Roy Jones and Posterity

**rightsideup** · 01-20-2015, 07:32 PM

he did not have a long run at mw and a lot of good fighters such as Charles, conn, Moore , Spinks and Foster at light heavy

**The Old LefHook** · 01-20-2015, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by rightsideup

he did not have a long run at mw and a lot of good fighters such as Charles, conn, Moore , Spinks and Foster at light heavy

At lightheavy RJJ did have a long reign of dominance. He could throw a punch from left field faster than any flyweight who ever lived. He has a fine collection of one punch KO's in his column.

**REMOVE SHARK 55** · 01-20-2015, 10:24 PM

Victor Conte

**REMOVE SHARK 55** · 01-20-2015, 10:28 PM

Angel Heredia, whoever his supplier was severely damaged his reputation in some boxing peoples eyes. His run as No.1 P4P was entertaining but greatest ever... in my opinion, nope.

**Scott9945** · 01-21-2015, 12:12 AM

Originally posted by The Old LefHook

Can anyone speculate as to why RJJ is not rated as the greatest middleweight and light heavyweight in history?

If not, well. Y'all musta' forgot.

Jones was in two world title fights at middleweight, and one of them was against Thomas Tate. You can regard him as the best middleweight you've ever seen if you care to, but rating him above the best ever at 160 sounds absurd.

**sonnyboyx2** · 01-21-2015, 02:30 AM

Head-to-head at middleweight, Jones would be a problem for even Ray Robinson.

**The Old LefHook** · 01-21-2015, 09:20 AM

Originally posted by Scott9945

Jones was in two world title fights at middleweight, and one of them was against Thomas Tate. You can regard him as the best middleweight you've ever seen if you care to, but rating him above the best ever at 160 sounds absurd.

I did not say RJJ was the best, I asked why he is not considered the best. I know actual discussion around here is impossible, but that is what my original post was supposed to lead to. Can you handle it?

**Scott9945** · 01-21-2015, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by The Old LefHook

I did not say RJJ was the best, I asked why he is not considered the best. I know actual discussion around here is impossible, but that is what my original post was supposed to lead to. Can you handle it?

I thought that I concisely answered your question. Sorry if you didn't grasp it.

**The Old LefHook** · 01-21-2015, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by Scott9945

I thought that I concisely answered your question. Sorry if you didn't grasp it.

All time lists are very flexible. By custom there is no problem ranking Marciano or Tunney as cruiserweights when they never heard of the division, so there is even less problem assessing RJJ's chances as an all time middleweight, since the idea is based strictly on who-beats-whom, not on trinkets or longevity.

As a light heavyweight Roy got plenty of exposure everyone is aware of, so if someone wants to answer the question only regarding his LH legacy, go ahead. After what he did and how he looked doing it, why is he not a shoo-in for greatest light heavy ever? Because he is not regarded as that. I am asking why, not saying that I think he should be. However, one must note that as slow of hand and foot as Archie Moore was, I see no way he is going to catch up with Jones. That is an individual case. If Archie were watching Roy's feet like he is reputed to have done, with other opponents, he would think he was at a tennis match. That works where two guys are leaning on each other, something RJJ did not do at all.

Roy Jones and Posterity