How would you rate these ten fighters P4P

No but tested against the likes of Bernard Hopkins and James Toney it can be justified, especially in dominating performances like the ones he put on in those displays (less so for Hopkins) and pretty much every other fight in his career.

 

I hope you give Hopkins credit dominating Tarver after coming off two defeats to Taylor. He also moved up two weights and many had him down for his first knockout loss, me included. He was pretty much at an all-time low with Tarver being on a high going into their fight. Jones was the underdog against Toney, who was #2 'pound for pound'.

My point is that Tarver and Toney were weight drained and it clearly showed in their performances. Even Pavlik got off with more punches on Saturday night than those two.

Toney was better than Tarver, but thats not my point. Just credit both ways to Jones and Hopkins.

 

Fair enough, though Pavlik has always been a volume puncher, so he's naturally going to get off more than a natural counter-puncher in Tarver who was unable to get anything going for stylistic reasons as well as the weight draining. Same goes for Toney from a stylistic standpoint. Neither fighter at their best would've been a lot more active, though they'd likely have been a bit more effective in losing efforts.

 

SRL
Sweet Pea
RJJ
JCC
BHOP
MMH
Holmes
Lennox Lewis
Hearns
PBF

 

I prefer to look at the positives than the negatives in both those wins for Hopkins and Jones. It's only fair. On paper they were tough tests. Hopkins had a tougher job on paper mainly based on coming off two defeats, being past his prime, and stepping up two weights. Jones stepped up one weight, was approaching his prime, and was up against a superb technician rated #2 'pound for pound'. And Toney rates a lot higher than Tarver as an ATG.

Excuses are made for the vast majority of fights anyway. Injuries, weight problems, wrong tactics, point deductions, trainers, etc.

 

Leonard
Whittaker
Chavez
Hopkins
Hagler
Hearns
Jones
Mayweather

 

Jones
Mayweather
Leonard
Whitaker
Hopkins
Chavez
Hagler
Hearns
Lewis
Holmes

 

SRL
Whitaker
RJJ
JCC
Hopkins
Hagler
Hearns
Mayweather
Lewis
Holmes

 

Whitaker
Chavez
Leonard
Hopkins
Hearns
Mayweather
Jones
Hagler
Holmes
Lewis

I have a feeling many will moan about Hagler's placement here which is fair. To be honest I'm undecided about it myself. Heavyweights I generally place lower as a rule, although here I feel I cannot rate them above the others.

 

SS, You'll have to excuse my tendency to vent at times -I'll clarify. Jones is not all flash, nor is he purely "style" instead of substance. However, I don't see nearly as much substance in him as I do in Leonard, Chavez, Hearns, and the like. He is lacking in that department and compared to the greatest fighter ever, it glares so much that I question the placement he is assumed to have by so many. He looked magnificent against Vinnie Paz and commentators and fans alike drooled. I didn't. It was a horrendous mismatch. You should see how great I look on the heavy bag.

How many times in his career was Jones an underdog?

Jones was more blessed with athelticism (power, timing, speed, rythym...) than anyone on the list. That enabled him to do well against those he did choose to fight. It would enable him to compete against the best all-time in three divisions. His head-to-head ranking is above his actual legacy in my opinion. He did not face a real challenge for a 8/9 year stretch -he protected his prime. That is not what great fighters do. And it costs him.

 

Fair enough mate, though I'm not too concerned with you ranking him lower that the likes of Leonard, Chavez and Hearns. I'm more so concerned with you putting him below the likes of Lewis and Hopkins. I don't see that at all.

Jones did fight a lot of sub par fighters for quite a few years, but really, what more could he have done? Fight Michalczewski in Germany? Sure. He could have. How many other greats would have done that? Fight Hopkins again? As we all recall "60/40 I kick yo ass". Reasonable terms. Hopkins wanted none of it. Fight Lennox Lewis? He had no business up at heavyweight. It's unreasonable to suggest he fight him there. Fight Calzaghe? Well, that SHOULD have happened, but hey if we are going to criticize Jones for facing duds, what in the world was Calzaghe doing for the first 10 years of his career?

