Could Roy Jones have taken the beating that Archie Moore recieved from Yvon Durelle in their CLASSIC Lt Heavy title fight up in Montreal in December of 1958....and come back with a KO win as Archie did???
Roy Jones was never a big light heavy. His speed allowed him to compete in a division he didnt belong in. He wasnt the type of fighter that took beatings, he always had the advantage over all his opponents at his best.
Roy was never in a war and he also never beat a unified, undisputed, or linear champion in his whole career. A fighter like Archie Moore would chew Glass Jaw Roy up and spit him out.
HMM I dont know about that. Jones beat some pretty good fighters when he unified the LH titles. Not so sure anyone in the history of the sport would be able to defeat the best Jones Jr. He was scary fast. Griffen had him a little confused, but he was a slick counter puncher, and Jones figured him out. I dont think Roy had problems with any fighter that took the lead. I always felt the only way to beat Jones at his best, was to time him coming in, so basically try and pick up ony any small rythem Jones was going through, and try and throw something that would catch him on one of those rhythems. I take pride in telling Lou Del Valle this in the gym, and it worked, he dropped him like a sack of rocks, although he will never give me credit for it.
Moore was the greatest sharpshooter in history in his prime. He would time roy jones eventually late in the fight and the first straight right hand that lands, jones is out cold before he hits the canvas. 1952 Archie Moore vs 1997 Roy Jones
Jones wouldn't have even taken a shot from Durrell and would have beaten him in a 1sided drubbing. He'd make Moore look slow and old too Moore's chin wasn't that great or durable itself being stopped on many occasions, including KO losses to WWs and journeymen
Maybe for a few of the early rounds he'd make both Archie and Yvon look slow and old, but Roy never faced anyone as tough as either fighter, with the exception of Glen Johnson. I'd bet on Yvon Durelle surviving Jones' early speed and catching him with a few solid right hands. If Yvon does, he has Jones in big trouble. If Glen Johnson and Tarver could beat Jones convincingly, certainly a tough, rugged fighter like Durelle could handle Jones Archie Moore would definitely take some shots against Jones and might be overwelmed by his speed early in the fight. However, I'd bet on the Old Mongoose to figure Jones out as the rounds go on, closing the early gap in the scoring and stopping Jones near the 10th or 11th round. Archie knew how to set up the perfect counter and knockout punch. Durelle himself said he never fought anyone with as much skill as Archie Moore who was well into this 30's when they fought. Imagine a prime Archie Moore in his 20's, who almost every light heavyweight refused to give a title shot, probably for obvious reasons. Archie was a deadly boxer in his prime years and there's a reason why he's called the "Old Mongoose." The man knew how to attack and counter with precision, baiting and setting up his opponent before finishing them. Who else in the history of boxing put more emphasis on placing shots for maximum affect? Not Roy Jones.
Toney and Hopkins weren't as tough as Durrelle who was ko'd 9 times and Moore who was ko'd 7 times? Your taking Jones 2worse performances and taking Moore/Durrells best performance. How about I take the Moore who was ko'd in 1 by a journeyman and compare him to the Jones who ko'd Griffin in 1? Jones may well stop Moore early, you assume Moore is more durable, but hes been ko'd 9times, including 1st round losses. Moore has been outboxed and dominated by WWs, struggled with fast slick fighters, the best black fighters he faced came out on top of him, Yet he's going to beat a once in a lifetime phenomenon like Jones? The most similar opponent to Roy Jones either Moore or Durrelle faced was probably Floyd Patterson. Durelle was schooled by a 170lb teenage Patterson then stopped in 5 by a more mature Patterson, Moore was outsped, schooled and ko'd by a more mature Patterson Lets look at Moore's best opponents excluding Ali/Marciano: Patterson - lost dominated ko'd Burley - lost dominated Charles - lost 3 times (1 by ko) Johnson - won the series 4-1 Booker - lost ko'd Williams - 1-1 Marshall - 2-0 Wade - lost Bivins - 4-1 A few things are clear whenever he's faced elite faster slicker sound defensive opponents he's struggled and usually lost. His best results are all against slower opponents (ie Bivins/Marshall/Maxim) and some fast opponents just dominated Archie
