Roy Jones Jr. vs Thomas Hearns

Great posts guys, I'm really enjoying reading through them. Just to add, Toney did manage the same feat as Roy, but the circumstances are different. Roy put weight on, to move up to Heavy to create history. Toney moved upto Heavy because he was so out of shape, he couldn't fight at the lower weights.

Regards, Loudon.

 

Jones never dominated any division.

At MW - He won a vacant title, before moving up. Avoiding both Julian Jackson and Gerald Mclellan (both huge punchers). Obviously the win over Hopkins became more impressive as time went on because of what Hopkins went on to achieve. However, he didn't fight the best fighters in the division at the time (Jackson, Mclellan)

At SMW - He didn't fight Nigel Benn or Chris Eubank (Benn in particular a huge puncher). Obviously the Toney win was very impressive.

At LHW - He avoided the lineal and true LHW champion Darius Michalczewski (another big puncher). Steps up to fight the lineal LHW champion in Joe Calzaghe, loses widely but gets credit for stepping up fighting the best in the division.

At HW - He avoided the true HW champion Lennox Lewis (huge puncher), and ran back down to LHW to avoid his mandatory Vitali Klitschko (big puncher).

If Jones fought the best opposition available to him, we would have learnt a lot more about him.

Roy Jones never beat a single lineal, unified or undisputed champion. Those are facts.

Hearns at WW - beat prime HOF'er Pipino Cuevas, fought a prime Sugar Ray Leonard and was a round away from winning. Gets credit for stepping up and fighting the best in the division.

at JMW - Steps up and beats prime HOF'er Benitez, destroyed Duran, defended his title a few times. - Clearly beat the best fighter in the division in Benitez

At MW - stepped up and fought prime Marvin Hagler who was the undisputed champion, in one of the greatest fights of all time. Lost, but gets credit again for stepping up and fighting the best in the division. Like Jones, manages to win a vacant title at MW (After coming back from 175-160, similar to Jones coming back from HW-LHW).

At SMW - Wins a dodgy decision over James Kinchen for the newly formed WBO title. However, steps up and fights SRL and really beat him, meaning he should have been a unified SMW champion. - Jones has the edge here with a victory over prime James Toney.

At LHW - Beats belt holder Dennis Andries. Then returns and defeats lineal champion, undefeated future HOF'er Virgil Hill who was on a good winning run. This is a greater win and accomplishment than anything Jones did in the LHW division.

 

People are bringing up Cuevas, like he was some super-skillful mega-clever boxer, and not a mediocre boxer with a punch.

 

Hi mate!

How's it going?

I've read your post, and being Roy's no.1 fan, I have to disagree ha!

At 160 Roy was young, and he never dominated the division.

At 168 he schooled Toney who was 26, undefeated, and the favourite going into the fight. We know about his weight problems, but he was widely regarded as the best SMW in the World at the time. The winner of Benn Eubank II was due to face him. Roy was willing to fight Benn, but he didn't want to tie into King, as we've discussed numerous times. There was never any real possibility of Roy ever fighting Eubank, because Chris was happy defending his belt at home on Sky. He had no desire to go to the States for the big fights. He's admitted that on numerous occasions. James Toney in 1994 was better than Benn and Eubank.

Benn had lost against Eubank and Watson, and if Roy had've beaten him, he probably wouldn't have got any credit for it. Roy never seems to get any credit. What do you call dominating a division? Unifying it? He had absolutely no desire whatsoever to Unify the 168 division after he'd easily beaten Toney. Forget Toney's weight problems for a moment. Try and see things from Roy's perspective in 94-95. Why after beating Toney would he chase the likes of Eubank and Collins etc? He'd already beaten the best fighter. But then you say he never dominated the SMW division? No he didn't, but he'd dominated the best fighter, so it wasn't necessary. That's why he moved up to 175 after a few defences. You know he could have Unified at 168 if he'd have really wanted to.

We've discussed DM to death. He had two or three negotiations to go over to The U.S. to fight Roy. Each time the negotiations broke down. Roy didn't avoid him at all. Roy was more than willing to fight him outside of Germany. Nobody in 2001-2002 fought in Germany. The truth is DM was happy defending his one belt in Germany for good money. Why risk it to fight Roy?