 

Lewis faced everyone that he could and beat every man that he faced. Jones can't say that Bowe got away, but that's no shame on Lewis. Some, like Holyfield and Tyson he faced late, but he did face them. He was stopped twice, but came roaring back and returned the favor. Jones wouldn't and I'd argue that by that point of his career, couldn't erase the Tarver and Johnson fights. Lewis destroyed Ruddock. He beat a live and dangerous Ray Mercer. Then he stopped Tommy Morrison who had just wrecked Ruddock. He destroyed Golota when Golota was still dangerous. He beat Briggs, Tua, and exposed Grant. His last fight was a sloppy, amateurish mess, but he did stop Vitali.

Hopkins later. Gotta work!

 

Hopkins was the first man to beat Felix Trinidad who had just demolished titlist Joppy in his first MW engagement. Bernard is the only man to stop De La Hoya in 44 fights. Both were smaller men granted, but Hopkins showed them where they did not belong -and that was in the ring with a great MW champion. He's the first man to beat Jones' conqueror Glen Johnson -Hopkins beat Glenhoffe when Glen was about 28 whereas Jones lost to him when he was Glen was 35. Hopkins made a fool out of Jones' conqueror Tarver, when he was 40. He made 20 or so title defenses over 9 years.

At 42, he beat Winky Wright who hadn't been defeated in 8 years. At 43, he schooled an undefeated 26 year old MW champion who defeated the man who took Bernard's title twice. That latest bout proves much. And I believe could have and should have beaten Calzaghe but that's not worth jack.

In sum, I think it is easy to rank Hopkins over Jones -particularly after Saturday night's performance.

...
Roy Jones Jr.

Roy Jones Jr didn't just avoid Michalczewski and Calzaghe. There are others. Jirov signed to fight him, Jones backed out. This after talking all kinds of bravado. Jones didn't just fight many duds... he was more evasive outside the ring against real contracts than he was inside the ring against rights and lefts.

Michalczewski, around the time that Jones was avoiding him, said "I always like to face good opposition. Only the best opponents bring out the best in me.". This is something that Jones never said, or if he did, he LIED. Jones went hurrying through three divisions and did not want tough opponents. Did he face McClellan or Eubank at middleweight? No. Did he try to fight Liles, Benn, or Stevie Collins at super middleweight? No. Michalczewski gives Virgil Hill a beating and takes two titles and what does Jones do? You'd expect that he'd face Michalczewski. He didn't. He faces .... Virgil Hill...! And I still hear the praise for that body shot. How many know that Jones threw that body shot on the wrong guy??

No one in their right mind should get away with excusing Jones for not fighting Michalczewski. Jones hid behind unrealistic purse demands: He wanted 10 million. Come on. His reign at LHW is questionable. Did you know that he actually had to share his WBC belt with Graciano Rocchigiani after Jones refused to face his mandatory (Michael Nunn) in '98 and Rocchigiani stepped in and beat Nunn in Marchl, 98 to claim 1/2 the title? What was Jones doing instead? The Hill fight was in April. Hill, a name fighter who was 34, barely ever fought out of Bismark, North Dakota, who was laid off a year, and was dominated by Dariusz in his last fight. Jones was conveniently avoiding Nunn and Michalczewski by taking an easy out.

Those who tout Roy's greatness at LHW are often honest men. They should prove there honesty by pausing and remembering that Jones shamelessly avoided a fellow champion in Dariusz Michalczewski, who unified three titles at LHW with his defeat of Hill and who had the most defensive in his division in 25 years.

 

Forget what Roy didn't do, thats common knowledge. Instead have a look at what he did accomplish. The DOMINANT wins over Bernard Hopkins and James Toney should at least put him way up the rankings. Its convenient that you fail to mention them and instead rank Hopkins way above him. Why do you take credit away for Roy because he was never an underdog? Who would he have to fight in order to have that happen. The only fight in his career that could be made where the other person would be favoured is at heavyweight against Lewis.

 

I agree, Jones' skills and superiority were the reasons why he was hardly ever an underdog. I might be wrong, but I think he was the underdog against Ruiz and Tarver III. He's 1-1 with those two fights.