Where does Roy Jones rank?

[Roy Jones Jnr]

[Weltschmerz]

Where would you rank Roy Jones all time?

Clearly an all time great. top 50 all time.

[Scott9945]

I don't do all time lists. But I am sure that at his very peak, Roy Jones was the best talent I've seen fight. His speed, reflexes were unmatched.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Lewis fought better opponents than Roy Jones?

List roy and lennox's top ten opponents.. After 3 names with roy your finished, lennox may not have a prime toney win, but he has a lot more top level wins.. I would rate Bruno, ruddock, etc higher than I would old mccallum, old hill, Vinny paz, Harding.. and lewis fought most guys at their peak besides holy and tyson. Vitali, Golata, ruddock,Bruno, Morrison, mercer, Briggs, grant, tua, Rahman, McCall were all prime when lennox fought them..

[Sugar Adam Ali]

UG


So you're just going to disregard the Hopkins fight because he was unknown? Jones and Hopkins were considered the two best middleweigts in the world at the time. Don't rewrite history. So who exactly would you have liked to see Jones fight for the middleweight title? I'll wait for names.

If Jones fought anybody else other than Hopkins I'm certain the consensus would have been "Jones ducked Hopkins." You're also contradicting yourself. In one sentence you claim Jones never fought other belt holders unless they were crap. But you criticize him for fighting Hopkins who was better than the belt holders at the time. You're also wrong that Jones never defended against a top guy. Thomas Tate was a " top guy" who Jones knocked out brutally one fight before moving up for James Toney.



How long did Hopkins go unbeaten after that? Jones dominant wins over world champions like Reggie Johnson who wasn't a " crap titleist?" KO win over Virgil Hill? Or what about dominating and knocking out Malinga?



I wish the DM fight had happened though. But I don't rate Jones with fighters like Spinks at 175.

I'm not going to go through his whole resume but as soon as you called Hopkins just a club fighter I knew you were going to denigrate Jones entire resume no matter who it was. Contrary to your belief, Jones dominated a lot of top fighters.

Dude, your rewriting history,,,, Best 2 middleweights, lmao.. Name me the biggest win between hopkins and roy when they fought.. I will wait.. As for who roy should have fought,,, I don't know, maybe the other legit champs that were established like John David Jackson, G-man, etc..
Hopkins was an espn fighter and never had faced anyone of note..

Please tell me who roy and hopkins beat to become the 2 best middleweights..
And all of that is irrelevant to my point... My point is regardless of how hopkins turned out, at the time he was an unknown espn club fighter with a nice win streak that could give a young roy some rounds in a vacant title fight..
If it was such a big fight between the "2 top mw of the world" then why couldn't it even headline a card, instead be stuck on the undercard of one of the worst ,aim event in history..


And like I said, roy fought crap Titlists,, Reggie johson was good early 90s, roy fought an old version in 99. Over the hill mccallum and virgil hill.. Tate was ok but if your using that as a "big" win then that just shows the shallowness in Roy's opponent list..

So please name the best wins for hopkins and roy that made them the clear cut top 2 in the mw division by spring of 93.. You must have thought gary Russell jr was the clear cut best featherweight going into the lomachenko fight..

And if you didn't realize it, Im playing devils advocate against jones just for the sake of debate.. I thought I made that clear, but obviously not, since you think I'm trying to degrade jones, which if you read my original post, you would know it's not the case..

[joseph5620]

Dude, your rewriting history,,,, Best 2 middleweights, lmao.. Name me the biggest win between hopkins and roy when they fought.. I will wait.. As for who roy should have fought,,, I don't know, maybe the other legit champs that were established like John David Jackson, G-man, etc..
Hopkins was an espn fighter and never had faced anyone of note..

Please tell me who roy and hopkins beat to become the 2 best middleweights..
And all of that is irrelevant to my point... My point is regardless of how hopkins turned out, at the time he was an unknown espn club fighter with a nice win streak that could give a young roy some rounds in a vacant title fight..
If it was such a big fight between the "2 top mw of the world" then why couldn't it even headline a card, instead be stuck on the undercard of one of the worst ,aim event in history..


And like I said, roy fought crap Titlists,, Reggie johson was good early 90s, roy fought an old version in 99. Over the hill mccallum and virgil hill.. Tate was ok but if your using that as a "big" win then that just shows the shallowness in Roy's opponent list..

So please name the best wins for hopkins and roy that made them the clear cut top 2 in the mw division by spring of 93.. You must have thought gary Russell jr was the clear cut best featherweight going into the lomachenko fight..

And if you didn't realize it, Im playing devils advocate against jones just for the sake of debate.. I thought I made that clear, but obviously not, since you think I'm trying to degrade jones, which if you read my original post, you would know it's not the case..

