Any Roy Jones fans out there?

[BDeskins]

Well the substance that is out there about picking Jones as beating those certain fighters...well lets see...Jones easily handled James Toney who KO'd Michael Nunn...Jones easily beat Reggie Johnson, who dominated Steve Collins...and Jones destroyed Virgil Hill, who both DM and Jones both beat, but Jones also beat Gonzalez, who won a decision over DM in his hometown. Now typically...this fighter beating that fighter has no bearing, but also considering that those fighters mentioned...such as Toney--Nunn...Johnson--Collins, DM-Hill and Gonzalez...well it is pretty evident that those were the best that those fighters ever faced...arguably the best any ever fought and not only were they beat, but they were beat very decisively...almost as decisively as Jones beat their defeaters...now matching opponents may not be an exact science, but it sure as hell is a lot more proof and evidence to back up arguments compared to the usual empty, no-substance claims of Jones detractors, which is typically...Jones was afraid of this fighter, or he dodged that fighter...well...he beat the best fighters that this and that fighter ever faced and when up against fighters that are much better than those who get mentioned as typical Jones-dodgee’s, so...really!

Now Jones beating Vinny Paz was nothing to brag about, even though no one else ever did to Paz what Jones did, but look at all the actual top rated A level opponents that Jones handled as easily as if they were actually D level fighters, but then again…a typical comment is well they were great, or they turned out to be great later…they just were not great when Jones dominated them…it’s very laughable!!!

[starlingstomp]

Just being pedantic here and not really relating this to how fights with Jones would go, but Johnson did not dominate Collins and i certainly wouldn't say he was the best fighter that Steve had fought.

I like Johnson and he was a fine middleweight, yet after losing to JD Jackson he sunk into the sanderline williams school of going through the motions.Exposing the truly inept Guthrie didn't exactly signal much of a career revival

Dariusz was also washed up when he lost to Gonzalez and had clearly been slowing down for a while.He would never have defeated Roy, but in his prime he was generally a lot better than the terribly slow, hittable plodder he became towards the end of his reign.

[wpink]

Bdeskins. I guess you do buy into the repeatedly disproven equation in boxing that if a beats b, and b beats c,then a can beat C. It is apparent you do. So I just would like to hear how you can explain how Mosly beat DLH since your equation to support Jones as being great allows him to be this way without proving it in the ring versus these fighters.

How does Mosley beat DLH who beat Mayorga, who beat forrest twice who beat Mosley. Hmmmm. So again in your equation Mosley should have beat Forrest. Or in the Ali losing to Frazier, who lost to Forman. In your equation that supports Roy Jones, Ali should have lost to Foreman. You see the problem with equations?

Roy should have fought these fighterss or at least most of them as the other great fighters did. They got inside the ring with the best of there era in their weight class or classes and let it be decided there. Not roy, he simply depended on Equations, or his bragging about what he would have done to these fighters. Many time negotiations did not allow and this is not all Roy's fault, some time Mandatory challengers were in the way. However, how are these viable excuses for Roy and not anyone else. DlH, Leonards, Ali, Mosley, Robinsons, Duran, etc.. found a way to make these fights and thus gained their greatness or ultimately their greatness was impacted inside the ring. Roy left if up to fanz to through equations at us.

Roy was a all time great talent though, that would have been favored in all of these fights. IMO! He just should have fought them, or most of them.

[BDeskins]

>>>Bdeskins. I guess you do buy into the repeatedly disproven equation in boxing that if a beats b, and b beats c,then a can beat C. It is apparent you do.<<<

Can you not understand what you read? I think I made it pretty clear that A beating B mean little, but compared to the nothing to you are trying to bring to the Jones debate...it's at least some evidence that Jones easily, very easily beat the best that those guys had faced.

Now Steve Collins...he has Nigel Benn and Chris Eubank on his resume, but both of those fighters were on their absolute last limbs in boxing whereas when Collins fought Johnson they were pretty much both in their prime and Johnson won very easily...I have the fight, though it's been a few years since I watched it, but Johnson boxed Collins' ears off!


