Roy Jones Jr's alleged "weak opposition"

[ShoulderRoll]

The athleticism and skill he showed in the ring merits Roy being ranked highly in a historical sense, even if his resume is not anywhere close to being one of the highest ranked.

I would say the same about Ricardo Lopez. Minus the athleticism part.

[IronDanHamza]

The athleticism and skill he showed in the ring merits Roy being ranked highly in a historical sense, even if his resume is not anywhere close to being one of the highest ranked.

I would say the same about Ricardo Lopez. Minus the athleticism part.

Yeah but surely you need resume that's atleast quite good?

You can't compare Roy Jones resume to Lopez'. It's night and day.

[BKM-]

The athleticism and skill he showed in the ring merits Roy being ranked highly in a historical sense, even if his resume is not anywhere close to being one of the highest ranked.

Disagree. For ATG rankings, resume is the most important of all.

Actually, I kind of do agree somewhat but only for fighters who have a stacked resume on top of it, then you can be influenced by talent.

But when a guy has a lacking resume you can't, because you're going on a 'what-if'. Nobody truly knows how good exactly prime Roy Jones was because he didn't face enough ATG's at their bests.

[IronDanHamza]

Disagree. For ATG rankings, resume is the most important of all.

Actually, I kind of do agree somewhat but only for fighters who have a stacked resume on top of it, then you can be influenced by talent.

But when a guy has a lacking resume you can't, because you're going on a 'what-if'. Nobody truly knows how good exactly prime Roy Jones was because he didn't face enough ATG's at their bests.

"No one knows how good he is"

I think that's silly.

If we don't know how good he is how come he obliterated all of these fighters that the other "greats" like Toney and Eubank for example struggled with?

How did he clearly beat Hopkins and dominate Toney?

Out of all the top fighters of the 90's he's the only one to clearly beat Hopkins, only one to dominate Toney and Johnson, the only one to obliterate Sosa, Griffin and Hill.

All of these guys fought all the other top guys but Jones is the only one who can do this to them? Surely that tells us how good he is?

And which prime ATG's should he have fought? He beat one in and Hopkins and another one people argue is in Toney.

[BKM-]

"No one knows how good he is"

I think that's silly.

If we don't know how good he is how come he obliterated all of these fighters that the other "greats" like Toney and Eubank for example struggled with?

They weren't that good, not nearly good enough to rank Roy Jones as highly as some people do(I hear top 15-20 sometimes) on the merit of his skillset.

For instance people say his chin was never caught untill Tarver but the vast majority of his opponents didn't have the ability to test that chin(like McClellan, Benn, Eubank, young Calzagh and others probably would have.)

How did he clearly beat Hopkins and dominate Toney?

I sure wish he would have dominated the peak Hopkins we all know and love to hate, he had many chances for that. Lets not pretend his clear unspectacular UD over green Hopkins was like a win over early 00s Hopkins who wrecked Trinidad.

Out of all the top fighters of the 90's he's the only one to clearly beat Hopkins, only one to dominate Toney and Johnson, the only one to obliterate Sosa, Griffin and Hill.

All of these guys fought all the other top guys but Jones is the only one who can do this to them? Surely that tells us how good he is?

It's not enough at all to rank him as high as some people do. Where do you rank him?

[IronDanHamza]

They weren't that good, not nearly good enough to rank Roy Jones as highly as some people do(I hear top 15-20 sometimes) on the merit of his skillset.

For instance people say his chin was never caught untill Tarver but the vast majority of his opponents didn't have the ability to test that chin(like McClellan, Benn, Eubank, young Calzagh and others probably would have.)



I sure wish he would have dominated the peak Hopkins we all know and love to hate, he had many chances for that. Lets not pretend his clear unspectacular UD over green Hopkins was like a win over early 00s Hopkins who wrecked Trinidad.



It's not enough at all to rank him as high as some people do. Where do you rank him?

Im with you on all that but to say "we don't know how good he is" is ridiculous. It's clear how good he was, his performances show that.

Well as far as Hopkins goes, that was no fault of Roy's why that rematch didn't happen. Neither were Calzaghe, Benn, Eubank or Collins. Eubanks and Calzaghe were never options and Benn and Collins didn't become options until the late 90's. McClellan Roy openly said he wouldn't fight but that fight was never available anyway.

Also none of the above as ATG's other than Hopkins. So which prime ATG's should he have fought?