Are you telling me that just because DM had the other belt, that Roy didn't dominate the 175 division? Yes we know what happened to DM, and we know he was a good fighter who beat Hill etc, but Roy dominated that division. He collected the other belts that belonged to DM, and DM could have fought Roy to try and get them back, but he didn't.

When he fought Joe, he was two months from his 40th birthday. We've discussed this numerous times. Joe just cashed in, and the fight has no relevance to anything. I'm not getting into the whole Heavy debate again, because it's boring.

You're trying to compare two completely different fighters in Tommy and Roy, and it's impossible for numerous reasons. They were both outstanding fighters, but you can't draw any parallels from their careers. Tommy was at his peak in the early 80's at 147. Roy was at his peak in the mid 90's at 168. Tommy was part of the Fabulous 4, and Roy didn't have great opposition to fight like Tommy had. Roy never had those same opportunites.

You can list all the names that Roy missed, but they wouldn't have been huge fights like Tommy vs SRL etc. Benn, Eubank, Collins etc wouldn't have been huge fights. Roy's era wasn't as strong as Tommy's, but that's not Roy's fault.

I'm not sure why you've made these comparisons?

Again you can't compare both fighters coming down in weight. They were different fighters, in different era's, at different weights.

I could say that out of all the weight divisions Tommy fought at, he only dominated one of the divisions. But that doesn't take away from the fact, that he was one of the greatest fighters of all time.

Also, I'm not sure why you're always trying to discredit Roy?

He was an outstanding fighter who fought and beat good fighters.

Regards, Loudon.

 

Hi mate, I'm good thanks, how are you?

Agreed, neither fighter dominated the MW division. Though I give Tommy huge credit for stepping up and fighting a prime Marvin Hagler, an ATG MW who was dominating the division, and was on a great winning streak.

Jones did record a hugely impressive win over Toney. After that, he defended his title against guys who weren't even top 10 ranked, whilst Benn and Eubank were fighting at a higher level. You can consider Toney better than them, but Toney's accomplishments at SMW are poor as well (we can go over this in more detail if you'd like). Hence, you can argue that Toney was the best fighter in the division at the time, but Benn and Eubank were fighting at the higher level.

The point about Don King, we have been over it and I don't know, neither of us can say for sure what happened either way.

One thing for sure though, beating Benn before he fought G-man would have been impressive. Benn was fighting really well at that time, as shown in his draw against Chris Eubank. Even though I think Roy would have beaten them all, I don't give credit for would of's and could of's if that makes sense.

That's fair enough, so whilst Jones has the impressive win here, he didn't dominate the division.

I haven't mentioned Toney's weight issues at all here.

Indeed, but if you want to get the credit, you have to unify. Also, Benn and Eubank were strong and respected champions, beating them would have been very good wins.

DM was the lineal and true LHW champion, you can't argue with that. He also said he was willing to travel to America, maybe he wasn't being honest, I don't know what happened in negotiations. The fact is this, without defeating DM, there is no way you can claim that Roy dominated the LHW division. He never beat the man and lineal champion, regardless of what happened in negotiations. DM didn't need to fight Roy for them back, in that situation the onus is on Roy to hunt DM down and defeat him, to legitimise his own title reign. (In my opinion, Roy would have beaten DM).

I was giving Roy credit for stepping up and fighting the lineal champion, even though he lost. His age is irrelevant. That being fair, because I gave Tommy credit for stepping up and fighting Leonard and Hagler, even though he lost, I was giving Roy credit even though he lost, because he stepped up to fight the lineal champion and number 1 LHW.

The poster above stated that he though Roy's run was better than Tommy's, I was comparing how they did in the respective divisions they campaigned at.

Indeed, you're right. However, that also works in Roy's favour as well, because if he faced fighters on the level of Hagler, Leonard and Benitez, he may have suffered a loss or two in his prime. Which would mean he wouldn't have this unbeatable aura that he seems to have.