>>>Roy was a all time great talent though, that would have been favored in all of these fights. IMO! He just should have fought them, or most of them.<<<

Well...it's difficult to fight opponents that won't get in the ring with a fighter...as in Jones' case! Instead they make empty challenges to a Jones who is already signed to fight someone else and then after that fight is over you don't hear anything from those guys, they go off a fight opponents that have no chance of winning and then they think that they earned a shot at big money against Jones...very few have...that is until Jones is already signed to fight someone else, then they came back out with the challenges when they knew that there was no way that Jones could actually take a match, unless he went against a contract, which then he would have been stripped of the titles that he earned as well as getting suied.

Also...exactly what did any of those guys do to get a shot a Jones? Did any of them ever fight an eliminator against another top rated opponent...I don't think so...I mean hell...Benn, Collins and Eubank were at the very end of their career when Jones was in their weight class and a fight against those guys...well you guys would be out here just like you do with Toney and Hopkins...Benn, Eubank and Collins would have been very good fighters at one time, but not when Jones destroyed them!

As I said...they made empty challenges when Jones was already signed to fight someone else and then those making the empty claims...well...just look at the opposition that they all fought...sorry, but consistently dominating C and D level opposition does not warrant a shot a the best in the world!

[wpink]

I see your a logical thinker, and a Roy Jones fan. So you bring good debate and discussions to the table. Very rare when dealing with Jones fans. I do disagree however. Manly for 2 reasons.

1. You said what did these fighters do to get a shot at Roy, was there an eliminator bout or whatever. Hmmmm Think about that. What did Roy do to get the belt that he won at heavyweight, where I will quote The Boston Globe artilce titles "Its not a sweet science for Jones" on 9/29/04.

"Yet the more Jones beat up on second-tier fighters, the more his advocates tried to make him out as the next Robinson, Sugar Ray Leonard, or Marvelous Marvin Hagler.

Among his victims were a schoolteacher, a fireman, a policeman, and a sanitation worker. He even did something that hadn't been done in 100 years when, as a former middleweight champion, he moved up to heavyweight and won a form of that title when he beat John Ruiz.

It was a carefully picked opponent who allowed Jones to avoid the true champion, Lennox Lewis, and still get credit for the feat. As skilled as Jones was as a fighter, he was even more skilled as a mass marketer and con man. He could fight, no question, but his opponents were carefully picked."

So in my 1st dispute with your point, who did roy beat at heavyweight to allow him to fight John Ruiz? Or was this chance at Ruiz a once in a lifetime opportunity to take a fight with a heavyweight who was handpicked because of his non abilities, low punch output, been knocked out in 19seconds, had to fight a trilogy with a 40 year old fighter, and a perefect opponent for Roy to make history. I think that ass smart as Roy was would not risk fighting a top heavyweight challenger because Roy knew he would not win.

2nd disagreement IMO latest does not mean the greatest, which many fanz who just got in boxing and see someone who possess skills and flash and a couple of titles, they are automatically anointed as the greatest, a all time great etc. Just because Roy had great skills, and was the best in his era ( he did not fight the best but I will agree on paper he was the best) this does not mean he is an all time great. The word All-Time brings into considereation the Duran's, Robinson's, Ali's, Leonard's, etc.... When you say all time then this means Roy's accomplischments need to measure up favorably or at least equal to other all time greats in areas that we can be as consistent in our measuring of fighters as possible. In some regards Roy is on par with number of titles, skills etc. However, in caliber of fighters he ranks a C at best. IMO that is the number one determining factor of a fighters greatness is the quality of opposition. Because of this, and the fact that Roy simply made sooooo many mistakes and I truly believe at any stage in his career if he had fought a fighter that had the skills as a Duran, that he would have been exposed earlier, and we would not be having this conversation.

