Jones vs Brannon

[billeau2]

I would just like to say the michlewski fight and hopkins rematch were not going to happen, and it wasnt roy's fault..

hopkins priced himself out, and michlewski was never leaving germany, so i dont really hold that against roy..

And after Sven Ottke who in their right mind would fight in Germany?

[robertzimmerman]

Sugar Adam Ali,

yeah, but at the end of the day, roy's resume and challengers doesnt add up to the talent he had..

That's right, but again, that wasn't down to Roy not wanting to have big fights.

But you've got to question if he'd have gotten credit for beating an old Michael Nunn, and Collins and Eubank etc, even if the fights had have been made, and he'd have beaten them.

Also, how many of the guys that he missed, were better than Toney, and how many would have brought the same challenge as Ruiz and Tarver did, when he fought them in his mid 30's, factoring in the weight loss etc?

just look at oscar, tito, shane. srl, ali, holyfield, floyd, manny and compare to roy's resume,, Roy had probably the most talent out of all of them, yet doesnt have the great wins except for a select few...

But you can look at their best wins, and look at the circumstances involved.

Also, a resume can be misleading. Manny's got a great resume, and it jumps straight out at you. He's had 3 fantastic back and forth fights with Morales, and 3 against MAB, and 4 against JMM. That's 10 incredible, unforgettable fights. But look at it from this perspective. Why did Manny have all those fights?

Roy beat Toney, and there was no call for a rematch. He crushed Hill, and beat Ruiz easy, without anybody wanting or needing to see a rematch. But let's say that Manny only needed to fight Morales, MAB and JMM once or twice, and trilogies etc weren't needed.

Then let's say Roy had exciting back and forth fights with Toney, Hill and Ruiz. (for example)

Let's say he fought Toney 4 times, Ruiz twice, and Hill 3 times. Let's say that they were all exciting fights.

Then what?

Who at that point, would seem to have the best resume?

You've got to take a lot if things into consideration when you assess someone's resume.

Roy beat good fighters like Del Valle, Griffin, Hill, Johnson and Ruiz etc, but didn't get much credit, because it was easy.

That's why a lot of people say that his resume is poor and he didn't fight anyone.

There's countless examples to give.

Reggie Johnson gave Tarver a great fight in 2002.

Roy beat him easily three years earlier, and then it was dismissed as a nothing win, because Reggie was shot.

Gonzalez was deemed a Mexican road sweeper who Roy toyed with, who then went on to beat Dariusz M.

Ruiz had beaten and knocked down Holyfield, who wasn't shot to ****, but then suddenly became a nobody when Roy beat him.

Look at who Roy's opponents had fought before he fought them. Then look at who they fought afterwards.

It's a myth that Roy has a weak resume.

Roy has a very good resume.

Go and compare it to Benn's, Eubank's, Collins and Calzaghe's etc, and then come back and tell me it's weak.

There is always a reason why a fight didnt get made, but when you have over a half a dozen big fights that were never made, it kinda shows a pattern..

like i said earlier, i dont expect roy to fight everyone i listed but 2 or 3 would have been par for the course...

Apart from Nunn and Collins, tell me who he could have fought that were big fights, that were viable? Be specific.

collins had already beaten eubanks so a fight with him should have been a no brainer,, same with G-man and Liles, they were domestic rivals, plus amateur nemesis of roy,, those fights would have been alot bigger than a byrd or tate or brannon fight...i just wish roy had taken alittle more risk, i dont mind having a few soft touches, but when for a decade you have nothing but soft touches and your biggest name is a 42 year old, jr mid at 175, it doesnt speak well for your resume

Who was Steve Collins to Roy and America back then?

He'd lost his big fights there in the early 90's, and he carried a lightly regarded belt, that wasn't respected or ranked by the likes of the Ring magazine. It wouldn't have been a big fight outside of Britain. Roy was never going to go out of his way to fight Collins.

I agree with you regarding Gerald and Frankie Liles. But tell me how they could have been made? Look at who Roy fought at 160 before Hopkins? Afterwards, he fought Malinga and Tate, and then moved up for Toney. Gerald only had one fight at 168.

Again, the Levin's couldn't deal with King. Frankie Liles was a Don King fighter. That's one of the main reasons Roy left 168, to go to 175.

Now please explain to me, how Del Valle, Griffin, Hill, Reggie Johnson and Eric Harding etc, were soft touches?

