Who ranks highest in the ATG list? roy jones, hopkins or calzaghe.

Good post. I agree.

 

When jones beat toney

At that time James toney had one of the best resumes in boxing history

It was one of the best undefeated runs ever, and everyone feared toney, he was a beast

One of the greatest wins of all time

Jones is the best at his weight, ever

 

What about the draws toney had? Toney is overrated.

 

bailey,

Joe fought at SMW for 14 years before he cleaned it out. From 93-98 it had some great fighters there. From 2004-2005 Kessler and Lacy made things interesting. But in Joe's peak years from 98-2004, it was one of the weakest divisions in boxing.

He was the man at 175. Again, he was also regarded as the best fighter on the planet.

We've discussed this before many times.

Roy was a nobody from 89-92 while he was with his father. He then started making waves in 92/93, and after he beat Hopkins he moved to 168. So he hasn't got a great resume at 160.

He had two very good wins at 168 against Malinga and Toney, and fights with Benn and Liles proved difficult to make.

He then moved to 175 and did everything apart fight from DM, because neither man would travel.

Life is all about circumstances and opportunities. I already know that your response to this will be that Dariusz was the man at 175, and that Roy was never the man in any weight class like Joe.

So let me ask you this.

What was the biggest accolade, Joe being the man at 168, or Roy being universally recognised as the best fighter in the world?

I do allow for circumstances when analysing wins, as I mentioned. Hagler never fought again after Leonard, but that was a great win as far as I'm concerned.

Fair enough. I respect that. At the time, it wasn't really seen as a great win. But again, Roy was only young with an injured hand, and Hopkins didn't lose again for more than a decade.

In my opinion, Toney wouldn't have beaten Roy at 100%. I don't blame Roy's weight loss for his losses to Tarver and Johnson, but it contributed heavily towards his downfall. Roy was in the best shape that he could be in, both physically and mentally at 35, for the rematch against Tarver. Tarver caught him with a beautiful shot. Tarver shattered his aura of invincibility. He then fought Johnson who in my opinion was in the right place at the right time. There was no way that Roy was anywhere near 100% both physically and mentally for that fight.

With regards to losing weight, there's a huge difference between burning body fat at 26, and burning muscle at almost 35. Going into the fight with Roy, Toney had knocked out Tim Littles in 4 rounds, and had beaten Williams. Years after he'd lost to Roy, he had good wins against Jirov and Holyfield.

Like I say, it was the manner in which he won that was impressive. Nobody else knocked Hill out in 57 fights.

Don't be absurd. A good fighter was knocked out in a single round from a lead uppercut. The Veit win doesn't compare. Griffin beat Toney twice. Who the hell did Mario beat who was better than Toney?

This is where you really let yourself down Bailey.

You never allow for circumstances and you have no perspective whatsoever.

It doesn't matter that Joe beat Hopkins, who'd beaten Tarver.

Look from Roy's perspective. Tarver was a dangerous southpaw, who was unbelievably motivated trying to prove a point to the boxing world. Roy was nearly 35, he'd had 50 fights, and had burnt muscle to go from 196-175 in a short space of time. He was exhausted after 9 rounds. That's why the win was so great, because of the circumstances involved.

Triangle theories don't always work in boxing, because of certain circumstances and the old adage that styles make fights.

I could say to you that Joe scraped by Hopkins, who'd lost twice to Jermain Taylor three years earlier.

There's no way Joe has better wins than Roy's over Tarver and Ruiz. The Lacy win was fantastic. The Kessler win was very good. But when you look at all of the circumstances involved, they can't top Roy's wins.

One final point, just because Joe had beaten Hopkins who'd easily beaten Tarver, that doesn't mean that Joe would definitely have beaten Tarver. I think it was Zod who pointed out that Joe has never faced a top southpaw before.

 

Jones
Hopkins
Calzaghe

 

:good

 

And you always hear about how great Joe was at overcoming adversity... Never fighting a world class southpaw in an entire professional boxing career is a lack of adversity in my opinion.

 

Toney got a gift against Tiberi and the 2nd McCallum fight could have gone either way. He got some help from the judges in the undefeated run.

People bring up Reggie Johnson and the first McCallum fight, but I thought he won both of those. In fact, he probably looked the best in his first fight with MM than he did in any of his fights at 160.

Still an excellent win by Jones.

 

Calzaghe is nothing close to ATG status so it makes no sense for you to put his name alongside a guy he got a gift against when he was 43 years old (BHop), and Roy Jones Jr.

 

Jones and Hopkins.I dont consider Calzaghe ATG.

 

Who was there as a top southpaw. You and Loudon best pm Zod

 

In 2004, he said he wanted big fights and he was happy to go to the U.S. and up to 175.

So it was obvious that Tarver's name was going to be mentioned. But in his autobiography, he states that he was never interested in Tarver because he'd done nothing apart from beat a past his best Roy Jones.

This is why I can't respect Joe as a person. If Roy was past his best in 2004 and 2005, then what stage was he at in 2008?