If RJ hung'em up after breezing past Ruiz...

Yes, but his post Ruiz career really tarnished his legacy. Those supposed tough fights he avoided wouldnt have done much either in my mind. RJJ was probably the most gifted fighter of all time in his prime, but when he fell, he fell hard.

 

Then I probably wouldn't rank Danny Green ahead of him. (You beat a legend, you become a legend.)

 

His resume overall wouldn't qualify him for the top five. It doesn't really matter when he retired he just hasn't beaten enough great fighters to get up that high.

On pure head to head ability though, I have no problem with anybody who ranks him top 5 at his best.

 

Who could beat Roy at MW-LHW?

 

Duran
Pea
Robinson
Jones
SRL

 

k,Roy Jones had surreal talent but to equate "Ray Robinson also had terrible losses" and compare a Ray Robinson with 202 fights in which ASIDE from his ko loss to Joey Maxim due to heat prostration, Robby to the age of 44 was NEVER kod even in his LAST bouts with a Roy Jones who had a mere
64 fights being flattened 4 times does no justice to Robinson. Robinson was a tough bird and had what the bare knuckle fighters called "bottom",
the ability to survive come what may. And as evident Roy Jones ,talented as he was with 138 fights Less than Robby lacked what the great Robinson
had "bottom " to the degree Ray Robinson had...

 

I recall Budd Schulberg making an argument for Roy being among the very GOAT after Ruiz.

He'd be ranked a lot higher, thats for sure.

 

yes, i agree the ko losses really hurt his legacy even though they were past his prime. when i say "terrible" losses, i mean ray lost to fighters that couldn't hold his jock in his prime. if robinson was in today's era and was finishing his career the way he did, he'd be looked upon like a holyfield or jones is today.

today robinson is generally regarded as the best fighter ever but in the
'58 ring record book, robinson is only listed as the #5 middleweight ever and in the '68 version he was ranked as the #2 welter ever. ezzard charles is not even found on either list. both their reputations grew over time and i think you'll see the same happen with jones eventually.

 

k ,I have to differ with you suggesting that Robinson's legacy "grew over time". If anything it has somewhat diminished unfortunately...From Robby's WW prime he was looked upon as the No1 welterweight of the modern era,and I seeing him ringside several times concur...As a MW at the age of 30,he was not as effective as when he was 147 pounds as age started to catch up with him and about 150 tough bouts. Today with the MW competition Robinson at the age of 31 would have a field day along with
LaMotta, Fullmer, Olson, Randy Turpin, Georgie Abrams,Carmen Basillio,etc...Yes Robinson WAS sweet as sugar...

 

He would have forever been known as 'Mr unstoppable'.

Yes he would be talked about on here as a high ATG

 

Roy Jones Jr. was a great fighter. Top 5? A case can be made but it would be mainly based on what could have been and not who he actually beat. Yes, he beat a lot of good fighters... but he missed out on fighting a lot of good fighters as well, for whatever reason.

World Title Belts at MW, SMW, LHW, and HW.

Turned pro in 1989 and his career moved along kinda slow at first. In 1992 he beat former champ Jorge Vaca, KO1, who had recent wins over Quincy Taylor x2 and Mark Breland. Also in 1992, he beat Jorge Castro by clear decision.

In 1993 he won a somewhat close decision over Bernard Hopkins before either man had peaked. Jones won the vacant IBF MW Title. Later that year he stopped Thulani Malinga in 6 in a non-world title fight.

In 1994 he stopped Thomas Tate in 2 during Tate's worst time of his career. Tate was struggling with drugs during this time. Looks good on paper. Later that year he moved up to SMW and beat James Toney for the IBF world title. It was a clear win but Toney looked out of shape.

In 1995 he beat Vinny Paz KO6 and Tony Thornton KO3.

In 1996 he beat Merqui Sosa KO2 (stopped a little early), Eric Lucas KO11, and an old as dirt Mike McCallum W12 (for the WBC LHW World title).

 

In 1997 he struggled with a lost by DQ to M. Griffin. He dropped Griffin but hit him while he was down forcing the DQ. Later that year he stopped Griffin in 1 to regain the WBC LHW title.

In 1998 he beat a past prime V. Hill, who struggled to make 175 Lbs, in a non-world title fight, KO4. Nice body shot. Later that year he beat L. Del Valle (W12) for the WBA belt. Del Valle dropped Jones but was soundly beat. Also in 1998 he stopped MW Otis Grant in 10 rounds. Grant had fought at MW for 10 years before jumping up to LHW to fight Jones.

In 1999 he clearly decisioned Reggie Johnson for the IBF LHW belt.

In 2000 he beat D. Telesco W12, Hall KO11, and Harding KO10. Harding gave Jones some trouble before being stopped due to an injured arm.

In 2001 he beat D. Harmon KO10 and J.C. Gonzalez W12. He dropped Gonzalez 5 times.

In 2002 he stopped Clinton Woods in 6.

In 2003 he moved up to HW and clearly decisioned John Ruiz for the WBA HW Title.

 

Yes

 

Some people seem to think that Roy Jones was at the top for 3 or 4 years and burned out. That’s very far from the truth. Marvin Hagler’s career for example spanned from 1973-1987. That’s 14 years. Roy Jones turned pro in 1989 and didn’t legitimately lose until 2004. That’s pretty much the same amount of time. The problem is how things have gone for Roy these past few years.

There's various things when assessing a fighter’s greatness. We have to look at their highest peak. We have to look at how they performed at their absolute best. Prime years. For example Pernell Whitaker’s absolute peak years were from '89 Haugen to 94 McGirt. Once we ascertain what a fighter’s prime was we can sometimes enhance or exclude what happened before or after that.

For example Whitaker gets major props from me for taking De La Hoya to the brink after his prime. Guys like Ezzard Charles and Ray Robinson rank over Archie Moore in my opinion, because their highest peaks were higher than his, although Moore may have stayed greater later. Charles and Robinson were obviously great long enough, that we know they weren’t flash in the pans.

We also have look at competition faced and competition missed. That’s very important. Then at how they responded to adversity. Last but not least, how they performed when they were past it. Just because you have slipped slightly, you can’t use it as an excuse to get destroyed consistently.

This where a guy like Ali seperates himself from Roy Jones. No way Roy Jones could have stood up to a puncher like George Foreman, being as far on the downside as Ali was. Ali was 7 years past his prime when he beat Foreman. So that’s it in a nutshell, on how we should analyze great fighters. We should put all of that stuff in a bowl, mix it around and come out with an accurate assessment on where a guy stands.

Roy gets a raw deal because his demise was so sudden, but if you look at how long he was at the top it's as long if not longer then most other greats.

 

Jones fights with the following were not as good as they could have been-

Hopkins- good win but neither man had peaked yet, the rematch should have came years earlier

Toney- good win but Toney underestimated Jones for some reason. A rematch at CW or HW would have been good.

McCallum- good win but McCallum was very old and still gave Jones fits thru the first half of the fight

Hill- good bodyshot KO win but Hill had already struggled with Del Valle and lost to Michalczewski. The win over Maske was his last hurrah at LHW. He could barely make the weight anymore. He moved up to CW after the loss to Jones.

Trinidad- a past prime Jones looked good but Trinidad really had no business fighting at 170 Lbs. IMO.

We didn't get to see Jones vs.-

Michalczewski, Nunn, Eubank, Benn, Byrd

Fights with the following fighters would have been fun to watch-

Brewer- Brewer was big and strong with good power, decent skill as well but wasn't the most durable

Tate II- Tate was really good at SMW, he would have done better in a rematch

Calzaghe a few years earlier- Jones probably would have won