RJJ's 50-0 or JC's 46-0?

81% of people prefer a make believe number than an actual one.

Well done the GF.

****in pathetic the amount of hate this man draws.

 

clearly roy jones. the griffin loss was an aberration. griffin was already on his knees when jones hit him but i thought it jones should have been penalized with a point deduction or something.

griffin was whining and couldn't continue. because of jones anger, we al know what happened in the second fight.

 

A number is just a ****ing number -- hence the whole point of this thread. You just walked into the thread-starter's modus operandi. You're not really this thick, surely?

 

Mate, it's not another Holocaust, dry your eyes. The TS asked whose record was better of two very similar records (numerically) that were formed in the same era, and the answer to his question is Roy Jones. There's no "hate crime" involved.

 

as a brit i do not recognise hardly any of the names on jones`s resume and as americans you probably wont recognise many on calzaghe`s.
so most of jones fights look like bums to me and vice versa,
so i can not comment on how good the bums were on jones`s resume.
so the only way i can split it is by saying jones`s name is on calzaghe`s resume so i have to clearly vote him.
​

 

On the official record it states a defeat. Therefore, it was a defeat. I think people have FAR too much emphasis on a '0' in the losses column, but you did exactly the same thing.

 

So now Roy was 50-0? :roflatsch

You Roy Jones nuthuggers have no shame. What next? Are you going to tell me he was THE Heavyweight Champion after he beat Ruiz? :rofl