Prime Roy Jones vs Prime Joe Calzaghe Who Wins and Why?

This Prime Jones you talk about, is it the same Jones that was using PED'S?:think

 

You are entitled to your opinion though it is nowhere near correct. I don't have a love of Calzaghe at all. What I have is total contempt for big mouthed pea brained Muricans who know less than fuk all about Calzaghe, and most things in general, because the vast majority of the numpties ONLY know anything due to what their TV channels show them.

They have no passports, they can't even pick out on a globe countries they invade, because they are so fuking stupid, but they have ALWAYS got a worthless opinion.

 

wow, you are a massive kunt

 

Apart from that, it might suit some of Calzaghe's critics to actually study some of Calzaghe's fights before they mouth off and make themselves look kuntish. What he did throughout his career was really very simple but highly effective. He forced the opponent to fight at his pace, which in most cases they were far from comfortable with.

Anyone who thinks he couldn't or wouldn't have done the same to Jones, probably also thinks the moon is made of marzipan.

 

5' 11" and 168 actually.

Whereas you are just a kunt.

 

I know Joe must be your uncle or you're Conner his son or Bailey his ex-girlfriend, or he signed your poster ten years ago but I'll humor you once ...

Do you mean like Joe using erythropoietin, cortisone, prednisone, and/or methylprednisolone?

Or, can you differentiate between these and HGH, or testoserone, or anabolic steroids (eq/anavar/winstrol/halo/etc.), or other choices?

How do you know what Joe has taken or not taken?

Can you define what is medically necessary for injury versus calculated abuse, distinguish, or quantify between what was used in the past, what was used more than once, or what is still used within past and present fighters such as Wladimir Klitschko, Vitali Klitschko, Evander Holyfield, Manny Pacquiao, Juan Marquez, Tommy Morrison, Ken Norton, Denis Lebedev, Jeff Lacy, Alexander Povetkin, Vinny Pazienza, Bryant Brannon, Firat Arslan, RJJ, Carlos Takam, Manual Charr, Matiusz Wach, Jean Marc Mormeck, David Haye, Shannon Briggs, Tomasz Adamek, Jose Luis Castillo, Andre Berto, Victor Ortiz, Shane Mosley, Fernando Vargas, Richard Hall, Andrew Golota, Frank Bruno, and a hundred others?

Can you?

How do you do it? What parameters are consistent and mitigation would you propose of the accomplishments of athletes in all sports (as the "problem" has been pervasive in nearly all of them for many decades)? Who is vilified? Who is absolved? Based upon what?

Is it who got caught or who warranted suspicion that matters or matters most? Or is it something else? How do you reconcile that there are those who showed no obvious indications (other than great success and accomplishment) while performing only to be found out as the worst abuser(s) of all (e.g., Lance Armstrong)?

Are you unaware that in boxing the athletes with the best opportunity and means to evade and avoid discovery rests and has rested in those that are the biggest fish in their respective ponds (i.e., those that control the fight's promotion for all of their fights)? That places fighters like Klitschko(s), Pacquiao, Mayweather, Dela Hoya, RJJ, and even Calzaghe (in his little pond) in the best position to abuse the opportunity if they chose to and circumvent identification as they can dictate the terms of the fight, affect the timing (if at all) of testing, and influence the arrangements that best serve their individual circumstances on a fight by fight basis.

So, can you come up with one rule for all? Can you come up with any rule at all?

How do YOU know what any and all of these current or past fighters have done once, done twice, done repeatedly, done for injury, done earlier in the career but not later, done later in their career but not earlier, or did for one fight but not for another?

Can you qualify or quantify anything?

Can you actually KNOW anything that allows for a comparative ****ysis of what impact their use had upon their career, success, or accomplishments and also for those that were lucky, fortunate, or able to circumvent all detection for an entire career?

Since you acknowledge my statements on RJJ and only ask about whether he was on PED's during this time it is clear that you understand my assertions on his athletic/talent superiority and merely want to suggest that only an athlete "with help" could be better/greater than Calzaghe.

You need to get in a gym. Calzaghe's athletic quality is no great leap. Of course, if you are born with a poor genetic hand then Calzaghe may seem like the "end game" and ultimate specimen. Or, if you are still a little boy.

Hate to tell you but Joe (waited too long - not to say it would have made any difference - as that is far from clear if not rather doubtful) is a complete and utter nobody in the USA and he didn't make any positive impact over here in two dire US performances at career end. That is the reality. No one saw him and thought "wow, I just saw an extraordinary momentous sport figure in action". Whether leaving the T&M or in the casinos that night the few comments made (of that quickly forgotten fight) were more in the tepid realm of "BHOP should retire he's SO OLLLD, and "that other (Italian - lol) dude really sucked also".

Anyone where you are know who Roy Jones Jr. is?


Alright, you can get back to your nut-hugging Joe now. I hope he was good or is good to you if you ever chase him down in public. Having fanatical fans is a small price to pay for the dollars spent in support of his career and on his events. I wish he would have hung around for another three or four serious fights. Perhaps some answers to the questions objective people ask about his career could have been more easily answered. He had a lost near-decade and he wasn't ostracized and unable to fight like Ali in '67 or injured or any other viable excuse. He simply faced lousy comp in a lousy division throughout his prime. Not exactly the stuff of champions - though it is true that it was a lousy era in a relatively declining sport overall.

