Part 2. Tyson broke him mentally. He did a complete psyche job on him. He didn't know how to react. He lost his temper in the build up and swore, he shaved his hair after comments made by Tyson, and that carried on into the fight, where he couldn't change tactics. Correct. No arguments there. I don't condone anybody taking PEDS. But we don't know the specifics. Fair enough. I respect your opinion. I'm giving Bernard heavy criticism for his comments and his actions. I don't know why you think they don't hold up. What he went on to achieve after MW isn't relevant to this debate. Nobody has said that Bernard did anything illegal. Everyone's entitled to their own opinions. Mine are as follows: Wlad: He was boring to watch, he held size advantages over his opponents, he reigned in a weak era, but he had a long reign and fought everybody who was available. Bernard: He had a very long reign, he changed his style, and he showed amazing longevity. But he dominated a weak division when he could have fought in better divisions, and after he'd won King's tournament, he refused to fight a rematch with Roy, to instead call out all of the JMW champs. Roy: He couldn't obtain the Dariusz fight and the failed test against Hall leaves a bad taste. But it was his 3rd weight class, where he scored spectacular knockouts over very good fighters, which culminated in him moving up to HW and back, which is why I have to place him at no.1 To summarise: In my opinion, beating naturally bigger fighters in a highly entertaining manner, is better than where Wlad and Bernard beat naturally smaller fighters in a less entertaining manner. And I think that going up to HW and then dropping back to LHW, was much harder than anything that they did. Roy burning muscle and dropping back for Tarver was just a bigger challenge than anything that they endured during their reigns. I don't think they have a win between them that can match that. So for me, Roy's reign was the most impressive.
Sooner or later when you continuously miss several fights against the best contenders the excuse that “it was the other guys fault” does not hold water. There is more than one way “Not to make a fight” and RJJ excelled in that!
Man_Machine, I agree. We don't know the circumstances surrounding his debut, so I'll give him a pass. Yes, I realise this. I'm just wondering why we didn't immediately see him consistently weighing in as a MW. The average weight isn't relevant to me. Again, I'm querying why a renowned fitness fantastic and gym rat, was weighing in at 166 pounds. My timeframe is correct. He didn't consistently weigh in as a MW until 1993. But if you want to count out the stages where he didn't fight, then I can agree that it was less than 5 years. The point is, due to him being a renowned fitness fanatic, I would have assumed that he'd have instantly have turned pro as a MW. So you don't think it was odd that a MW and renowned fitness fanatic, who lived in Fischer's gym, was fighting some of his fights at 166 pounds? I'm sorry, but this is really silly. I'm not making too much out of Bernard's comments. They can't be interpreted any other way. They are crystal clear. No, he couldn't make 160 easy. Both he and Mackie have alluded to that. MW may have been a prestigious division, but it was weak when Bernard was there, and he was happy to defend his IBF title for 6 years against whoever was put in front of him until King's tournament was formed. The SMW division contained the likes of: Roy, Liles, Toney, Nunn, Benn, Eubank, Collins and Little. Yes, it was his lifestyle choice. And he's told us why. No, I'm not saying it gave him an unfair advantage. I'm saying that he held size advantages in height and reach over most of his opponents. And whilst there was nothing wrong with that, it simply has to be factored in when rating his reign. Bernard himself has said he could have moved up much earlier than he did. He needed Mackie's expert help to get him up to LHW, because he'd trained his body to be a MW for 12 years, which amazed Mackie. Again, that's nonsense. Yes, after 12 years of doing the same thing, of course he needed to make adjustments. But he'd already agreed to a 168 C-W with Roy in 2002, (4 years earlier) before he priced himself out, and he'd also agreed a 168 fight with Calzaghe until he had contractual issues. Not only that, he was also open to fighting Brewer. But according to Brewer, the Goosen's didn't offer him enough money. Why are you going against what Bernard himself has said? It didn't take working with Mackie in 2006, for him to suddenly realise that he could have fought at SMW and LHW earlier. We already know that he fought at 166 pounds before he committed to the MW division in the early 90's. What were the other higher priority reasons? You've read his comments. You know that he turned down $6m to fight Roy again, to target JMW's instead. Fair enough. No, he wasn't supposed to undergo bone shortening surgery. But again, it should be factored in when rating the overall worth of his reign.
Jack, 1. He didn't carefully select his opponents on HBO. 2. I don't see the comparisons between Ruiz and Baldomir. 3. Roy's fall from grace isn't relevant to this thread.
Yeah, the main one being: Running away from your biggest ever pay day, to call out JMW's instead. Good old Bernie from the tough streets of Philly. Bullying former WW's.
You know it's true. The only fighter Roy should be criticised for not fighting was Nunn at 175. He disrespected him and messed him around. Other than Nunn, there's valid reasons why the other fights didn't get made. Most of them weren't viable.
RJJ - Louden's guy May - NoNeck's guy Both will defend to the end who was greater … I'm starting a thread so this one won't get derailed.. I want a clean fight and who is more knowledgeable about their own guy to defend … Good luck Gentlemen
Loudon, 1. Jones did carefully select his opponents on HBO. His resume is not as bad as some of his detractors make it out to be but it’s not Holyfield / de la Hoya / Ali-esque either. Roy must take at least some responsibility for that. 2. The comparisons are quite clear: both Roy and Floyd were phenoms moving up from lighter weight classes, deliberately selecting very ordinary title holders to get their belts and then make a statistical claim to greatness by adding another weight class title, yet not fighting the other belt holders who were much greater threats. 3. Roy’s fall from grace will always be relevant in any thread that involves his run. It is what is, Loudon. The fact of the matter is that there is no other fighter in history, and indeed, perhaps no other athlete in all of sports, who was considered so great and yet had his entire trajectory changed by one single punch! As I noted before, Roy had already beaten Tarver; Tarver was not known as a murderous puncher; Tarver was considered an underachiever; Tarver would go on to lose his very next fight in a lackluster performance. FWIW Loudon, I was a huge Roy fan, I always enjoy your posts and your detailed analyses but we might simply disagree about the above points about Roy.
Loudon will win by brutal knock out; think Tyson vs Spinks, Bambi vs Godzilla or, dare I say...Tarver vs Jones 2
NoNeck, After facing Oscar, he kept taking vacations, before coming back and fighting about once per year. He didn't have mandatory obligations like most other fighters did. But when he was younger and he first won the WBC title, he fought guys like Roy and everybody else did at some point. See below: Rios Juuko Vargas Gerina Sosa Bruseles
I don’t dismiss Loudon out of hand because I think he does make good points, but like you say, at some point you see a pattern. The same is true with Floyd. They’re both great fighters whose resumes aren’t what they could’ve been and they’re both the common denominators in all of the fights that didn’t get made.