[robertzimmerman]

One thing can be said for Jones: There was a time when he beat some top elite guys and he made it look easy with Toney. For whatever reason later in his career he gave clinics but when he fought the best he showed incredible skills.

That's right, and it's a complete myth that he has a weak resume.

Compare his resume to Dariusz M's and Calzaghe's etc.

[FightFit]

One thing can be said for Jones: There was a time when he beat some top elite guys and he made it look easy with Toney. For whatever reason later in his career he gave clinics but when he fought the best he showed incredible skills.

That`s very true i heard a boxing writer say when he took on toney james was considered one of the baddest men in boxing a beast in his prime but what roy did was so amazing and easy the writers were thinking maybe toney wasnt as good as they thought although that wasnt true at all toney is an ATG for me Zimmermann said it earlier its the manner in which he beat those great fighters.

[FightFit]

That's right, and it's a complete myth that he has a weak resume.

Compare his resume to Dariusz M's and Calzaghe's etc.

Maybe you will agree Zimmer Roy Jones Jr had serious Ambition i mean talk about going threw divisions 154 to Heavy then back to Light Heavy who does that? SUPERMAN does.

[robertzimmerman]

Maybe you will agree Zimmer Roy Jones Jr had serious Ambition i mean talk about going threw divisions 154 to Heavy then back to Light Heavy who does that? SUPERMAN does.

I think that Roy is underrated as a whole, and he gets unfair criticism.

I think he was happy to fight the likes of Kelly, Frazier and Woods for $5m a fight on his HBO contract. So I can see how that's perceived. He was happy to take those mandatories. But people don't realise that he was also willing to fight Dariusz M, a Hopkins rematch and Holyfield etc. Those fights didn't come off for various reasons, but there's evidence at hand, to prove that he wanted those fights.

Every fighter fights subpar opposition. People forget that Roy was proud to collect all of the 175 belts, and each organisation had a mandatory challenger. He was the WBC, WBA and the IBF belt holder. Guys like Rick Frazier and Woods were somehow the number one contenders for his titles. So he'd got obligations.

But he fought good fighters and he beat most of them with ease, that had done good things before he beat them, and then went on to do good things afterwards.

Tate, Hopkins, Malinga, Toney, Griffin, Del Valle, Hill, Johnson, Harding, Gonzalez, Woods, Ruiz and Tarver were all good fighters.

Guys like Frazier, Grant and Kelly etc, were sandwiched in between.

I think Nunn and Collins should have been on his resume, but I don't think he'd have got credit if he'd have beaten them anyway.

As I've mentioned earlier, Benn and Liles fights would have been great, but they couldn't be made.

Also, great fights at 160 couldn't be made.

It's just circumstances.

It wasn't that Roy simply didn't want to fight these guys.

Look at things logically. If Roy was scared to fight guys like Gerald McClellan, Benn, Liles, Eubank and Collins etc, then why would he have signed to fight Toney, and why would he have gone up to HW at 34, after 50 fights? Why would he have gone back for Tarver?

A guy that feared someone like Steve Collins at 27, wouldn't then fight Ruiz and Tarver at 34-35, and then want a Tyson fight.

It's illogical.

He couldn't have fought everyone.

I think that had he beaten Liles, Benn, Collins, Eubank and Nunn etc, but had missed some of the others, there'd be people questioning why he hadn't fought Hill, Toney and Tarver etc.

I think he was always in a no win situation.

I also think that because he was so dominant, it gave the impression that he was fighting nobodies, even though they were very good fighters.

I think he had more ambition that people give him credit for.

He didn't have to challenge Toney for the IBF belt at 168, but he did. He could have fought lesser opponents instead. After he'd beaten Toney, he couldn't unify against Benn and Liles because of King. So he had the option of either remaining at 168, to see what would unfold in the future, or to move up to 175.

Compare that to the circumstances of say, Joe Calzaghe. Joe was in the same scenario. He couldn't unify at 168 in the late 90's-early 00's. So he had the same two choices. Either to remain at 168, or go to 175. He chose to stay. He chose to stay, and he didn't get his big fights there until 2006 and 2007.

But Roy moved up and unified at 175. So he too could have just stayed at 168. Then when he got to 175, he did everything he possibly could, apart from fight Dariusz M.

