So who can honestly beat a prime RJJ?

this

 

Spinks/Charles/Foster/Moore

Monzon/Hagler

 

Steve collins

 

How?

 

Those who say Hagler, it's possible at 160 but I actually think RJJ is a bit of style nightmare for Hagler. Prime RJJ at 168 is unbeatable

 

You know that an interesting point ... You have to wonder what Hearns TNT of a right hand would do to RJJ`s chin ...

 

I do have to say that absolute peak RJJ at 160, on his best night is a problem for anyone ...His speed was second to none,nobody was even close. And he could crack at 160 ! The big question would be is he resilient enough to handle the likes of Monzon, SRR,Hagler etc etc.

 

Or what Jones' left would do to Hearns' chin. Especially since, with his speed, Jones would likely land first.

I think Jones would struggle to beat the great LHW's like Moore, Foster and Spinks.

 

Why are people mentioning Crusierweights?

Jones wasnt prime at crusierweight

 

You have to confine this to 175 and lower. I think the ATG light heavies would trouble Roy greatly. He didn't face much competition there; it wasn't his fault, but the division was weak and his top opponent wouldn't travel. Griffin genuinely bothered him in the first fight, and Harding took some rounds off him, too.

At 168, I don't think anyone could beat him three out of five.

At 160, I'd give Hagler a chance to do that. Monzon lacked the physical tools, imo. The 1980 version of Hagler had good speed, power, extraordinary chin and workrate, boxing skills, and I think he'd get into Roy's chest and stay there. Roy might beat him via decision, but he'd be panting down the stretch. At 168, Roy would be too big for Marvin.

 

Chris Eubank openly admitted that he never wanted to fight Jones when he was in his prime.

Stop talking nonsense.

 

46-0 can pull off a huge upset!

 

had his chance, didnt take it - hence the 46-0....

 

Nobody beats Jones 9/10. I'd give a few a shot to pull it off on any given night, but I'd never favor them.

 

Its always important to analyse Roy Jones as a PED free fighter and by that i mean judging him as a fighter from the Richard Hall fight onwards where he was then fighting regularly on an even playing field in arguably the weakest 175 era of all time.

Its pretty clear in my eyes that Tarver would better Jones 3/5 and i would also back Glen Johnson to do the same. Calzaghe would perhaps also win 4/5 at 175 and i would give Montel Griffin a 2/5 chance, whilst its a gimme that the likes of spinks would win 5/5 at 175.

If we are talking about a Jones at 160 or 168 then I would back Hagler 4/5, there is absolutely no way Jones could keep a prime Hagler off and when it came to exchanges the difference in punch resistance would be huge with Haglers magnificent ability to thrive in the face of adversity.

I would give peak Gerald McClellan a 3/5 win ratio and I believe a peak McCallum is probably a straight down the middle 50/50 series of fights.