Most impressive run: Hopkins, RJJ or Wlad?

Roy fought some guys who were much worse than Mayweather's opposition. Brannon, Glen Kelly, Harmon, Richard Frazier etc. were pretty terrible. It would be like if Mayweather had a whole list of Henry Brussels level opposition.

 

My vote goes to Roy Jones Jr, just because of what he achieved in that time across multiple weight divisions all the way up to HW. Only Bob Fitzsimmons had previously won world titles from MW all the way to HW.

Between Wlad and Hopkins is a difficult call because both were completely dominant in their divisions during that period. Wlads run was impressive for him beating all of the contenders of the time and barely losing a round. Hopkins run was impressive because he has some real heavy hitting names on his record.

Roy Jones Jr just edges it for me though.

 

Ruiz was only a champ on paper and Toney also moved up from 160 to beat him easily. I'd call it a good win but not a great one. I prefer his win over Tarver.

 

Cheers JT - Happy New Year to you...

...Yes - on occasion, I do think 'em through, first...

 

Yes, a shutout prior to the stoppage. Good one.

 

Ruiz was the final world title in the jigsaw to equal bob fitzsimmons record

Based on Roy’s own career goal that was it and he should have retired afterwards.

 

lufcrazy,


I missed this post at Christmas.

I don't like not replying to people.

You're hilarious.

The only guy who's hiding behind the stats is YOU.

All I have....?

Oh dear.

No, it's not all I have.

You obviously haven't even read my posts.

How was Dariusz AVAILABLE?? How are you going to fight someone who doesn't want to fight you? You can't. But at least HBO, along with Roy's advisors, did everything they possibly could to secure a fight with Dariusz. Okay, it didn't materialise and it affects his resume. But serious efforts were made. That's better than ACTUALLY ADMITTING that you stayed away from those kinds of guys, as it was easier fighting lesser opposition in a lower division. Do you understand?

The only thing that's pitiful here, is your complete disregard of Bernard's comments and actions, because you are impressed by his final stats.

No. Not just because he was able to make MW. Again, I'm dismissing him mainly due TO THE COMMENTS THAT HE MADE. You've made up all of these colour analogies, yet you're not even reading the posts properly. Again, Roy's and Wlad's resumes suffer for not fighting Vitali and Dariusz. But so does Bernard's, for swerving the Roy rematch as well as being in the mix with the best SMW's and LHW's in the world, by INSTEAD dominating a weak MW division, BEFORE GOING ON AND CHALLENGING OUT ALL OF THE JUNIOR MIDDLE-WEIGHT CHAMPS.

Correct. And how is Bernard's run the most impressive? He wasn't particular exciting, his best wins were against fighters who'd peaked at the lower weights, and by his own admission - he remained at MW for as long as he did because it was easier than fighting the guys above.

You really need to reread the above and then apply some context. First off, he was a former MW champ. Then when in his 3rd weight class, he spectacularly knocked out Griffin with a lead uppercut in the first round. Have you ever seen someone knock out a guy before with a lead uppercut? I haven't. That was incredibly impressive. He was then the only guy who ever knocked out Hill. Yes, Hill was faded, but it was an incredible body shot, and Hill went on and knocked out Tiozzio a few years later. He then toyed with Reggie Johnson and Clinton Woods like they were nothing. He then tried to fight Dariusz and Hopkins. But when those fights couldn't be made, he then moved up to HW and dominated Ruiz. Yes, Ruiz wasn't great, but he was a HW. Put that into perspective. A former MW dominating a HW with consummate ease. He then went back to LHW to beat Tarver, having to go through adversity to do so, as he had to burn muscle.

So to summarise: Despite missing his biggest rival, this former MW went up to HW and back in style, barely losing rounds in the process, challenging himself in a way that Bernard never did during his run.

But to you, Hopkins impressed you more, as he cleaned out the division? Ha! You are a joker my friend.

What if we fantasise for a minute and pretend that Roy had beaten Vitali?

You'd probably say: "Although it was very impressive the way Roy beat Klitschko, he still didn't clear out the divisions that he fought in, in the way that Hopkins did"

Basically, you're the Bailey of the Classic section.

You're a stat man.

You don't care that Roy beat bigger fighters in style.

You don't care about Bernard's comments.

You don't care that Tito was a former WW and Oscar looked dreadful against Sturm.

You don't care that Roy challenged himself more.

You don't care that he avoided Roy when the fight was on the table and he'd already won King's tournament.

You don't care about any of the above, because the only thing that you care about is the final BoxRec stats.

 

Part 2

Wlad deserves a lot of credit. Although I was never impressed with his style and personally found many of his fights boring due to his tactics. But that was due to him being psychologically scarred from his early knockout defeats. I also believe that Vitali was more formidable. And I think that Wlad was lucky having him there to guide him and to avenge some of his defeats, and I believe that Vitali's early retirement gave Wlad opportunities that he may not have had otherwise. Whilst it's very difficult comparing fighters from different divisions, I give Roy the edge because he was more exciting, and he was faced with bigger challenges.

Once again, you have not applied CONTEXT to any of the above. It's absolutely laughable. Really, this is Baileyesque. It's pathetic.

