Roy Jones vs Billy Conn (resume and p4p standing)

[IMDAZED]

Nobody. But his resume between 147.1 and 167.9 has far more depth overall.

Good point. However, I think Conn has more depth in his resume because he was more active and fought in an era where nearly everyone was. Not quite sure I'd compare these two using that context but I see a lot of posts doing that. When I look at standings, I rate the quality and number of top-heavy victories first. Losses second. It's hard to rate a Conn because most of what I seen were his highlights. Not too many of the other variety but he had plenty of those as well.

[Kid McCoy]

I can just as easily say that Jones would have looked like Superman against a lot of Conn's opponents. In fact, I would bet on it. And Jones would have fought Michaelczewski in the United States. He did not want to fight Michaelczeski in Germany because he didn't want to get robbed. Considering what happened to him in the Olympics he had every right to feel that way.


The fact remains that Toney was considered by many to be the best fighter in the world at the time. And he is a future hall of fame fighter. Hopkins record before the fight doesn't change the fact that Hopkins went on a 12 year unbeaten streak after that fight and beat some highly rated fighters. He's still going strong at almost 47. Not being of aware of his ability going into the first Jones fight has nothing to do with his actual ability. And the Toney fight with Tiberi doesn't change his standing any more than Conn's controversial win over Yarosz changes his career and standing. Looking at it from that perspective I can say Conn's loss to Louis is overblown. It was one fight and he lost by getting knocked out cold. In spite of that, a lot of people still talk about the fight as if Conn won it. A loss is not more impressive than a clear victory over a high quality fighter no matter how you look at it.




Joe Louis was honest because of Conn's speed, movement, and counter punching. I don't believe it was because of his Conn's power. Even if you believe Conn's power is underrated it doesn't compare to Jones no matter how you look at it.

Michalczewski came to the US to call Jones out at the Hill fight and Jones ignored him. I don't believe Jones had any serious interest in making the fight. He even tried to stop HBO mentioning Dariusz' name. I also doubt Jones would have been robbed in Germany. A lot of Dariusz' fights had American judges and referees and if the Germans really were protecting him they wouldn't have let him lose to Gonzalez when he could have tied 49-0.

Hopkins wasn't the fighter he'd become years later. He was an untested, fairly inexperienced fighter who hadn't yet beaten anyone important and wouldn't have been anywhere near a title in Conn's era. Jones beating Hopkins circa 2000 would have been much more impressive. So one of Conn's Yarosz wins was close. I'd say the 1937 Yarosz was a better and more experienced fighter than the 1993 Hopkins.

The point about Toney was he was always up and down. This is a guy who was capable of losing to a Tiberi or a Thadzi at different stages of his career and he wasn't exactly at the peak of his powers against Jones. Jones beating him is a good win but it doesn't surpass what Conn was doing. Whitaker was p4p #1 when that fight happened. And again why no rematch which would have done more for Roy's legacy than the fights he was taking. I don't see these type of questions about Conn's career. Conn probably would have fought Toney and Hopkins 2 or 3 times apiece.

I don't think Conn was great because of his loss to Louis. It's a string to his bow in that it was a tremendous effort against an all-time great heavyweight but it's his whole body of work that makes him a great. He fought in a tougher era than Jones against better competition, was being thrown in with experienced Hall of Famers and other top contenders as a teenager, mostly beating them and he carried on being matched tough throughout his career. Despite that only three men beat him after the age of 20. One was Louis and the other two were top fighters who he also beat twice.

I didn't say Conn hit harder than Jones, just that he had more pop than he's credited with. Conn didn't just out-box Louis, he was out-fighting him and winning the exchanges. He was hitting hard enough to earn Joe's respect and at one point visibly wobbled him with a hook. Jones' power is unlikely to be a factor in a fight with Conn as Conn took it from harder punchers than Jones.

[joseph5620]

Michalczewski came to the US to call Jones out at the Hill fight and Jones ignored him. I don't believe Jones had any serious interest in making the fight. He even tried to stop HBO mentioning Dariusz' name. I also doubt Jones would have been robbed in Germany. A lot of Dariusz' fights had American judges and referees and if the Germans really were protecting him they wouldn't have let him lose to Gonzalez when he could have tied 49-0.

Hopkins wasn't the fighter he'd become years later. He was an untested, fairly inexperienced fighter who hadn't yet beaten anyone important and wouldn't have been anywhere near a title in Conn's era. Jones beating Hopkins circa 2000 would have been much more impressive. So one of Conn's Yarosz wins was close. I'd say the 1937 Yarosz was a better and more experienced fighter than the 1993 Hopkins.

