Roy Jones Jr vs the following

Some people say Jones Jr was an ATG talent before he fought his first ranked opponent.

We both know, with 100% certainty you would have said Tszyu was not facer enough to catch Judah.

 

Jones Jr being an ATG as an amateur is somewhat hindsight.

What does facer mean? I assume it's a misstype. Either way Tyszu had already caught upto Chavez, Hurtado and Mitchell.

 

Fast.

Of course its hindsight, but this is the problem with using the eye test.

 

For me RJJ beat better boxers than anyone Greb, Armstrong or Robinson beat.

 

But you are extremely biased against oldschool fighters.

 

1. He beat the best boxers from 160-175 of his era over more than a decade. With all else being equal he beat the best of his era

2. Yes I consider the standard of boxing from the 80s-00s better than those eras

3. You're biased because you ignore the fighters Armstrong/Robinson avoided and only point to the fights RJJ didn't take. And at least Jones fought the best of his era, where as Armstrong and Robinson did not.

 

That's why this debate is pointless. We view things differently here.

Still this bull**** story about Armstrong ducking Burley? Henry fought the best competition available, most of the time being smaller man. He has top 5 resume in boxing history. Pretending that he ducked anyone is just dumb.

 

No he didn't, Burley was by far the best welterweight in the division, he absolutely dominated Zivic. So what does Armstrong do, he fights Zivic instead. It's the probably the management doing the ducking but it's a blatant duck all the same.

 

No, first fight between Zivic and Burley was close and there are reports who say that Zivic was right winner. Even if he shouldn't have won, he certainly wasn't "absolutely dominated".

To call this a duck is completely nonsense. It's not my fault that your Burley love makes you completely blind at facts, to the point that you accuse Armstrong of being a ducker. What's next? Maybe Armstrong was also a racist?

 

There was a trilogy of fights with Zivic, the first Burley won close, the second was a controversial loss, the third fight Burley completely dominated and battered Zivic, it wasn't close.

After Burley wins the trilogy in emphatic style, Armstrong or his manager chose to defend against Zivic instead of Burley.

 

The series went 1-1-1, Burley didn't win the first fight.

It's not "winning in emphatic style". It was a close series between two great fighters. Burley had his last words, but that doesn't mean that he dominated Zivic.

Try to be more objective, Burley wasn't god.

 

Except Burley did win the first fight. Now you're rewritting history to suit your bias. The last fight was the clearest win of the series.

June 14th 1938 {The Pittsburgh Press} "Sure I'll fight Henry Armstrong, I'll fight anyone" claims Burley after beating Zivic, which he did beyond question. Burley showed what it takes to fight Armstong. "Zivic used his roughhouse techniques, gouging, heeling, thumbing and wrestling until the crown booed him loudly"

May 11th 1939 {Pittsburgh Post Gazette} Chappie Bernstein, Burleys manager issued a writ. Fritizie Zivic got the worst beating of his career by Burley. "I cannot understand why Zivic is being lined up as a challenger to Henry Armstrong" Burley has all the skills to beat Armstrong. The WBA think so too and have ranked Burley number one challenger to Armstrong's welterweight title. Charles Burley has always given his best, never been in a bad fight, has won all his fights on his own merit and has yet to be censored for foul fighting. Its about time the local boxing scribes got behind a lad who is a credit to his profession. He is willing to meet any or all claimants for the chance to fight Armstrong. We don't go around the country fighting pushovers and setups to bolster our claim for the crack at the welterweight crown. Do Luke Carney (Zivics manager) and Zivic feel the same?"

 

My bad, you are right - Burley won first fight. Apologise for this mistake, I got it wrongly.

 

I dunno. Very different times and different eras.

The names listed were all very good fighters tested over 15 rounds repeatedly. Basilio was a very good fighter. Does Turpin stand a chance?

Roy was a great fighter and he likely beats any of them in a best of three fight rivalry, but he might not be 100% every night. I'm not sure he would get through that list of fighters undefeated if he had to box them consecutively for instance. They don't box in Fantasy Forum Fight Land.

Does Carmen get a fix of that androrostenedione that Roy tested positive for?


Ok, maybe Fullmer beats him then.