A man who admitted to dragging people up to weights which they weren't comfortable or familiar with?

A man who admitted to avoiding SMW and LHW earlier, as it was easier beating naturally smaller fighters at MW?

A man who purposely avoided a rematch with Roy at a C-W, to challenge out the JMW champs instead?

Oh, it's okay though. He gets a pass, because he cleaned out the division in a way that Roy never did. None of the above matters. It doesn't matter that he beat 2 former WW's, one of which who couldn't even beat a C class Sturm.

You're a JOKER.

Yeah, it's a real positive to shun a rematch with Roy, to instead fight a former WW. Brilliant!

Considering that you are an extremely ignorant person who ignores all factors and circumstances, I was never going to convince you.


My argument for Roy was very convincing and it couldn't be any clearer:


1. He was extremely entertaining, scoring fantastic knockouts.

2. He fought the best guys who were available to him.

3. He moved up and fought naturally bigger opponents.

4. His run saw him take on much bigger challenges.


It's very simple.


Now compare that to Bernard:


1. Bernard wasn't as entertaining.

2. He only fought the best guys available to him at MW, whereas THE best guys available to him were at the above weights.

3. He fought naturally smaller opponents.

4. He didn't take on big challenges in the way that Roy did.

5. He admitted to staying at MW for so long because it was easier than fighting bigger guys in the divisions above.

6. He admitted wanting to drag smaller guys to a weight that they weren't familiar with.

7. He purposely avoided a huge rematch with Roy, to instead target champions from the weight divisions below.


Please tell me how you see any of the 7 points as a positive??

Oh wait, you don't care, because Bernard cleared out the MW, whereas Roy missed Dariusz.

If you're not going to apply context or take onboard all of the relevant factors, then do us all a favour and don't bother replying.

Here's one for you:

Instead of trying to be clever by using colour analogies, go and educate yourself with the factors involved, instead of just focusing on the overall statistics.

 

Oh my here we go again! Not sure if it is funny or sad at this point

 

Sorry I missed this post at Christmas.

Thanks for the best wishes.

 

Why would it be sad?

Contribute.

 

You've put forward a good argument.

Regarding Lennox, yes, he lost in his 4th title defense and he didn't have a reign which was a long.

However, do you not think it would have been possible for Lennox to have followed Wlad's exact timeframe, where he went from fight 46-47?

 

Hard to say. Any answer could be correct.

I'm going to say Wlad, because he didn't avoid anyone, and would fight any man, even in their back yard. Roy Jones would not do this, and he fought the least amount of times. Jones was very likely on PED's.

Hopkins fought some big names ( Oscar De la Hoya and Tito ) but some of them were lower weight guys moving up. His best opposition vs. natural middles was lacking. If Glenn Johnson and Keith Holmes were his best wins a middle, that's not saying a lot.

 

Man_Machine,


Apologies for the late reply.

I totally missed this when I resumed debating in the new year.

Bernard still achieved an awful lot, and I've always been impressed by his amazing longevity. But his comments simply have to be factored in to the equation when ranking his achievements.

It's the domination of a weak division against naturally smaller opponents, when he could have been in the mix with better opposition at the weights above.

Correct. Nobody has said that the LHW division which Roy fought in was brimming with stellar talent. But after not being able to secure fights with Benn and Liles to unify at SMW, he was faced with 2 choices:

1. Stay at SMW to defend his IBF title.

2. Move up for a fresh challenge.

He could have remained at SMW and fought whoever was put in front him, where he could have notched up numerous defences, which it was Bernard was happy to do for 6 years. But he went with option 2. And although it wasn't a stacked division, it was his 3rd weight class, where he was fighting guys who were naturally bigger than what he was. So that was impressive. He fought the best guys that were available to fight, and he deserves credit for that.

Yes, he dropped a fight to Griffin, but we know what happened. It was on a technicality. It can hardly be celebrated as a victory for Griffin. Although in my opinion, Roy was rightly disqualified.

Yes, he missed his biggest rival in Dariusz, and I'm sure you're knowledgeable of why they didn't fight.

I think it stands out, alongside stopping Griffin and Hill, as well as coming back from HW to reclaim the LHW titles from Tarver. I don't think that Bernard or Wlad can match those victories within their title reigns.

You say over mediocrity, but that wasn't the case.

Roy had a unique skillset that went hand in hand with his great athleticism. Roy's downfall came from ageing as well as the weight loss for Tarver. It was a mixture of the 2 things. He lost muscle at an advanced age, which according to Mackie Shilstone, can affect the body's immune system. Tarver, Byrd and Dawson also suffered when they burnt muscle. Roy was 35, he'd had 50 fights, and he was a reflex fighter who dealt in milliseconds. To be honest, it was always on the cards for me, unless he'd have changed his style to compensate for his age.

Correct. And along with his boring, negative style, it works against Wlad (in my opinion) when ranking him for this thread.

I agree.

I agree. It wasn't that impressive to me. He used to bore me, and I used to hate seeing him hold his opponents. But he found that he could get away with it, and we know that the reason why he did it was because he was psychologically scarred from those early knockout defeats.

Correct. Although we can hardly blame him for not wanting to face his brother.