Then what happened? He decided to go up to HW, that hadn't been attempted in a long time.

He could have been content to just stay at 175, but he moved up. Go and look at Dariusz M's resume as a comparison.

So Roy was a lot more ambitious, than what people give him credit for.

Of course his resume could have been stronger, but It's a complete myth that it isn't strong.

Roy has a very good resume, and I'd put it up against anybody's from the same era, that fought around the same weight classes.

[billeau2]

That's right, and it's a complete myth that he has a weak resume.

Compare his resume to Dariusz M's and Calzaghe's etc.

The problem with Jones and something partially alluded to by "Sugar" is how certain segments of his career where handled. In my opinion Mayweather and Jones share one bittersweet trait: both guys at some point decided to play it safe. I think the reasoning was partially because both guys did not draw the crowds they thought they deserved. People seldom remember that before the De La Hoya fight Floyd was a bad draw. After that fight Mayweather went on a mission to protect his undefeated status and this mission partially determined his opposition.

With Jones, towards the middle of his career he fought guys that could not catch him. In the end he paid a price for this decision. I tend not to believe that Roy was as diminished when he faced Tarver as people seem to think. Tarver decided not to be intimidated, i.e. not to back off of Jones. This set up the punch ("the punch haha") but more than that imo it created a roadmap to beat A version of Jones that was not physically prime, but still very dangerous. Glen Johnson simply followed this roadmap, pressured Jones by walking into his attacks and not backing off, and did it again as Tarver had.

I think that if Jones had fought better comp towards the middle of his career he would have perhaps been able to survive a few wars where he was walked down. As it was an older Jones could not find a way to fight when he could not use speed and evasive action.

I know people say it was the weight yo yoing, I know people are impressed by Jones foray into the heavyweight division but I don't agree with either idea. Toney was a fat middle weight able to dominate a bad heavyweight division. Jones never had the durability or tools to fight consistantly as a heavyweight.

BUT....I don't think anything I stated above is the same as saying Roy fought bad comp. Certainly compared to guys like Joe C and Ottke there is no comparison but i would take it one step farther and say that in a major part of his career he fought great comp. And then, when he established himself he fought guys that were not necessarily the best....seeing it from Roy's perspective Roy always struck me as one of those street smart types who wasn't going to give nothing away....He may have felt the numbers were not fair so "**** people I will fight who I want." I would also say that regarding Nun....Nun was good enough to possibly give Roy a time of it, but I don't think Roy was scared of Michael N. From Roy's perspective he had all the tools he needed to deal with Nun (or so he thought) I would have loved to see tha fight.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

@ robertzimmerman

Your replies are just too long to quote, so im just going to summarize..

Roy was a great fighter,, Im not trying to downplay that or discredit roy's ring accomplishments. My whole view is that Roy, despite his awesome ability, and his likability, Roy never reached the status of an Ali, Srl, holyfield, oscar, floyd, manny, etc.

Go back and read my earlier posts on this thread, and you will see that im comparing roy to other great fighters, that went on to become ppv superstars and the face of boxing. Roy was a star no doubt, but he never reached superstardom the way floyd, oscar, holy, etc..

Im not trying to compare him to fighters below him like calzaghe or michlewski, I was just stating the fact that for all of roy's ability, he never crossed over and became the megastar like the others i have mentioned.

I dont think he reached the "floyd" level because since the toney win in fall of 94, he took a very safe route, and milked his HBO contract for all that it was worth, and by the time the contract expired and roy couldnt milk it any longer, he took on ruiz and tarver in 2003 in big fights, but then basically got owned by tarver, and that was it for roy..

Had roy landed some big fights after toney, i think he would have reached that level of stardom that oscar, floyd, manny, holyfield etc have achieved..

There was plenty of opportunities, and Roy was basically a free agent his entire career, so promoter issues wouldnt affect him as much as others.

You can make excuses like liles was a don king fighter, but so was ruiz, how can roy land a huge fight with one fighter and not the other.

Collins would have been a big fight ala floyd-hatton, had roy fought him after collins had beaten benn and eubanks 2 times each.