You're right, we have been over this before, and my position remains the same, beating Collins, Benn, DM etc. wouldn't have been like beating SRL, Hagler, Duran. However, it would have been a lot better than some of the guys Roy did beat.

See above.

If it's an excuse for one, it works for the other. That's only fair right?

Agreed, reading my original post you'll see that the only division Tommy dominated was 154. Roy didn't dominate any division.

I often give him credit where it's due as well. Though I personally feel he's somewhat overrated, that's my opinion. Even though I always back up my opinion, I seem to get shot down. Posters like powerpuncher and kmac are a prime example, if they disagree with what you post, they seem intent on trying to drag you down to their troglodyte level. I much prefer debating with someone level headed like yourself.

I agree.

True story, Tommy went to Roy's house in Pensacola to discuss a fight between them. Thankfully that didn't come off, as Roy would have done some serious damage to Tommy at that point

Regards :good

 

Knockout,

Hi mate, I'm good thanks. Thanks for your reply, I really enjoy our debates.

I give Tommy a huge amount of credit for stepping up to fight Marvin. Not many fighters would have been willing to do that, and I know that Tommy would have loved a rematch at some point.

After Toney Roy only fought 4 or 5 times. Merqui Sosa was well respected and that was a good win. Sosa was a hard man, and it was an impressive stoppage. Eric Lucas was a decent fighter. Yes Benn and Eubank were fighting at a higher level. Toney didn't have a great resume at SMW, I read an interview from Toney a few year ago, and he admitted that he'd lost to Tiberi. But I think despite him not having a great SMW resume, I think at the time he was the best fighter in that division.

I think Benn definitely won the rematch with Eubank, and I think a fight between Benn and Toney would have been great. You say it would have been impressive if Roy had've beaten Benn at around 93-94, but I honestly don't think he'd have got any credit for it. I think Don was being greedy, and Roy was very wary of him. You had to respect him for the fights he put together. He had power and influence, and he could make fighters lots of money, but he was not to be trusted. Don knew that Roy was the best fighter fighter in the World in the mid 90's and he wanted a piece of him. But Roy didn't want to be tied to anybody. I think King was the only stumbling block.

I think if Roy had've fought one of the other SMW belt holders before Toney, then he would have been interested in Unifying. But after he'd beaten the best at that weight, I don't think he was motivated to do it. As I've said, King was a major obstacle with his demands, and he would have had to have gone to the U.K. to face Eubank, because Eubank wasn't bothered about going to the States.

I'm not arguing that DM wasn't the lineal Champion. He was unfairly treated and he had a legitmate claim to being the no. 1 in the division. But he watched Roy come and take all of his old belts, and then when he had the opportunity to fight to regain them, he didn't take it. I respect your opinion, but I think the onus was on DM to chase Roy down, with Roy walking around with his old Belts around his waist. Roy would have fought him in the U.S. but he wasn't willing to go to Germany, and DM knew that full well, and I think that's why he stayed there. It was a big risk for DM. He was getting well paid for defending his belt in Germany. Also, like I keep saying, you'd think that the injustice would have made him determined to have fought Roy. I think after DM lost his belts, Roy dominated the division by collecting them all. He wasn't just handed them, he fought and beat good fighters for them.

Maybe Roy would have lost if he'd fought fighters at his weight the calibre of Hagler etc. I don't think it works in his favour at all. I think Roy could have given anybody in history a fight from 160-175 and I think his lack of quality opposition is held against him, especially when ranking him.

I'm not going to get into the weight debate again, but I don't think it was an excuse at all. You could see how tired he was for Tarver, and however many pounds of actual muscle he had to lose, he went from a solid 200 pounds down to 175 for the weigh in before he rehydrated back to 185 or whatever it was. That's a hard 25 pounds in your mid 30's, when you've never done it before. Just because Tommy didn't have the same problems, that doesn't mean that Roy didn't struggle. He was nearly 35 and he'd had 49 fights.