 

Joe was quick he did have an effective style. He won which is the point. Roy was just on another level talent wise not just from Calzaghe but the majority of the fighters I have seen.

Not necessarily an easy fight though as I think Joe`s quickness, ring smarts, southpaw style would be a puzzle even for a prime Jones.

The quickness of Roy`s feet in an out, side to side was uncommon for a bigger man {over 160lbs}. He had the equalizer than Calzaghe lacked and that was a big punch. Jones could hurt his opponent with just about any punch he threw.

Jones by decision with a KD or two

 

See the irony is that most people when discussing this fight completely discredit their actual styles and any relevancy to the competition. They're too busy talking down Calzaghe rather than thinking of the fight.

Also, the irony is that people seemingly think Calzaghe wasn't a big puncher during his prime, despite his pretty decent stoppage record until his hands went bust and the fact that people like Eubank (who faced some very heavy hitters) said that Calzaghe hit him harder than anyone else had.

So again, I really question whether or not you even distinguish "prime for prime" and whether you do what a lot of people are prone to do, and pick peak dominant performance and say "Well that version of Jones Jr would beat the version of Calzaghe I remember"

Calzaghe had a very good jab, often under-rated.
Calzaghe was very good at creating angles, often under-rated
Calzaghe had a very good chin, often under-rated
Calzaghe's foot speed and footwork were great, often under-rated
Calzaghe had stamina unlike pretty much anyone else I can think of, often under-rated
Calzaghe had abnormal reach, 5'11, 185cm reach (James Toney for instance, 5'10, 178cm reach)

I back Jones Jr to win, but it's not an easy fight for him, it's one that he would more than likely struggle with. Remember his struggles with Antonio Tarver in their first fight? Tarver being a solid southpaw who was able to rough it up with Jones Jr, use his jab effectively and land power shots that put Jones Jr on ***** street?

But sure, let's go into this world where Jones Jr had a lot of experience against crafty left handed fighters and never had struggles against them. Let's also forget that Calzaghe never had the end of career blips that Jones Jr had, Let's also forget that two diminished versions of these two fought and it was so one sided to Calzaghe it was embarassing.

 

When you **** hot in a drug test, you are cheating. Period, Roy did, Joe didn't. Period.

 

Is that why they have such a thing as testing? Quite a novel idea, you should check it out sometime.

So on that basis, which is Jones? A cheat for taking banned substances, or a fuking idiot for getting caught?

Bit like a choice between sh it and syphilis, don't you think?

 

The illogical bias you just spewed only reaffirms my initial conclusions regarding your anti-Jones/pro-Calzaghe bias. I get it.

 

Jones comfortable decision (117-111 or thereabouts). Wouldn't rule out him stopping Calzaghe but inclined to say it'd go the distance.

 

You get nothing. You merely think you do. So I don't like Muricans with big mouths who know fuk all, and I don't like Murican idiocy that falls for hype over substance, as is the case with Jones. Big deal.

The day you can show me clips of Robinson, Hagler, Calzaghe, Toney, Leonard, even Eubank, or Benn, spark out, comatose, fuked like Jones has been ( and not just the once either ) take your fan boyism, and clueless whining about Jones being one of the best fighters who ever lived and shove it where the sun don't shine.

Truly ATG fighters simply don't get put to sleep the way Jones has and especially more than once.

Oh, and don't kid yourself if Lou Del Valle can put Jones on his ass so can Calzaghe. The difference is of course Joe would follow up with such a volume of punches the fight would be stopped.

 

What did their 2008 fight tell you?

 

A thorough outclassing of a guy who was 9 weeks from his 40th birthday, who was 3-3 in his last 6 fights?

Wow!

Didn't Glen Johnson thoroughly outclass him and knock him cold over four years earlier?

Of course Joe had no issue putting his chin near him. He was a scavenger. He had no respect for Roy as a threat at that point. He'd laughed that Roy was past his best on live TV, and branded him as shot on three occasions before their fight.

Do you seriously think that Joe would have dared to have done such a thing when Roy was prime?


Below are some of Joe's comments throughout the years:

1999 - "I'm not chasing Roy Jones. I don't want tough fights"

2003 - "Roy Jones is a good fighter. I think I could give him a great fight. Maybe the greatest he's had. But I know what my capabilities are, and I'd want the 'Crown Jewels' due to the element of risk involved."

2006 - "Antonio Tarver has done nothing apart from beat faded versions of Roy Jones."

2007 - "A fight between me and Roy, would now be pointless."

2008 - "Roy is past his best, and is no longer the same fighter he once was."

2008 - He was asked if he'd be disappointed if Roy was to be his last fight. His response? "Yes!"


You don't need Columbo to figure out what happened, and why Joe fought him in 2008.


IMHO, Joe would never have fought Roy at his best. But if he had've done, he'd have been ultra cautious, and Roy would have won comfortably. Joe's defence wasn't good enough to beat Roy. He was always easy enough to tag, especially with right hands.

Roy was better in almost every department:

Chin - Joe
Stamina - Joe
Work rate - Joe
Hand speed - Roy
Shot variation - Roy
Footwork - Roy
Accuracy - Roy
Timing - Roy
Power - Roy
Reflexes - Roy

Roy in his 20's-early 30's, was on another level. The only thing that their 2008 fight confirms, is that a prime version of Roy could have dropped Joe whenever he'd have put his foot down on the pedal.