G-man would have been huge from 93-95

Benn and eubanks would have been huge fights in 92,93,94,95,96

liles would have been great in 96,97
nunn would have been fine from 93-97, even though he was on the downhill, he would have been considered a much better opponent than a 42 year old jr mid champ, or eric lucas, or brannon, or vinny paz,

Roy's lack of big fights between toney and ruiz, really cost him his chance at becoming that megastar like floyd has become..
Roy's biggest purse was 10mil for the ruiz fight, that is chump change compared to what oscar, floyd, holyfield made in their heyday...

Yes roy has alot of solid wins vs clinton woods, harding, first tarver, ruiz, reggie johnson, but not are legacy type fights and are the equivalent to Floyd fighting ghost or ortiz, good fighters, solid wins, but not the type of fights that compare to SRL battling benetiz, duran, hearns hagler, or oscar fighting tito, shane, ike, vargas, hopkins, sturm, floyd, manny,

Roy's lack of huge fights in his prime cost him his chance at being on the SRL, oscar, floyd level.. Roy was just as talented, amazing in the ring, but his fights just never made him a megastar that his talent could have made him....


Thats all i was trying to say,, Yes roy has had a great career compared to 95% of all fighters, but when compared to guys in his league, his resume is lacking compared to oscar, floyd, Srl, etc...

[robertzimmerman]

billeau2,

The problem with Jones and something partially alluded to by "Sugar" is how certain segments of his career where handled. In my opinion Mayweather and Jones share one bittersweet trait: both guys at some point decided to play it safe. I think the reasoning was partially because both guys did not draw the crowds they thought they deserved. People seldom remember that before the De La Hoya fight Floyd was a bad draw. After that fight Mayweather went on a mission to protect his undefeated status and this mission partially determined his opposition.

Thanks for the reply.

I agree that Roy was happy to defend his titles against his mandatories for $4-5m on HBO. But he wasn't just content to do that. He didn't play it safe when he fought Ruiz and Tarver, and if things had been different, we could have seen a Dariusz M fight and a Hopkins rematch, after he'd unified at 175. That's what I'm arguing. I'm as sad as any fan that he fought the Kelly's and the Harmon's of the world. But I've seen various links and videos that prove he wanted bigger fights around that time. When certain fights couldn't be made, he didn't have any choice but to fight his mandatories, because he represented three organisations. So it upsets me, but I can't say that Roy was to blame. People needed to ask questions as to why in the hell (without being disrespectful) guys like Frazier and Kelly etc, were made mandatories. It made Roy look bad. One of the main reasons he went up to fight Ruiz, was to shut up the critics who were saying that he hadn't fought anybody.

With Jones, towards the middle of his career he fought guys that could not catch him. In the end he paid a price for this decision. I tend not to believe that Roy was as diminished when he faced Tarver as people seem to think. Tarver decided not to be intimidated, i.e. not to back off of Jones. This set up the punch ("the punch haha") but more than that imo it created a roadmap to beat A version of Jones that was not physically prime, but still very dangerous. Glen Johnson simply followed this roadmap, pressured Jones by walking into his attacks and not backing off, and did it again as Tarver had.

This is how I saw things from that period. For the first Tarver fight, he wasn't physically or mentally at 100%. He'd cut muscle at nearly 35, something he'd never done before, and he'd had 50 fights. Tarver was unbelievably fired up, and Roy was down, because he hadn't got his circus of a fight with Tyson, for mega money. When the Tyson fight fell through, he gave in to Tarver, who'd baited him throughout the year, including crashing the post fight press conference with Ruiz. So Tarver was 100% motivated, looking to prove a point. After 9 rounds, Roy was extremely tired, and he somehow battled through to the end. In the rematch, he was in a better frame of mind, and he was in much better shape, having worked with Mackie Shilstone again. The punch he was caught with was a great shot, and there's no excuses. They only thing that I argue, is that although Roy was still a top, elite fighter, he wasn't the same guy that he'd been in his 20's.

Glen Johnson in my opinion, was just in the right place at the right time. The Tarver knockout had turned Roy's world upside down, and I believe he took the Johnson fight, just so he could get back in the ring ASAP, to eradicate the Tarver loss. According to Alton Merkerson, Roy's Father, and respected boxing writer Thomas Hauser, Roy hardly trained for the fight, and just went through the motions. Roy had a huge ego, and Tarver crushed him both physically and mentally. I give credit for Johnson's tactics, but in my opinion, he wasn't a good enough fighter to win 9 rounds against Roy, and to then knock him cold under normal circumstances. Roy beat better fighters than Glen, some of them with ease, yet he couldn't win a single round when they fought. So I don't think Glen could have beaten Roy, had Roy fought to his full capabilities.

