How good was Roy Jones?

Agree.

I see where you're coming from, but don't necissarily agree fully. But it is true that there is a difference between him and say PBF in terms of technical skill.

 

:good

 

In some respects but Roy is technically a better puncher, better shot slipper, better counter puncher, better command of distance, better lateral movement and a better combination thrower. In some ways those are partly genetic and physical ability

 

In the grand scheme of things though, strictly from a technical perspective, Floyd>Roy clearly, i mean blatantly. There are specific things that Jones does better, but on a ultimate technical basis, it's a landslide for me.

 

I'd agree, but technical skills are pretty complicated hence the breakdown.

I'd also say if Jones was 135lbs he wouldn't lose a round to Castillo, if he was 147 he wouldn't be losing rounds to Hatton or Judah, Mayweather did. The funny thing is if Mayweather beats Pacqauio and retires most will rate him ahead of Roy (This is going a little off track)

 

Jones was an incredible talent who would give anyone you care to name a tough fight or a loss at 160/168...and he was pretty good at 175 too.

 

Don't get me wrong, there's a good argument for Jones being better. And the Castillo point you made fits in there. (all stylistc type subjective type stuff can arise from that argument though in fairness). I just meant technically, as much as we break it down, technically it's a landslide PP. I think Maywether will hand Pac his ass personally, but we can always come back to that if it ever happens, there's no deadline for predictions i'm taking it
:good

 

I honestly think the Hopkins that Jones fought was more suited to challenge him stylistically than say the one who fought Trinidad.

 

At his zenith, RJ wasn't good, he was AMAZING. Like seeing top-notch sprinters 'n Usain Bolt; in another class altogether.

All the Monday-morning quarterbacks piling on --PATHETIC!

 

Roy Jones is the greatest boxer to ever step inside of the ring, in terms of co-ordination, speed and skill.

People who chat utter **** and say he was'nt technically gifted, don't know boxing and are stupid. Thats just a myth a total myth, just like the myth that Ronald Winky Wright is a defensive fighter..........he's a pressure fighter and always has been.

Funny how people can become brainned washed by the media.

 

Good to see an old timer/classic guy that can respect it like it is. The guy had insane ability and would beat a crazy amount of ATG's from 160 - 175. His sheer talent would have him making fools of some.







He held titles for over a decade excepting 4 1/2 months for that DQ.

He won titles against guys spanning 66 pounds. He won titles in umpteen divisions. He spanned weights up and down.
He was finally defeated at age 34.

The guy went 15 years undefeated excepting a DQ that he righted in brutal fashion. 48 fights. He was finally defeated at age 34 and hasn't looked good since, obviously well past it. Yet those with an agenda want to bottle the Tarver and Johnson losses as evidence he wasn't that good. He was past it LOL.

Hagler was younger when led a merry dance by SRL. If he was fighting a couple of years later (As Jones was) every chance he gets outboxed by a younger fighter. Would he be jidged via this? Not on your life.

Ali at that time was struggling against the likes of Norton and Young. Is this the Ali we judge?

Aaron Pryor was younger and getting stopped by Bobby Joe Young.

Tommy was hit or miss.

Duran was up and down.

Benitez, another with great reflexes, average basics and oft judged durability was long long gone.

Gomez was well hammered.

Arguello was basically gone.

Leonard was ragged and soon to be hammered.

Tyson, well.

Monzon was going.

Valdez was twice schooled by Corro, who Ring voted near the top of worst fighters to ever have a title.

The list goes on and on, yet the first thing one see's from detractors is Tarver and Johnson atsch

When he lost the physical abilities, for sure he was done and dusted. Others weren't even fighting, had been hammered or were performing at a very ordinary level comparative to previous. Nothing can be taken away from the man's abilities and achievements at his best, and his best was showcased over many years. They all slow down eventually.

 

Scary good. Top 50 ATG easily. Thats VERY high praise.

 

Top post.

Jones and his opposition get held to a harsher standard than virtually any fighter who ever lived.

If you were ****ish enough to apply the same negative,blinkered assessments to ATG's Duran or Monzon that Roy cops then you could pick holes in their resumes and title reigns as well.

For example the same people who big up Duran for beating Davey Moore (a 13 fight veteran) and Iran Barkley (a top fighter who had a deceptively ordinary record) crrucify Jones for beating Hopkins (because he was green after only 22 fights) and Ruiz (because he was ordinary with a deceptively good record).

The bloke can't win against hypocrisy like that.

 

This is pretty much it.

The manner to how he lost to Tarver both times does mean something, though. Not so much that he lost, but how he lost. The first a clean KO which can't but help to throw Roy's chin into question since he hardly ever was hit clean in his prime. The second was very much down to himself, being extremely cautious and letting the fight slip away.

Otherwise I agree with everything you wrote.