Was Roy Jones overated ??

Tyson`s combo`s were better and Roy`s jab was useless in his first bout v Griffin.

 

Benn could be outboxed quite easily, when Benn came into his own was when fighters stood in front of him, he struggled with Sanderline Williams too, Benn was just tough, with fast powerful hands, nothing more.

 

You're a bit obsessed with Tyson aren't you? And Roy's jab was always quite useless. I don't know who you think you're arguing with about that Roy wasn't a very fundamentally sound fighter. It's about as controversial statement as saying that Tyson wasn't a very tall HW.

 

Benn stopped a lot of people. I'm sure over the course of 2 complete fights he checked out his durability somewhat.

 

Eubank could punch as well and Malinga went the distance with him also.

 

There's another example. Lets can Jones for taking 6 rounds to get him out of there tho lolol

 

Hmmm, Malinga was immediately after the Watson incident. Eubank was never the same fighter but yeah, he had a vicious short uppercut when on his game.

Roy would've destroyed Eubank, Benn, Collins and I suspect Calzaghe in his prime. I know that there's a section of fans that say he should have faced them but meh, a little bit disingenuous, other than Calzaghe's speed and style, which I would back prime Roy to deal with, I don't see what they show him that Toney couldn't.

 

Eubank lost to Collins shortly after Roy had moved up, so I can't see any "should" there even though I think a match-up between them would have been interesting, seeing how Eubank was a tricky counterpuncher in his own right. The window for Benn was longer, and that would have been fun fight too, but a meet with Collins would have satisfied any "should" for me, even though I think that would have been the least interesting match-up of the three.

A unification with Malinga after Benn had lost to him wouldn't have told us much, seeing how Roy already had shown the gulf of class between the two of them.

And can't see any good reason why Roy should have moved back down to face Calzaghe.

 

I think Roy Jones Jr was such a phenomenal athlete, who exhibited his natural physical talents of speed and reflexes, on cue and on many occasions with such ease, that he was always going to generate exhilaration amongst the boxing public and media. It is easy to see why he was considered unique and, as such, garnered a lot of attention on what was a clear path, charted skyward.

I was certainly on board, at the beginning and, given that he was strolling through his opponents (save maybe Hopkins), it's no surprise he achieved the kind of rating he did. After Toney, it was difficult to not rate him very highly and I think it was only Pernell Whitaker, who was rated above him, pound-for-pound, by then.

However, my own interest tailed off a little (not entirely), not long after the Toney bout; probably around the Vinny Pazienza fight. It's also here that I felt the 'RJJ story' that was being written around and along with him, courtesy of the media, began to look a bit ridiculous. The press coverage of Jones Jr/Paz was just a bit over the the top, for mine.

There was a lot to lead people to believe that RJJ was just an 'Act' that needed selling, no matter the dance partner. For whatever reason, there were several big contests out there that didn't come off. In rating Jones, historically, the concern shouldn't be why they didn't happen; just that they didn't happen.

Nevertheless, Jones Jr just kept on winning and the sliver-lining that comes with not fighting what are perceived as the bigger challenges out there, is that it leaves matters unresolved and the door open to pure speculation. With RJJ's results and the performances he put in behind them, people were always more likely to lean towards the 'He would have won anyway' position.

Overall, I don't think Roy Jones Jr was overrated, at the time. Although, I can appreciate why there were some dissenters, who felt he was.

In retrospect, I think his placement, in most of the lists I've seen, seems reasonable. Personally, seeing from the beginning that he was such a uniquely talented athlete, I have to admit to getting a little bored with the foregone conclusions against, in the main, mediocre opposition. Like the repeat performances of any 'Act', one needs to uplift their material now and then but, in my opinion, Jones didn't do that often enough, when the possibilities were there for him to do so.

 

Can't argue with a single word there.

Moreso, Calzaghe going up than Roy going down probably. Meh, no real need for them to make the fight but if people throw up Benn, Eubank, Collins etc. then you might as well throw Calzaghe in the mix to sweep the best of the UK and Irish boxers.

I'm sorry, I just don't think the UK boxers were of the same class as McCallum, Hop, Toney and Roy and I loved watching Benn and Eubank on ITV growing up, but I really don't see how any of them make it competitive with prime Roy.

 

Eubank and Benn were world class in terms of charisma, and together with Watson they gave us some great fights (with one very tragic ending, though), but as you say they weren't really among the very best fighters of that generation. They were on the level of, say, Johnson and Hill, but a level below the likes of Nunn, Kalambay, McCallum, Toney and Hopkins, and another level below Jones.

 

If nothing else I appreciate Roy for the Vinny Pazienza fight. That needed to happen. Jones tortured him just enough. It was smooth.