roy jones jr vs archie moore....

1. This is ridiculously biased- Moore scored ten knockouts in the 38 fights you list, but you've come up with excuses why six of them aren't important, and yet you still retain the 38-fight total, apparently meaning you're pretending those six fights still happened and still count, except now Moore didn't get the knockout! If you're not going to include the fact that Moore won by knockout, you shouldn't include the fight at all, or else you're literally listing a bunch of fights that automatically detract from Moore's "meaningful-fight" knockout percentage no matter what he does!
2. Since you go out of your way to explain away favorable results for Moore, but don't also discount fights where Moore wasn't at his best, your statistics are still more biased.
3. Your selections are arbitrary, and your focus on Moore's fights in the early-mid 1940s, in which he was a far spottier performer than he was in his best years, considerably detract from the impression given of his standing.
4. Many of those guys were more durable than Jones.

 

I'm extremely confident that if Jones fought Harold Johnson and Jimmy Bivins five times apiece, he would lose at least once to each of them.

In addition, if he fought Joey Maxim three times, Lloyd Marshall twice, Holman Williams twice, Bobo Olson once, and Charley Burley once, I do believe the odds are overwhelming he would suffer at least one loss.

Note that, in order to replicate Moore's career, Jones would need to be having all of the above matches while regularly fighting 10 times or more per year, and frequently gaining/dropping 15+ pounds to maintain campaigns at both light heavyweight and heavyweight. Think he'd be up for it?:think

 

I picked the fights where Moore faced great or very good fighters. Because that's what he'd be facing in case of Jones. That is important to evaluate the chance that he scores a KO, thus all 38 fights matter.

In his supposed "best" years he faced top-class fighters a lot less often than in his earlier years. That is, in my opinion, the main reason why they are called his "best" years, and why his record is a lot more consistent during that time.

The closest in style and abilities to Jones is Burley, and he beat Moore very easily, and I have no doubt would have repeated it had they met one more time.

 

Jones doesnt have a rythm and is very unpredictable

 

If Jones potshots/counter punches, Moore has very few to nil countering opportunities. If he fights like he did against Griffin, or any of his 160-168 fights Moore could be devasted.

When Jones turns up the pace in his prime there simply isn't a better offensive P4P fighter

 

Jones went undefeated and barely losing a round against Toney, Hopkins, Ruiz who are all comparable to the fighters you mentioned, as for the match ups:

Maxim - Jones easily wins every round and if he turns up the pace Maxim gets stopped

Holman WIlliams - Holman is a counter puncher, no counter puncher stands a chance against Jones speed and reations

Olsen - Olsen gets stopped mid-rounds after being thoroughly dominated

Lloyd Marshall - don't know that much about

Burley - a tactical afair Jones would largely dominate because of speed, Jones is far stronger and far more of a devasating puncher than the smaller man.

Bivins - Bivins is the biggest best LHW/HW but he wasn't much of a puncher and has many SD decisions and closer fights against none greats. Is this the type of fighter your picking over a prime Jones who barely lost a round?

Harold Johnson - Johnson is a great but is he as talented as James Toney/Hopkins who Jones beat emphatically, I'm unsure and his KO percentage isn't devastating. Jones would be a huge favourate

 

1. Umm is Archie going to beat Jones to the punch? Not in a million years. Hows he going to land other than countering? He isn't.

What your all neglecting is footwork and use of angles are more important than punching hard :nut . Jones is simply leagues ahead of Moore at doing this.

I met Clinton Woods who faced Jones and he told me the amount of angles Jones used was impossible to figure out. And this is a future world champion, with wins over plenty of ranked LHWs. Clinton also told me he put on around 17lbs of water weight in his fights to weigh 192 on fight night at 175, so Jones fought some big guys at LHW as Clinton wasnt even near the biggest he faced

Even if he does land don't make out that Moore has a significantly better chin, he doesn't and has been down and hurt by punchers not as devastating as Jones

Do we not agree Jones is going to land more?

2. This is laughable 'ko'd more often than not', please tell when Jones was ko'd remotely near his prime. Your making it sound like Jones just pot shot and ran from his opponents. Its been shown Archie's KO ratio against the best hes faced isn't devasating, hes facing the joint best LHW's hes faced, the best defensive LHW hes faced and hes pulling out the KO when he couldn't against lesser LHWs with lesser defenses?

 

Thanks man, you saved me some time. I see RJJ on his back examning the lighting by mid to late rounds.

 

A poor boxer is very rythmatic and easy to see what he's going to do, you know what shots he prefers throwing. A great boxer is reacting to his opponent, countering his punches, throwing when he sees a mistake, feinting and throwing unexpected shots etc. The only rythm is the mistakes you make, or the mistakes he makes you make that hes capitalising on.

Now theoretically Moore can set a trap, ie dropping his shoulder to invite the punch, rolling and countering. Which is great in theory but Toney and others have tried to do thesame and couldn't land. Jones was plenty fast enough to even leap in with leading left hooks and get out before a counter is near to being thrown, this is what makes him so hard or near impossible to beat in his prime.

 

Jones is no Burley :bart