Roy Jones.

Thats a silly oversimplification. Just because Hall was on steroids doesnt mean he used them to the same effect, the same way, or had the same benefit of genetics and/or pedigree working behind them. Im sure there are plenty of guys out there who are on more steroids than Carl Lewis was and couldnt run faster than him and Im sure there were guys out there on more steroids than Arnold and didnt look better than him. But without Jones enhancements would he have been able to accomplish what he did? Would he have been able to hide that china chin for as long? Nevermind that he spent the majority of his career fighting bums which is also going to make you look better than you really are.

 

It is pretty remarkable, but I think it is the nature of a board of non-athletes posting on athletics. Simply the wrong demographic or too one dimensional. It is similar to a board on the NBA in which Kobe Bryant is crucified as an overrated ball-hog by "fans" while his peers universally rate him as one of the greatest skill sets and talents EVER to lace'm up. In particular, this board really suffers from a lack of any African-American or African-European input. You lose a key segment and level of understanding of real talent vis-a-vis the more pedestrian or less exceptional that are regularly held to a lesser standard.

When speed, quickness, and power combine in athletic endeavors - including combat - the numbers show the quality of these representatives (and consistently above all others when participation rates are (merely) adequate) and the dismissal of so many as mere products of PEDs/steroids tells the tale about some on ESB. Whether it be Ali, Tyson, RJJ, Hopkins, FMJ, etc. - it is often the same posters.

[This is not aimed at you, Klompton2 - as to race - as far as I know of your posts - but I think you are wrong to think that RJJ was merely a product of PEDS and that he was unique in this area. Actually, you made a similar assertion (i.e., accusation) in another thread about a poster about race and thread topics - and I agree with your contention there.]

A reread of Scully's piece posted here ("The Evolution of Roy Jones, Jr.")

http://www.boxing247.com/weblog/news.php?p=3824&more=1

on the early RJJ years (which provides more color of the time beyond what those of us that were able to see in (at that time) glimpses of early RJJ in the trials, nationals, GGs, and/or Olympics) is a fitting place to begin before starting in on his pro career.

After reading Scully's recap, one should know that even in a long declining sport within the US (a topic still being addressed in another thread in the Classic), there were one-offs of great talent and there is really little for RJJ to apologize for. The competitive landscape was lousy relative to the standard of the other burgeoning US sports and so it is no surprise that fighters (and their promoters and management) were especially calculated in their choices and/or decisions to try and elongate their career arcs to minimize risk and maximize return. It is no different than mediocre athletes working to get a single title shot.

Combining that with the natural maturity progression that can differ somewhat in people - covering a range from early physical maturity like in Mike Tyson to late like in an Andre Dirrell - the best matchups are often missed (and often intentionally so) as career arcs differ. You don't often have young pre-prime pre-peak guys like Gerald McClellan choosing to move up from MW and willing for his very first fight at SMW to take a fight - and title fight - in hostile territory against a more mature individual and champion in Nigel Benn.

Whether one looks at middleweight (Hopkins), super middleweight (Ottke & Calzaghe), or light heavyweight (RJJ) these divisions were all TERRIBLE. And particularly so relative to what they would have been with positive participation rates in a growing sport. [Within the US the other sports all gained depth and maintained high quality DUE to high participation rates while boxing languished with minimal athletic adherents.]

Hopkins faced horribly poor middleweight competition within the US. There was so little to chose between in this declining environment within the US he had to face some opponents more than once. You can be certain he was thrilled to survive long enough financially or economically for Tito and Oscar to grow into larger athletes (or at least their ambition grew large enough) so as to give him the chance for more meaningful paydays after the long cold years he had endured through his prime - in this athletically neglected sport.

The super middleweight division was also straight out pedestrian and athletic dross. If Roy had wanted to he could have been even more dominant (I guess that would mean knocking out more guys as he was pretty much unbeatable until his mid-30s) by remaining a division lower and fighting the comparatively unimpressive European "talent" holding the belts at 168. SO, instead of remaining in the horrible 160 or 168 divisions, he went up to at least face larger men in the horrible 175 class. I think that is at least being braver than those who milked second rate belts at home or ate like a bird while running more miles through the hills than Sebastian Coe to make the lower weigh-in. But, no credit is given by some for such ambition/risk.

Obviously this talented fighter was not without fundamentals and his unique abilities were more than evident to those that saw him even as a rail-thin fighter trying to squeeze down to welterweight at one point in the amateurs. Yet, on ESB he is a mere product of PEDs to certain detractors.

It is consistent that Hopkins, Toney, and RJJ receive more flack on ESB than lesser fighters. And the "reasoning" is not a bit surprising. It is fair to note that these fighters have climbed divisions, fought into advanced age, and may even still be all technically "active" here as we approach 2015, during a long decline in US boxing so that this longevity was made possible not merely because of their talent but also - to a very real extent - because of a WEAK competitive landscape in which there were no young talented participants/athletes to chase them into normal retirement.

But, one wonders (outside of and excluding heavyweight as there are no limitations and size can be a factor in a way that it cannot in all other divisions of boxing) where are all the "white" boxers fighting into their 40s in the various weight classes? Surely, RJJ must have more fundamental capabilities then he is given credit - for SOME reason - if he could still be climbing into the ring at 45 years of age - even at a modest or pedestrian level of competition?

The Classic repeatedly demonstrates (from the same few posters) that they are consistently held to a higher standard that sort of indirectly validates their actual standing. If they were such frauds they wouldn't be boxing well past their physical primes far into their 40s against younger opponents.