Also to say "Roy never got his chin tested before Tarver" is also ridiculous. He may have been great at eluding punches but he didn't go 10+ years without getting hit clean by guys who could bang.

Jones dominated Reggie Johnson who beat Collins and dropped and badly hurt Toney.

Jones destroyed Malinga who IMO beat Eubank.

The guys he "should" have fought.

I would probably rank Roy somewhere in the Top 30.

[BKM-]

Im with you on all that but to say "we don't know how good he is" is ridiculous. It's clear how good he was, his performances show that.

Well as far as Hopkins goes, that was no fault of Roy's why that rematch didn't happen. Neither were Calzaghe, Benn, Eubank or Collins. Eubanks and Calzaghe were never options and Benn and Collins didn't become options until the late 90's. McClellan Roy openly said he wouldn't fight but that fight was never available anyway.

Also none of the above as ATG's other than Hopkins. So which prime ATG's should he have fought?

Also to say "Roy never got his chin tested before Tarver" is also ridiculous. He may have been great at eluding punches but he didn't go 10+ years without getting hit clean by guys who could bang.

Jones dominated Reggie Johnson who beat Collins and dropped and badly hurt Toney.

Jones destroyed Malinga who IMO beat Eubank.

The guys he "should" have fought.

I would probably rank Roy somewhere in the Top 30.

No we don't know how good he truly was in his prime, the measure of that is by fighting greats and he fought one ATG in his prime which was Toney, so we know how good Roy was against that one particular style. But to know if he was one of the greatest fighters ever? He would have had to fight several ATG's with several styles.

Roy looked great against the limited opponents he fought but he did not fight the best he could have fought. You say none of it was his fault, but he did not make the extra effort to make those fights either, the most unforgiveable being the rematch against prime Hopkins. That's fine, but it has consequences for one's legacy even if it's not his fault. I don't think Roy fullfilled his potential at all.

[ShoulderRoll]

Yeah but surely you need resume that's atleast quite good?

You can't compare Roy Jones resume to Lopez'. It's night and day.

You're right about that. Although in defense of Lopez he seems to have fought everyone of note in his division. Roy missed a few names in his divisions but in his defense he did move up in weight several times.

In any case my point is that I believe sometimes a guy merits ranking above his resume based on what he displays in the ring. Salvador Sanchez would be another example.

Disagree. For ATG rankings, resume is the most important of all.

Actually, I kind of do agree somewhat but only for fighters who have a stacked resume on top of it, then you can be influenced by talent.

But when a guy has a lacking resume you can't, because you're going on a 'what-if'. Nobody truly knows how good exactly prime Roy Jones was because he didn't face enough ATG's at their bests.

That's a valid belief. A lot of people will be sticklers about ATG rankings being based on resume only and won't care anything at all about the "eye test."

[IronDanHamza]

No we don't know how good he truly was in his prime, the measure of that is by fighting greats and he fought one ATG in his prime which was Toney, so we know how good Roy was against that one particular style. But to know if he was one of the greatest fighters ever? He would have had to fight several ATG's with several styles.

Roy looked great against the limited opponents he fought but he did not fight the best he could have fought. You say none of it was his fault, but he did not make the extra effort to make those fights either, the most unforgiveable being the rematch against prime Hopkins. That's fine, but it has consequences for one's legacy even if it's not his fault. I don't think Roy fullfilled his potential at all.

I will say again that clearly we do know how good he is because he's the only one who's dominating and obliterating the opponents compared to the others.

Again, which prime ATG's was he supposed to fight?

Hopkins priced himself out of the rematch. You can't blame Roy for that.

[robertzimmerman]

No we don't know how good he truly was in his prime, the measure of that is by fighting greats and he fought one ATG in his prime which was Toney, so we know how good Roy was against that one particular style. But to know if he was one of the greatest fighters ever? He would have had to fight several ATG's with several styles.

Roy looked great against the limited opponents he fought but he did not fight the best he could have fought. You say none of it was his fault, but he did not make the extra effort to make those fights either, the most unforgiveable being the rematch against prime Hopkins. That's fine, but it has consequences for one's legacy even if it's not his fault. I don't think Roy fullfilled his potential at all.

Roy made good fighters look like limited opponents.

He did make a lot of effort to fight better fights.

He made efforts to fight Liles, Dariusz, Evander, and Hopkins in a rematch.

Hopkins was offered $6m, but wanted $10m.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sport...es-hopkins.htm