Johnson and Tarver weren't a step up. Roy had beaten fighters that were better than them. Also, people seem to forget that Roy beat Tarver the first time. There could be an argument if Tarver had have knocked him out easy in the first fight, but he didn't. He was fully fit and motivated, and he couldn't beat Roy who was tired and running on fumes for the last few rounds. Also, how can Glen Johnson be a step up?

I'm sure you'll agree that pre Ruiz, Roy wouldn't have had much trouble with Glen. Roy's reflexes had slowed considerably after the Ruiz fight. If Roy beat good/great fighters with relative ease before he lost the weight, but then afterwards, loses to Johnson (who struggled with Woods) then it has to be the weight.

I agree that Tommy dominated the 154 division, but I think you're been harsh on Roy, saying that he didn't dominate the 175 division.

Thanks for the great debate, and although I don't agree with some of your points, I respect your opinions, and it's a real pleasure debating with you mate.

Regards, Loudon.

 

He had four fights at the weight, slipping by the mandatory challenger and probably the most dangerous rival. That is not dominating a division.

Neither of them truly dominated a division, and Benitez is the only one of Tommy's beaten opponents that I would put on par with Hopkins and Toney in quality. Duran was a bit too past it. Hopkins was in his prime, but not quite at his peak. I think both that fight and the coming fights showed that.

 

Same here mate, you really know your boxing

Indeed, that was a great fight for boxing, but a really bad fight for Tommy.

Good points, Toney probably was the best fighter in the division at that time. However, I wouldn't consider him 'the man', as both Benn and Eubank were fighting at a higher level. Toney didn't do much at SMW, which is a shame, as he could have been a real force there (though Jones would always beat him).

I personally think Toney would have handled Benn no problem. Benn is tailor made for Toney in my opinion. Benn's best attribute is his power, with Toney's defence and granite chin, he's not stopping Toney. I see Toney stopping Benn. Toney would have had problems with Eubank though (apparently Chris signed a two fight deal to fight Nunn and Toney, shame those fights didn't come off!).

Do you not think it would have been impressive for Roy to beat Benn at that time?

Maybe you're right about Don King, I can't say for sure either way. However, I do think Roy would have been very cautious against Benn if they fought. He would have respected the Dark Destroyer's aggression, relentlessness and punching power. Roy probably would have won, but he would have been pushed hard and made to work for it.

About Eubank, I'm not sure, he always makes out that he would have fought Jones, and that it was Roy who was apprehensive about facing him. Hard to say who's telling the truth in this situations. I also think Roy would have problems with Eubank, who was very good at timing guys leaping in, like Roy does.

I just cannot agree that you can 'dominate' a division, if you don't face the best guy or next best guy in the division.

Darius did say he was willing to travel to America. Anyways, Roy wasn't a big PPV attraction, he could have made more money if he travelled.

I think it's possible Roy priced himself out again (can't rule this out). Have a look at these interviews - [url]http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-330823.html[/url]

Look at this quote from Roy,

Darius was undefeated, and a serious threat.

Definitely, and so it should be. However, with some of his fans and I've seen it on here, he seems to have this unbeatable aura, and if he suffered a loss or two in his prime then he wouldn't. Though to be fair, he did beat a couple of great fighters, and some good fighters in his career, and looked great doing so. At the time of the Tarver, he was practically undefeated, having won belts from MW-HW, it's bloody impressive from whatever way you look at it.

I'll ask you this, before Barkley, when did we ever see Tommy get stopped by a single punch? When did we see Tommy in the state he was against Kinchen off a single punch? Remember, before the weight loss, Tommy took tremendous punishment from a big puncher in Hagler before going down. After the weight loss, we saw him get stopped by Barkley by one punch, and saw him get rocked and have to hold on from a single punch by James Kinchen.

Roy looked, and said himself he was fine for the Tarver rematch. I'm not saying the weight loss didn't affect Roy, but you have to be fair and allow both fighters the same excuses.

I certainly think Tarver was a step up from anyone Roy had fought since James Toney. He pushed Roy hard in the first fight (which many felt Tarver won) and then beat him in the rematch. Maybe Roy's lack of competition for years affected him when he fought Tarver. Even if you are an A fighter, if you're fighting poor opposition for years, you're going to struggle when you step up.