One would think that the Classic section would have an older demographic that would be FAR FAR more cognizant of the impact of age compared to the population in the General - for example - and factor that aspect into their comparatives and thoughts more often than they do. I can only guess there are far too few ex-athletes posting or some not yet middle-aged.

Yes. He was lightning quick out of the box. It had nothing to do with PEDs. It was apparent from the very beginning of his boxing career.

 

Ridiculous statement..

That's all.

 

I think having an iron chin helps a fighter hang on longer after his quickness and reflexes fade, because they are going to get hit more regularly... Though I don't think Roy's chin was glass at his best, but it was surely never iron..

If Roy had an iron chin, I think he would have lasted longer at the elite level. Not that 35 is a spring chicken anyway.

 

It sounds like you are saying it wasn't the steroids alone that made Roy stand out. A bit of a contradiction to your previous statement.

No one knows, this is all speculation.. No one even knows what steroid Roy took, and the andro story as crazy as it sounds can not be fully proven wrong, and if it was indeed andro, it is proven to not have that big of a difference from all the tests and studies that have been done. I believe it is even prescribed these days to help old men get a hard on.

You are losing me here... Did Roy stand out because his opponents were clean and he had an unfair advantage? Or was it because they were bums?

 

It's so funny when people get so butthurt over certain fighters and try to downplay their accomplishments. It seems like at one time people appreciated the rare talents more. It's funny how people pick apart Mayweather and Pacquiao these days to try and make them look like less than the incredible fighters they are yet see people jump on Amir Kahns nuts after a win. Crazy.

 

Bernard Hopkins, James Toney, Virgil Hill, Mike McCallum and many more just below that level like Jorge Castro and Sugar Boy Malinga.

My definition of "bums" differs from Klompton's.

And I have to say that I'm more than a little surprised and a bit taken aback that an author who should really know better would use that word to describe a long list of fighters who deserve better.

"Bums"??? Really??? Can you help me understand your definition of the term?

 

Interesting article by Scully. Funny I use to be on an AOL boxing site prior to coming here for about 5-6 years and Scully and I use to IM back and forth and he'd tell me about his book, let me read a chapter and 5-6 months later repeat. Then they closed the site down and I came here. That was about 10-12 years ago. Then about 3-4 years ago I managed to chat with Scully again on AOL and asked him to start posting here, which he did for awhile, but like many others they moved on. He's a pretty cool dude and I have nothing but respect for the guy. So thanks for the article, it was a good read.

Jones to me doesn't deserved to be dumped on one bit.

I'm not a boxing expert but I have been following it most of my life, and to me the biggest mistake Jones make in his career was not staying at heavyweight. The body doesn't have too much problem going up in weight when you age, but it plays hell on your body dropping weight when you get older, if it's not fat your dropping.

At his best Jones was probably the most athletic boxer in history (him and Ali) and truth be told he certainly had better fundaments than Ali, BUT Ali could take a punch better.

As for who is and who isn't on steroids, it's a complete waste of time speculating on that. I'm from Canada and I remember Ben Johnson first won gold (Great Canadian) then got his metal stripped (err wasn't he Jamaican?), turns out in the inquiry, everyone was basically taking steroids, he just happened to be the one who got caught.

 

Klompton probably just hates Roy. Maybe Roy beat his fav. Because what Klompton is spewing is pretty much illogical trash

 

Well, I doubt Roy beat Greb, haha.

But I do think that sometimes he rather aggressively tries to tear down anyone who he thinks might threaten Greb's place in the p4p pantheon ... and as some people think peak Roy might be the GOAT, well ...

 

I think that, in addition to age and the mishandled weight loss after Ruiz, the Tarver and Johnson KO's affected him mentally and physically to the point that he couldn't fight his old style anymore. This was really evident in the Calzaghe fight, when he just couldn't or wouldn't pull the trigger. He looked mentally shot. You can't fight that style if you're afraid to pull the trigger.

As for fundamentals, why don't our local "experts" explain what exactly they mean by fundamentals. What specifically is it that they think Jones "didn't learn" and doesn't know how to do? The stupidity of some posters here is simply unbelievable. It's quite obvious that Jones does know the fundamentals but chose to forgo boxing convention during his career because he could. Is that still a good idea when you're mentally and physically shot? Probably not, but that's a separate issue.

It's not a matter of technical skill. He could have fought more cautiously and conservatively in his later bouts, but he still would have lost. Most boxers can't overcome the loss of their physical gifts - once that happens, they become shot. Ray Leonard, for example, was a brilliant technical fighter in his prime, but once his physical gifts started to slip, it wasn't long before he was shot to pieces.

 

Everyone disagreeing with klompton about his statements here, is just too stupid and ignorant, or has an agenda.
I already detailed about Jones' fights, the age, conditions and disadvantages his opponents faced when fighting him, and I did not even counted the roids (which he obviously took) against him or reasoned even 1 single outcome by him using them (despite they did enhance his performance)

 

Following a left hook with a left hook immediately already seems technically very wrong for me, but what do I know?

 

You're talking absolute nonsense. 'China chin' Jones was never even badly hurt before he came back down to 175 from heavyweight and stripped 20 pounds of muscle from his frame.
Was Jones on steroids throughout his amateur career? His hands seemed pretty quick back then, maybe that was down to a syringe too.
Hate the revisionist fans that crawl out to claim that they always knew Jones was a hype job who was protected from tough opposition and dosed up on drugs. The man was awesome for over a decade, and there's never been a glass jawed con man in the history of the sport who could have assembled a record like the GREAT Roy Jones Junior.