Send in a fighter to beat (destroy) RJJ

[DeeMoney]

How did Glen Johnson, and Antonio Tarver do it if Roy was so invincible.

Darn right, thats why we recognize that Jake Paul is clearly a greater fighter than Mike Tyson....he beat him head to head.

[BKM-]

For God's sake man, Roy was well shot for both. It happened fast with Roy. Once shot, he was all the way shot.

Roy got shot by Tarver.

And he never recovered. Johnson was feasting on Tarver's left overs, but Antonio was a bad style matchup for Jones at any point in his career.

At that weight his chin was in a lot more danger. He knew it and fought like it even in their first fight. He had trouble with powerful southpaws who could put pressure on him.

I think prime Calzaghe also gives him fits.

Roy was good but a lot of it was flash with no substance. He just didn't fight a lot of great fighters. And he fought for a long time in an era filled with very good dangerous fighters. A peak(instead of the green) Hopkins, McClellan, Benn, Eubank, prime Calzaghe, Michalszewski etc.

I know I know, it's not all his fault those fights never happened but the fact of the matter is he never fought them and he fought a lot of lower class opponents instead.

Resume will always be the most important factor.

[BKM-]

Darn right, thats why we recognize that Jake Paul is clearly a greater fighter than Mike Tyson....he beat him head to head.

You mention Tyson. Him and Roy's mythical legacies are similar.

All of their losses were past their primes so they don't count, and even though they fought in very strong boxing era's it was never their fault that a ton of great matchups never happened.

Nothing but excuses and what-ifs. The most nauseating type of boxing fandom.

[DeeMoney]

You mention Tyson. Him and Roy's mythical legacies are similar.

All of their losses were past their primes so they don't count, and even though they fought in very strong boxing era's it was never their fault that a ton of great matchups never happened.

Nothing but excuses and what-ifs. The most nauseating type of boxing fandom.

There are many good and great fighters who were undefeated in their primes. Thats why you have to both evaluate who they beat, when they beat them (ie did they just pick off past prime big names), and how they bear them (try and watch the film).

Same goes for the many good and great fighters who have losses in their primes.

[BKM-]

There are many good and great fighters who were undefeated in their primes. Thats why you have to both evaluate who they beat, when they beat them (ie did they just pick off past prime big names), and how they bear them (try and watch the film).

Same goes for the many good and great fighters who have losses in their primes.

A lot of great fighters with several losses are held in higher regard than those two. It's because they fought everyone. They won most and lost some. That's better than barely fighting any of them while winning most and losing very few(Prime Tyson lost and Prime Roy lost in my book too. He wasn't shot against Tarver, Antonio shot him with a left hand.)

[JAB5239]

- - After Roy hung on collecting needless paydays while circling the drain, the usual suspects forget Roy's unworldly speed of hand and foot along with a greatly unrated punch. Roy had a tremendous boxing IQ also. Charles also hung around too long, but Tunney retired incredibly young Knowing that Dempsey actually KOed him in their rematch, so gets a pass on his prime rating.

Lol, you're such a troll. Tunney stated he could have gotten up sooner had he wanted, and still beat the count irregardless. The man was NEVER KOed. The only man to whoop Tunney, Dempsey wanted no part of. Just the facts! Yer welcome!

[DeeMoney]

A lot of great fighters with several losses are held in higher regard than those two. It's because they fought everyone. They won most and lost some. That's better than barely fighting any of them while winning most and losing very few(Prime Tyson lost and Prime Roy lost in my book too. He wasn't shot against Tarver, Antonio shot him with a left hand.)

Roy was on the wrong side of 35 when he first lost to Tarver, no way he was still in his athletic prime. And for someone whose success was so heavily based on athleticism, if he wasn't in his athletic prime, then he wasn't in his prime. Heck, we has past his peak before he moved up to heavyweight, whether that means 'shot', I guess its just a matter of semantics.

That doesn't mean you can judge him as being less for not fighting those you wish he fought while in his prime. Most everyone uses different metrics and measurements when evaluating.

[BKM-]

Roy was on the wrong side of 35 when he first lost to Tarver, no way he was still in his athletic prime. And for someone whose success was so heavily based on athleticism, if he wasn't in his athletic prime, then he wasn't in his prime. Heck, we has past his peak before he moved up to heavyweight, whether that means 'shot', I guess its just a matter of semantics.

That doesn't mean you can judge him as being less for not fighting those you wish he fought while in his prime. Most everyone uses different metrics and measurements when evaluating.

I saw him get dropped with bambi legs before he was 35 as well, that weak chin would always pose a threat and to me it's no coincidence that he fought in a strong era filled with powerful punchers and he hardly fought any of them.

Tarver would find that chin no matter what version you want to pick, he was a big guy and relentless. Roy was actually looking faster and more explosive in the second fight than he did in their first fight, untill he got timed and put out. It wasn't a lack of athleticsm that cost him that fight.

[DeeMoney]

I saw him get dropped with bambi legs before he was 35 as well, that weak chin would always pose a threat and to me it's no coincidence that he fought in a strong era filled with powerful punchers and he hardly fought any of them.

Tarver would find that chin no matter what version you want to pick, he was a big guy and relentless. Roy was actually looking faster and more explosive in the second fight than he did in their first fight, untill he got timed and put out. It wasn't a lack of athleticsm that cost him that fight.

Not writing he had a great chin, writing he was no longer in his prime. If you want to argue 35 year old, RJJ was still prime, then we'll just have to disagree.

[Anomalocaris]

Darn right, thats why we recognize that Jake Paul is clearly a greater fighter than Mike Tyson....he beat him head to head.

Jake Paul is the greatest fighter in history.

He makes Langford, Fitz, Gans, Greb, Pep and all the rest look like slow, clumsy, unskilled bums.

He could beat prime Louis, Liston, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Holyfield, Lewis, the brothers, Fury and Usyk on the same night.