The point about Toney was he was always up and down. This is a guy who was capable of losing to a Tiberi or a Thadzi at different stages of his career and he wasn't exactly at the peak of his powers against Jones. Jones beating him is a good win but it doesn't surpass what Conn was doing. Whitaker was p4p #1 when that fight happened. And again why no rematch which would have done more for Roy's legacy than the fights he was taking. I don't see these type of questions about Conn's career. Conn probably would have fought Toney and Hopkins 2 or 3 times apiece.

I don't think Conn was great because of his loss to Louis. It's a string to his bow in that it was a tremendous effort against an all-time great heavyweight but it's his whole body of work that makes him a great. He fought in a tougher era than Jones against better competition, was being thrown in with experienced Hall of Famers and other top contenders as a teenager, mostly beating them and he carried on being matched tough throughout his career. Despite that only three men beat him after the age of 20. One was Louis and the other two were top fighters who he also beat twice.

I didn't say Conn hit harder than Jones, just that he had more pop than he's credited with. Conn didn't just out-box Louis, he was out-fighting him and winning the exchanges. He was hitting hard enough to earn Joe's respect and at one point visibly wobbled him with a hook. Jones' power is unlikely to be a factor in a fight with Conn as Conn took it from harder punchers than Jones.

Michaelczewki calling Jones out in the US is not the same as fighting in the US. Michaelczewski never fought outside of Germany and he was NOT willing to fight Jones in the US. You can doubt all you want about Jones being robbed in Germany. It doesn't mean it wouldn't happen. Michaelczeski's stoppage win over Richard Hall was highly questionable. American judges didn't prevent that from happening.


Conn was knocked out cold by Louis so you can't say "he took his punches" Conn was also knocked down and hurt by fighters who might not have punched as hard as Jones. So don't pretend that Jones couldn't hurt Conn.





As far as Toney he was not up and down when Jones fought him. You can continue to try to discredit that win all you want but it doesn't change history. Toney was considered by many to be the best fighter in the world at that time. Whitaker was NOT the unanimous choice for pound for pound d number 1 at that time. When you say "no rematch" you're nitpicking. If you want to go that route I can mention all of Conn's losses with no rematch. And how do you know Hopkins was not the same fighter? He went on an unbeaten streak for 12 years after the Jones fight. Did he miraculously transform after his fight with Jones? I call BS on that and consider it a weak attempt to discredit Jones for beating Hopkins.

[Kid McCoy]

Michaelczewki calling Jones out in the US is not the same as fighting in the US. Michaelczewski never fought outside of Germany and he was NOT willing to fight Jones in the US. You can doubt all you want about Jones being robbed in Germany. It doesn't mean it wouldn't happen. Michaelczeski's stoppage win over Richard Hall was highly questionable. American judges didn't prevent that from happening.


Conn was knocked out cold by Louis so you can't say "he took his punches" Conn was also knocked down and hurt by fighters who might not have punched as hard as Jones. So don't pretend that Jones couldn't hurt Conn.


As far as Toney he was not up and down when Jones fought him. You can continue to try to discredit that win all you want but it doesn't change history. Toney was considered by many to be the best fighter in the world at that time. Whitaker was NOT the unanimous choice for pound for pound d number 1 at that time. When you say "no rematch" you're nitpicking. If you want to go that route I can mention all of Conn's losses with no rematch. And how do you know Hopkins was not the same fighter? He went on an unbeaten streak for 12 years after the Jones fight. Did he miraculously transform after his fight with Jones? I call BS on that and consider it a weak attempt to discredit Jones for beating Hopkins.

Dariusz actually said he was willing to fight Jones in the US. Jones just wasn't interested in fighting him full stop. He even put a up a poll on his website asking 'who shall I fight next?' and when Dariusz was the overwhelming choice he had it pulled. So the Hall fight was controversial. DM gave him a rematch and won again without controversy. Hill and Griffin both went to Germany and lost fair and square. Gonzalez went to Germany and beat Dariusz fair and square when the Germans would have had every reason to protect him.

Conn was knocked out cold by one of the hardest hitting heavyweights ever and it's not like he got KO'd with the first punch. Even at the end he took a lot of flush shots from Louis before going down. That's hardly proof Jones could do the same. He was never stopped by anyone else, unless you count a TKO when he was 17. If Conn took it from Savold, Zale, Rankins, Apostoli and Louis for 13 rounds, there's no reason to think he couldn't take it from Jones. How many punchers did Jones take it from?