I think physically, Roy was fine. His issue was, he didn't take Glen seriously, didn't train properly and was low on confidence. Now I've stated my opinion on this, which is that Glen fought the fight of his life, he did everything right that night, didn't allow Roy to use his speed or his usual tricks, his camp really did their homework. Roy's issue of not training properly is his own (see Tyson - Douglas). Shouldn't detract from Glen's win over a still very strong version of Roy Jones. I don't hold it very strongly against Roy (clearly not Roy at his best), but I do think Glen deserves credit which he doesn't get. I agree that Glen would have gotten clowned if he fought Roy years before

Beating DM would have meant he did dominate the division, because he beat just about everyone else impressively. However, without beating the lineal and true LHW champion, I can't agree that he dominated the 175 division.

Thanks for the great debate yourself mate, I really enjoy it. Excellent post by the way, I look forward to your reply.

 

I think the Virgil Hill win can be rated on that level as well.

Don't forget that Tommy also fought prime versions of Hagler and Leonard. If Roy fought guys on this level, he may have picked up losses himself. I think Benitez was a better fighter at that point than Mike Mccallum. So I disagree, what had Mccallum done in the division between 82-84 that earned him a shot at Hearns? Remember, when Mike won the WBA title, Tommy's camp were in deep negotiations with Hagler, and signed to fight Hagler in December 1984, 2 months after Mike won his WBA title. When did Hearns-Mccallum come up before Tommy fought Hagler? You only have to look at the money Tommy made fighting Duran. So I disagree, I think Tommy dominated the 154 division and is the consensus number 1 JMW in history, I'd pick Hearns against anyone who's campaigned at 154.

 

I will explain this as simply as I know how.

Tommy Hearns is an ATG H2H at 147, and at 154. He is not, above either of those weights. He lost certain physical advantages.

Roy Jones Junior is probably the GOAT H2H 168 lb fighter that we have ever seen. I assume this fight would take place at 160. A 160lbs RJJ was rehydrating to a LHW level. Now, at MW Roy was nothing but brilliant, raw unrivaled potential. People throw him into imaginary tournaments with the likes of Hagler, Hopkins and Monzon, and that's fine with me, but there needs to be an understanding that he is there as a wild card.

Now for this fight; we have a Hearns who is more vulnerable, vs a Jones who still makes tactical mistakes.

Jones has almost every conveivable physical advantage, (Chin can be argued here.) while Hearns has more experiance and significant size of his own. It comes down to if you think Hearns can lay a trap for Junior, and land a right hand. It's that simple. If he can, then he has his chance to win by KO.

If Jones's physical abilities allow him to dictate the flow of the fight, then he either UD's Tommy, or stops him late. I lean heavily to the UD, because Jones was no fool, he's not taking the chances he'd need to, in order to stop Hearns.

 

How does Roy win a decision over the superior boxer in Tommy, who has the reach advantage?

 

By using his feet, and not allowing Hearns to dictate behind the jab.

Hearns was not fleet footed, not by any means. At 160, this flaw was even more pronounced. Jones would need to move, and prevent Hearns from setting his feet. Jones was elusive enough to evade the vast majority of Hearns' jab IMO.

Off set Tommy's rythm, and feint your way in close, then invest to the body, come up to the head and move to the side. (differing sides, we're not settling into a pattern) Investing to the body is vital for Jones in this matchup, because if he can take Hearn's base away from him then it's a far more winnable fight.

 

Jones, Jr is a cut above at these weights. He never even came close to getting beat rarely lost a round, handily beat two HOF in Hopkins and Toney. Having seen damn near all of his fights at these two weights, I can't remember a time he was even bothered, let alone dazed.

 

Jones was so damn dominant in the 90's I almost feel kinda sorry for Hearns in this match.

 

Don't think of the Hearns from around 88 who fought Roldan and Barkley.

Go look up Hearns' MW fights against Singletary, Hutchings and Sutherland. Hearns was indeed fleet footed in his prime.

At 168 though, this isn't a contest, Jones wins by KO.