Everyone that does a comparison for prime for prime, well most people, judge Roy in the style that he took on in his later years..... I always hear about "his presure would be trouble for Roy" and "Roy would pot-shot" really though, Roy in his prime is a prime example of a presure fighter, never spent too much time on the ropes, when he did it was gainful and he always came back. He was very much on the attack, not usually on the retreat when he was he was scoring.. I just hate the comparisons that judge the way he fights now to the way he used to fight:happy :happy
I wont forget the Jones era that end with a round 2 KO by Tarver. He had done anything and everything at taht point, and like everythingh it ended!
Definitely. Have been watching his whole career again and the guy was superman. The angles he attacked from, the power, the speed, the defensive maneouvers. Even the showboating I loved. He was a great showman and an even greater fighter. The best I have ever seen, and probably will ever see. What was so incredible about Roy was that he could do things that were so fundamentally wrong and get away with it. Its like he was born to fight.
I thought the Toney fight was a wonderful showcase of him; styles do make fights, but he was so clearly ahead of Toney with his speed and inventiveness; he's an all-time great no matter what he does now.
RJJ is on a great and realtively short list of boxers with exciting and innovative styles, Nassem Hamed was another one (never reached his pinnacle but boy did he do some fun stuff), Chris Eubank was another again the era didn't give him much chance to shine globally but he had some great moves...i know theres more but can't think off top of my head....
