To those who say "Jones should've fought Eubank/Benn/Collins"...

I don't think Eubank wanted money, he wanted respect. He had nothing to lose.

A Eubank fight in England was still the biggest fight for Jones Jr, and most dangerous proposition. Far more dangerous than McCallum dug from the grave or past-it, jab-only Virgil Hill.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PydXSPyUvvE[/ame]

from 9:25 in

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVAmaBv1aQI[/ame]

0:37

 

HUGE DUCK FROM PISSY POPKINS


1 - Why did you not answer all my questions?

2 - why do you think ward was justified to be ranked p4p as number 6 just for beating kessler (a fighter you have never rated)

3 - where do you now rate ward in your p4p list?

4 - why does ward go down on your list after beating both abrahams and bika, how can ward fight better comp than that when he is in the tournament?

5 - where do you now rank froch p4p in your list?

6 - glen johnsons only half decent win at super-middleweight is v alan green. johnson has losses at supermid to kinawuka, sosa, ottke, branco, sheika, and vanderpool, so why does this win justify you moving froch up the p4p rankings?

7 - both ward and froch beat abraham convincingly, there only other fights were victories over bika (ward) and johnson (froch). who do you think has the better supermiddleweight resume in bika and johnson?







ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS 1 TO 7 AND DO NOT DUCK ANY THIS TIME










:smoke:smoke:smoke:smoke:smoke

 

Pac Hatton

 

I never understood the "well, one of the guys lost before the matchup could be made so there was no point in them fighting each other" argument. That makes a ton of the greatest fights ever moot.

Why does it matter of Eubank or Benn lost their titles as far as fighting Roy Jones? Does that make the fights unmarketable? Were arenas suddenly half-empty when those guys fought once they were no longer undefeated?

The timeline mentioned in the original post is built upon the premise that there was no use making the matchups unless everyone involved was a sitting champion. I reject that outright. Sometimes a guy getting beat and losing his "the man" status is what opens to doors to make a great match.

 

Can't go along with that bud!

 

At light-heavy I think Eubank would've been perfect

 

The scorecard of judge Paul Thomas was interesting...

1- Calzaghe (10-8 )
2- Even
3- Eubank
4- Calzaghe
5- Eubank
6- Calzaghe
7- Eubank
8- Eubank
(even at this point)
9- Calzaghe
10- Calzaghe (10-8 )
11- Calzaghe
12- Calzaghe

 

that's a strange one.

isn't this whole thread saying that roy didn't duck a load of guys cos they lost their titles & rjj didn't need to fight a former champion coming off a loss cos they wouldn't be relevent or make his resume better.

but hill was a former champion coming off a loss when rjj faced him. & roy thought that was ok.

funny how no-ones brought that up.

until now.