One final thing. Roy was Knocked out during training as an amateur. He said so himself after he got kO' by Tarver. Look at the video. Now keep this in mind when we see that his father clearly avoided putting him in the ring with fighters that could expose him, like McClellan who dropped him and beat him as an amateur. Roy even commented that he had to let his father go because he was too protected and "now he will be able to take bigger and better fights". Then Roy may have had a couple of big fighter with Hopkins and Toney, but after 94 after he witnessed the Benn-McCllelan fight, roy said himself this made him much more leary of taking on tough opposition. But he still bragged a big game. That along with how he went out in his 3rd fight with Tarver, when he made no attempt to win the fight and said so himself twice. Once at the end of the fight, saying he was happy to end the fight on his feet. Wow, then later saying he purposely lost the fight to prevent his father from training a winner. Wow.

That about sumz it up. Roy is not a all time great, he simply was a all time great talent that should have fought all the best fighers during his day.

[BDeskins]

>>>So in my 1st dispute with your point, who did roy beat at heavyweight to allow him to fight John Ruiz?<<<

So tell me who did the other supposed top heavyweights beat to get a shot above Jones?

>>>Roy is not a all time great, he simply was a all time great talent that should have fought all the best fighers during his day.<<<

That makes about as much sense as the typical Jones comments...and all-time great talent, but not a great fighter...LOL!!! How much would you be willing to put on the line for this bet: When it comes time Jones will be a first ballot, unanimous voted Hall of Famer for every HOF that he is eligble for, which I do not know if you are aware, but a fighter typically has to be an all-time great for that to happen, with a couple of exception. I'd put a $1000 on it...would you?


>>>Among his victims were a schoolteacher, a fireman, a policeman, and a sanitation worker. He even did something that hadn't been done in 100 years when, as a former middleweight champion, he moved up to heavyweight and won a form of that title when he beat John Ruiz.<<<

Gee...like that has never been done before! Why not instead of babbling out occupations, that don't mean shit, try to point out the ranking of those fighters? Not the ABC rankings, but where they were ranked by orgs like The Ring, IBD and so on? Hell there have been all-time great champions to hold the exact same occupations you named...does it make them any lesser a fighter...I don't think so...but I know...it sounds good to Jones-haters to name what they do out of the ring instead of what they did in it!!!


That's about all the time that I am going to waste with you...it's clear you cannot judge Jones for what he did, and instead fault him for what he didn't, but if you were to be honest then you should fault every fighter that way as well...fault them for what they didn't do...makes a lot of sense. I guess due to a tremendous disliking for the man that you refuse to see what he actually accomplished in the ring, which no matter what you, or any other Jones-hater might try to say...it's in the books, and for the record...how many non-great fighters have ever won belts at 160, 168, 175 and heavyweight? Hmmmm...the only one close is Bob Fitzsimmons...but I guess he was just an all-time great talent, but not a great fighter...right?

[wpink]

Bdeskinis, It funny that you continue to try to beat a dead horse and ramble on about irrelevant information. Hall of fame and All-time great to me mean different things. Maybe not to you. Anyone who says roy does not belong in the hall of fame is smoking. I am not arguing that point. However, your attempting to place Roy up there with fighters who did one thing that roy didn't do. You are trying your hardest to avoid and switch the conversation and debate from, and that is Roy's level of competition.

Was it all Roy's fault or not, really doesnt matter much, as the issue is who did Roy face inside the ring that was great, period. Some fighters have great fighters and avoid them, some fighters are not lucky enough to have the chance to prove just how great they are because there was no one at their preak that in the opinions (and that is simply what this is, opinions) of most of the public, boxing fans experts or whatever you want to call them, no one great to challenge them. Thus fighters like Marciano, Larry Holmes, etc may have been greater than what we know or rate them, but they did not have the resume of Ali. Thus in the eyes of many Ali earned greatness because he GOT IN THE RING WITH OTHER TOP FIGHTERS AND BEAT THEM. Unlke Roy, who has two things against him. He talked a big game and for reasons that range from negotiations broke down, to mandatory challnger issues, to not traveling to Germany etc.. Roy did not fight many of the best fighters during his era. Was it his fault, that again is irrelevant, the issue is Roy did not fight them, and thus to simply say he is an all time great treats him differently than anyother All time great in the eyes of many, as they earned it in the ring. What you say about ali, if he didn't fight Foreman, or Frazier. We would not be having a discussion about well Ali couldnt sign the contract or travel to face them,,etc. Ali made the fights happen!! (Notice I did not say hall of famer as hundreds are hall of famers, but IMO All Time great is reserved for the best of the best). Hell Ali could said he already proved greatness by beating Liston, then old Patterson (equivalent of McCallum or Hill on Roy's resume at that stage in their careers in fact probable better). Ali could have simply fought maybe frazier and call it a day, but he went on to beat Foreman,Shavers, etc. Would Roy have made these fights. HMmm if he is an all time great, you would not have think about the answer, we would know from what he did that the answer would be yes, as all time great simply fights the best. I ask you would Roy have made these fights?

