had more power, a better defence.

Joe has always been relatively easy to hit.

A guy who struggled against the likes of Robin Reid, was simply not good enough to beat Roy at his peak.

Roy would have had no trouble with Joe.

 

Jones wasted his legacy. He should have stopped after he reached his goal against John Ruiz.

 

I schooled and boxed rings around you in that thread without even getting into first gear, completely debunking the nonsense you'd been parroting for months, and you've just been schooled again with your latest embarrassing attempt at a fanboy spin.

You'll be schooled and humiliated every time you type your pathetic nonsensical revisionist drivel :deal. You're a laughing stock here.

And let's not forget how, after I destroyed with you purely with ridicule, you desperately resorted to creating an alt to try to make it look like you didn't get pwned.

Comedy gold indeed .