I think that if Jones had fought better comp towards the middle of his career he would have perhaps been able to survive a few wars where he was walked down. As it was an older Jones could not find a way to fight when he could not use speed and evasive action.

I agree to a certain extent. I think Tarver would always have given him a good fight. But If Tarver had've beaten Eric Harding in 2000, in the eliminator that he was put in, I think a younger version of Roy would have beaten him. Would Glen have used the same tactics, and beaten him like he did, if Tarver hadn't have crushed him, just three months earlier? I'm not so sure.

I know people say it was the weight yo yoing, I know people are impressed by Jones foray into the heavyweight division but I don't agree with either idea. Toney was a fat middle weight able to dominate a bad heavyweight division. Jones never had the durability or tools to fight consistantly as a heavyweight.

I agree. But I give him credit, because he'd had 50 fights, he was 34, and if it was that easy, more fighters would have accomplished it. Nobody at 175 today, looks as though they're going up to HW anytime soon. I'm a huge Toney fan, and he also gets credit. But the difference between him and Roy, is that Roy chose to go up, and bulked up with Mackie Shilstone. Whereas Toney was that out of shape, he didn't have much choice. Although to be fair, Toney's the sort of guy who'd have probably have gone up anyway. So again, I give him credit.

BUT....I don't think anything I stated above is the same as saying Roy fought bad comp. Certainly compared to guys like Joe C and Ottke there is no comparison but i would take it one step farther and say that in a major part of his career he fought great comp. And then, when he established himself he fought guys that were not necessarily the best....seeing it from Roy's perspective Roy always struck me as one of those street smart types who wasn't going to give nothing away....He may have felt the numbers were not fair so "**** people I will fight who I want." I would also say that regarding Nun....Nun was good enough to possibly give Roy a time of it, but I don't think Roy was scared of Michael N. From Roy's perspective he had all the tools he needed to deal with Nun (or so he thought) I would have loved to see tha fight.

I agree with you, and again, I'm not under any illusions, that Roy was upset fighting B and C class guys for huge money. I think he was happy enough to do that. But I truly believe he'd have taken the Dariusz M fight in the U.S. Again, Roy's got a huge ego, or he did have. I think he was happy enough to fight the Kelly's of the world, until he was heavily criticised by the media. At that point, he moved to try and get big fights to shut them up. His career followed a pattern. He got slammed for fighting Frazier in 99, and I've read a link, where after Collins had gotten in the ring to challenge him, when he was giving his post fight interview, he gave Stan Levin the go ahead to make the fight. But when he'd gathered his thoughts a few days later, and he'd read negative comments, it seems as though after speaking to Murad Muhammad, he pulled the plug and wanted to unify against Reggie Johnson instead.

The same thing happened a few years later during the famous 'Roycott' incident. He was hurt by that and he sent Brad Jacobs to meet with Kerry Davis to try and make the Dariusz M fight. Then when that fell through, he met Evander late in 2001, before he fought Ruiz for the third time.

When Evander didn't win the belt back, he remained at 175, and took on Kelly and Woods, where he received even more criticism. So after Woods, he was determined to fight Ruiz to shut everyone up.

Floyd in my opinion, operates a little differently. I don't think the fans and media can get to him in the same way.

With regards to Nunn, I think Roy should have taken the fight, even though Nunn was past his best. I think Nunn would have caused him a few problems. But I think that Roy sometimes found himself in a no win situation. I think if he'd have fought and beaten Nunn, he wouldn't have gotten a lot of credit.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

One thing i never understood was the roy had 3 chances at tarver and never looked good, he barely pulled out a win in the first fight, yet a 40+ year old bernard who had never fought at lhw comes in and turns tarver into a sparring partner..

i never understood how roy could struggle 3 times with tarver, you can say the weight loss in the 1st fight, but the 2nd and especially the 3rd, roy had ample time, and tarver was a good fighter, but not exactly a great fighter, he will probably be in the HOF for his wins over roy, but in the grand scheme of things, tarver is slightly above average. Never understood how roy struggled with him so much, i guess styles make fights, and tarver just had the right style being a southpaw counterpuncher with a good power, but hopkins toyed with him, and roy got owned.. that always puzzled me