Secondly, what seperates the Marciano's and Holmes's from Roy is that they faced everyone in their era. So while they are ranked below Ali IMO, because of a couple of things, one being that ali beat better opposition. They both are not guilty of the Roy Jones issue, and that is there are not fighters in their era that they ducked, avoided, negotiated out of, used the mandatory challenger excuse, waited for a opportune time that never existed, etc. They simply fought the best fighters out there, That placed them above Roy IMO.

Oh finally "Among his victims were a schoolteacher, a fireman, a policeman, and a sanitation worker. He even did something that hadn't been done in 100 years when, as a former middleweight champion, he moved up to heavyweight and won a form of that title when he beat John Ruiz". This quote I simply quoted from a respected boxing source, however it is a very very very common expression echoed when the name Roy Jones is mentioned. I ask if you ever heard of the RoyCott. If not, look it up, as it was a movement growing in boxing by fighters, trainers, expertes, media etc..people the routinely pay their hard earned money so see champions fight the best, and they organized a movement and was gaining steam. This movment called on HBO to stop showing Roys fights versus the c level fighters, and they were not going to go to his fights versus these fighters anymore. Now how much steam if gathered, I dont know, but it is funny that a Broadcasting company (HBO) that he worked on, mentioned this as happening the sport of boxing while roy had a fight.

The point is, roy contiously fought these low level of fighters since 1994, and that is not what all time greats are made of. Maybe hall of famers, but not all time greats. Hell we are ridiculing Mayweather for his resume, and he is fighting fighters much better than Roy did and he is only 29. Yes other fighters do have a list of bumz, even all time greats, but Roy only has 2 top teir fighters that were in there peak years to point to. So if that group of fighters quoted before is the jest of your resume, then yes it is fair to point to it, and question it. The two top level fighters roy fought was in 1994. What was he doing since? Maybe gaining alphabet titles and challenging a all time weak heavyweight as means to sneak in and gain a heavyweight title versus fighting the Lennox Lewis who was the universally recognized true heavyweight champion, is impressive to some, but beating ruiz does not anoint Roy as THE heavy weight champion of the world. Lennox was. OH before I forget, James Toney moved up from middleweight and beat Ruiz too. Wasnt Ruiz ko'd in a record 19 seconds by Tua. Wow and to point to Ruiz as a reason to call Roy great. Again are we focusing on the quality of Roy's opposition? Are we, or as Roy fanz often do, they try to switch the focus to something irrelevant.

Sorry my friend, but Roy is not unlike the other fighters out there that have WBA,WBC,IBF etc...restriction that calls fo rmandatory fights versus who they pick. However, maybe roy should have called DLH, Mayweather, Mosley, Leonard, Ali, Robinson, etc..and asked them how they had these same restrictions but managed to ink names versus other greats while they were in their peak years (not McCallum at 40 or Hill at that stage of his career).

No I am not fauliting roy for what he didnt do, but unlike you I am not giving him credit for what he didnt do either. To sum it up, the proof is in the pudding, and roy didnt show us the pudding. Not jello-brand anyway, maybe some off lable type , but not what true all time great are made of and have been evaluated for years before we were born. Why does Roy deserve a pass.