Moore is alot more durable look at all his KOs most appeared way way after his prime and you have to remember Moore was fighting at the top level until after he was 40 and after 100+ fights, Roy jones is late 30s with 50 odd fights and hes nowhere near the top level. Moore was out sped and KOd by Patterson but he was in no way schooled Archie already knew so much. also he was 40 at the time so this is comparable to RJJs schoolling to Calzaghe and Patterson is a much better fighter than Joe. Patterson - lost dominated ko'd - when he was 40 Burley - lost dominated - a loss to an ATG but at MW but Moores best work was at LHW Charles - lost 3 times (1 by ko) - a consensus top 2 at the weight one of the greatest ever LHW Johnson - won the series 4-1 - won it 4-1 thats good Booker - lost ko'd - i think you will find it was a draw again at MW not Moores best weight Williams - 1-1 - good record against a good fighter 1-1 same as what Griffin and RJJ are at Marshall - 2-0 - he won it Wade - lost - again at MW early in his career Bivins - 4-1 - 4-1 against a good fighter tahts a great achievemnt
The point is at no point was Moore dominating the elite, Jones did dominate the elite. Moore also throughout his career had problems with the faster slicker opponent he faced. Moore has better longevity than Jones ofcourse but so does Hopkins and we saw what happened when Jones and Hopkins met in their primes. But when is Moore's prime when he is supposed to beat Jones? Or when did Moore truly dominate the best of the best of his own era for that matter? Late 20s he was getting beat by WWs/LWs at MW, dominated by Burley and Booker, in his early 30s loses 3-0 to Charles and gets ko'd in 1 by a journeyman, in his mid 30s he goes on a very good running streak against lesser contenders than he fought earlier in his career (they certainly weren't as good as the black murderers row) with a few losses but dominated for the main part. In his late 30s and 40s he losses to Marciano and Patterson. We also have to ask, when is Moore's prime. Was it his late 20s when he was coming second best to the murderers row, was it his early 30s when he lost 3fights to Charles and got ko'd by a journeyman, or was it in his mid-30s when his opposition dropped off? Against the very best Moore doesn't quite cut it, especially against faster slicker opponents. A prime Jones dominates any version, a past prime version who's slowed and doesnt throw punches anymore probably gets beaten up. Even a 40yo Jones beats Durrell though.
Hopkins was pre prime whe he met Jones JR. Ok moore did not have a great winning record and that at the top level but look at who he fought he mixed in a far higher class than jones. Jones might have dominated his era but Moores era was tougher and had more competition than Joneses. Moores prime for me was his early 30s at LHW where he had alot of great wins but he did lose 3-0 to Charles but Charles is regarded by many including me the GOAT at LHW. Ok he also lost in 1 round to a journyman and it is a bad result but going by the law of averages having that many wins he can afford 1 blemish on his record his wins make up for his losses. His opponents in his late thirties were as good as many fighters Jones fought in his title reign at LHW. Moore does cut it against the best the wins on his resume are as good if not better than Jones name, give a list of 5 opponent sthat jones beat who were better than Bivins, Marshall, Johnson, Williams and Maxim.
Moore wasn't stopped for the first time until he'd had 70 fights, Roy couldn't make it passed 50 without being one-punch KTFO twice. In fact, Roy was stopped as many times in 50 fights as Moore was in twice that many - and that's with Moore fighting till roughly the same age and against a higher and more consistent level of opposition. Roy looks fragile as hell compared to Moore.
Is "dominating the elite" a requirement to be better than Roy? How many fighters that Roy lost to had themselves been dominant against other elite fighters? Hopkins and Roy never met in their primes. Hopkins' two fights with Segundo Mercado very plainly illustrate his progression into his prime. His competition didn't "drop off," he beat Harold Johnson and Jimmy Bivins multiple times each in that time, he thrice whupped Joey Maxim (world's top rated light-heavyweight), KO'd Bobo Olson (undisputed MW champ), and beat Nino Valdez (#1 heavyweight contender), not to mention a few other good contenders along the way (ie: Bob Satterfield, Billy Smith, Bob Baker). How is that a "drop off"?? Harold Johnson was fast and slick, and Moore cut it quite well against him.