LOL John David Jackson? So you would have been more impressed by John David Jackson? And McClellan was an inferior fighter to Hopkins. If you watch the telecast it was the ckear consensus that these were the best two middleweights. Are you suggesting Jackson and McClellan were better than Jones and Hopkins?

Since you're so into opposition, who exactly did McClellan ever beat or defend his title against at 160 other than Jackson?

It's pretty damn obvious that Jones and Hopkins were the two best in the division. Why does it matter who they fought before? Jones does have a dominating win over Jorge Castro who was better than anybody McClellan beat before fighting for a title.


You comparing Jones or Hopkins competition to that to Gary Russell jr is absolutely ridiculous. Do you even know who they fought?

I see you want to rewrite history with Johnson too. Johnson won a belt when he knocked out unbeaten William Guthrie who people claimed Jones was ducking. This was seen as a very good unification fight at the time. Hindsight does absolutely nothing to change that.



And if Hil was so shot how did he win a cruiserweight title years later?


I don't have time to answer everything tonight so I will finish my rebuttal tomorrow lol.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

LOL John David Jackson? So you would have been more impressed by John David Jackson? And McClellan was an inferior fighter to Hopkins. If you watch the telecast it was the ckear consensus that these were the best two middleweights. Are you suggesting Jackson and McClellan were better than Jones and Hopkins?

Since you're so into opposition, who exactly did McClellan ever beat or defend his title against at 160 other than Jackson?

It's pretty damn obvious that Jones and Hopkins were the two best in the division. Why does it matter who they fought before? Jones does have a dominating win over Jorge Castro who was better than anybody McClellan beat before fighting for a title.



I don't have time to answer everything tonight so I will finish my rebuttal tomorrow lol.

Dude, I'm really not trying to debate this that much..
It's silly to think hopkins and jones were the clear cut best 2 mw in the world in early 93..hindsight 20/20 yeah they probably were, but at the time general consensus was jones a rising star and hopkins is a good solid test that will give him rounds but not be that dangerous..

My counterpoint to Roy's greatness, is if you compare his list of opponents, his is really shallow compared to other greats.. Roy's wins over Reggie and del Valle are the equivalent of floyd beating manfredy or Corley.. Good wins but not highlights on an atg resume.. But floyd has a ton of big name fights, while roy was bare except for toney and then about 10 years later with ruiz.. Even Floyd's big name over the hill fighters like Oscar and Mosley were at least champs of the division, whereas mccallum and hill were just faded names by the time roy fought them..
Roy's an atg no doubt, but he is considered that mostly due to his incredible skill rather than his long list of opponents..

[joseph5620]

Dude, I'm really not trying to debate this that much..
It's silly to think hopkins and jones were the clear cut best 2 mw in the world in early 93..hindsight 20/20 yeah they probably were, but at the time general consensus was jones a rising star and hopkins is a good solid test that will give him rounds but not be that dangerous..

My counterpoint to Roy's greatness, is if you compare his list of opponents, his is really shallow compared to other greats.. Roy's wins over Reggie and del Valle are the equivalent of floyd beating manfredy or Corley.. Good wins but not highlights on an atg resume.. But floyd has a ton of big name fights, while roy was bare except for toney and then about 10 years later with ruiz.. Even Floyd's big name over the hill fighters like Oscar and Mosley were at least champs of the division, whereas mccallum and hill were just faded names by the time roy fought them..
Roy's an atg no doubt, but he is considered that mostly due to his incredible skill rather than his long list of opponents..

Okay well I'll end it with this; watch the telecast of that fight which included Gil Clancy. The consensus was that these were the top two middleweights. Hopkins was not just there to " give Jones rounds." Not true at all.

[BKM-2010]

Dude, I'm really not trying to debate this that much..
It's silly to think hopkins and jones were the clear cut best 2 mw in the world in early 93..hindsight 20/20 yeah they probably were, but at the time general consensus was jones a rising star and hopkins is a good solid test that will give him rounds but not be that dangerous..

Hindsight is legitimate when it comes to ranking topics like this though. Wins get better(or worse, though rarely) over time, and I think that just because for example Hopkins wasn't the big name he would eventually become yet, doesn't mean it detracts from Roy Jones' win over him.

[Suckmedry]

Hindsight is legitimate when it comes to ranking topics like this though. Wins get better(or worse, though rarely) over time, and I think that just because for example Hopkins wasn't the big name he would eventually become yet, doesn't mean it detracts from Roy Jones' win over him.

I agree. Kind of.

Its not quite the same as him beating Hopkins 5-10 yrs later. Not at all the same. But its still reasonable to assert that looking back Hop would have beaten any other mw around at the time (not too knowledgeable about who was around back then) so at the time it was like a C class win. Over time it becomes a B+. Jones win over Toney being an A because Toney was p4p ranked at the time.