Toney was always up and down and he was never the unanimous choice for p4p #1 either. He shouldn't have even been undefeated going into the Jones fight. The Ring didn't have him higher than 3rd. And regardless, one win against Toney doesn't make him better than Conn. Why is asking about rematches nitpicking? These were potentially big (and risky) fights that Jones didn't make and it's not as if his career was overflowing with those. How many tough fights can you say Conn genuinely avoided? If Conn had shared Jones' attitude to rematches he would never have lost to Yarosz, because he wouldn't have fought him again after winning the first one. That's the difference between Jones and someone like Conn. Conn took risks, which cost him a few more losses but his career is more impressive for it.

Do you think Hopkins was the complete article in 1993 and didn't improve in the next ten years? I don't think you'll find many who would agree with that. I don't discredit Jones for beating Hopkins, I just don't see it as a Thrilla in Manila type legacy fight either. It was a good win against a then untested prospect who became a top fighter, which is really what Jones was at the time as well. Jones beating the Hopkins who had beaten Trinidad would have been a much bigger win.

[SCtrojansbaby]

Same ole same ol nothing Roy Jones ever did deserves full credit and everything everybody else does is the greatest thing ever

[JAB5239]

Same ole same ol nothing Roy Jones ever did deserves full credit and everything everybody else does is the greatest thing ever

Stop whining and argue the facts than. You can't because you simply don't know boxing's history, and we've already established that.

[IronDanHamza]

I think it's argubale.

[Scott9945]

Same ole same ol nothing Roy Jones ever did deserves full credit and everything everybody else does is the greatest thing ever

I'm just curious why you don't have Roy Jones on your favorite fighter list, when it is plainly obvious that he's your favorite fighter.

[Greatest1942]

I think it's argubale.

It is very arguable true. However there is no basis for saying Jones would have been robbed iN germany..come on then every fighter going to USA should think they will be robbed in USA. USA is not the world. What about Roy Jones and Steve Collins by the by.

If you wish we can debate, because with you I am quite sure it won't be a mud slinging match.

1) Jones might have the two biggest names. I can live with this.

2)Given the above can you still argue who has the deeper resume. There are some question marks over Jones not taking fights, there aren't any about Conn.

3) Ultimately Conn fought more regularly against the top guys than Jones ever did. He did face most of them at their best too, something you can't say objectively about Jones.

Look at the guys he beat Gus Lesnevich, Fred Apostoli, Fritzie Zivic ,Melio Bettina, Babe Risko, Vince Dundee, Teddy Yarosz ,Lee Savold , Bob Pastor, Tony Zale , his resume is sprinkled with names from middle weights to Light heavy and he has pretty good wins at heavy, not great but good. I doubt Jones will muster this much quality wins in each division or even with all divisions.

The man went 13 rounds with Joe Louis. I doubt Jones chin is as good. In his whole Career Conn was KO'd by Joe Louis and in his third fight, when he was 17...So once when he was really young, and twice by the guy who was voted as the #1 puncher ever 3 KOs in all. it took a combo from Louis to put Conn away I doubt it will take so much for Jones...Tarver and Glen Johnson did it fine. I will not count Jones recent KO's, since he really should not have been there.

As for as power, its Jones but its not like it will be a walkover. Conn KO'd Bob Pastor one of the tougher heavyweights of the era or any era. He mostly fought ranked contenders and its not easy to get a good Ko% against top competition. Don't believe me ? We all know George Foreman's KO%...wanna know his Ko% against top 2 contenders ? its 57%. Just to reiterate the fact that its not so easy to get it against top competition.

I have said this numerous times and I will say this again, I have seen Louis in some serious trouble only thrice, 1st fight against Max, 1st against Conn and against the Rock...It was not the movement but the punches that had Louis in trouble at one spot. It is a tribute to Conn's underrated power that he was able to trouble good to great heavies with his power.

I doubt anyways Jones will last 10 rounds with Louis. Because not only was Conn fast, he was technically a very sound boxer. Its more difficult to catch a fast technically sound boxer, than a faster but not so sound boxer.

I will also say one last thing if WW2 would not happened we might have seen more of Billy...WW2 really destroyed his prime years. I think he would have beat Moore to make a more formidable resume.

To me its Conn...as someone truly said, he has one of the best CV's in boxing. You might match him in the top 3 but its hard to match the overall depth. His total list of wins blows Jones resume out of water IMO.

And lastly since Dundee has not been mentioned and some guys might start shouting who is he, here is his resume won 115 (KO 28) + lost 19 (KO 1)...pretty impressive and might be actually top 5 in Roy's resume.

[Greatest1942]

Same ole same ol nothing Roy Jones ever did deserves full credit and everything everybody else does is the greatest thing ever

Cong**** on getting unbanned.

As for your whining