Roy Jones Jr's alleged "weak opposition"

[robertzimmerman]

OK - But you said Jones needed to beat an ATG in his prime - but you rank Hopkins higher. Which ATG did Hopkins beat in his prime?

Roy Jones jr beat James Toney when he was undefeated and was an underdog in that fight. I can't see how Tarver is a better win than that, despite Tarver beating RJJ. Trinidad's is Hopkins best win imo.

Yeah Hopkins moved up, but RJJ moved up more times and beat more champions. + He beat Hopkins himself.

I have no issue saying Hopkins is definitely an ATG, but Roy Jones' resume is a lot better. Hopkins' win over Pavlik would have been a lot better if they had actually fought at a weight Pavlik was comfortable with too.

OK - But he didn't beat Calzaghe and at best it is very disputable. Taylor I agree with. Still, who is Jermain Taylor on Roy Jones' resume?

RJJ dominated every division from Middleweight to lightheavyweight and was champion all the way up to heavyweight and was considered the best in the world for almost a decade. His run in every division was more impressive than Hopkins' in the same divisions if you look at who they fought.

You've made some great points there.

[IronDanHamza]

Yet, somehow, every single person that's read it has drawn the same 'wrong' conclusion. But I guess that's our fault cause we're not genius'. You're the only person smart enough to figure your own post (but that's only because the meaning you had in your head isn't what came out when you wrote it down for).

When the only person that sees it's real meaning is the person who wrote it, while every single other person that read it took a different meaning from it...maybe, just maybe Dan, it's you who's lacking the comprehension of what you yourself wrote and how it comes across to everyone else.

Can you see that? Can you admit that you just might have written it in a way that doesn't get your meaning across properly? Can you admit that you just might be wrong in the face of everyone that read it taking a different meaning from it than you intended?

But keep arguing that everyone else is wrong, except you. It's a good look.

We're not the ass in this case mate.

Not everyone has made assumptions in this thread firstly.

Secondly, it's not my fault if people can't understand something that I've made clear.

Even if it's not clear, I've explained in more detail as the threads professed anyway yet here I am on page 14 still having to explain it.

If it's not clear by now then it never will be so yes perhaps take your own advice and don't continue to post.

[IronDanHamza]

Yeah, I know that already. I don't even think you read what I wrote because everything you just replied to I'd already answered and talked about in the earlier post. I know that it's about Jones' specific opponents and the Toney one about his career. Makes no diff...Urgh, just go read the post again, I can't be bothered writing it out again.

You know it already? So what you going on about then?

If you know and comprehend what the two threads are about then I struggle to see what your issue is.

[BennyST]

You know it already? So what you going on about then?

If you know and comprehend what the two threads are about then I struggle to see what your issue is.

Clearly you can't see it. Have you been reading anything that's been written? By the way, people aren't assuming anything. What you've written had clear meaning for everyone that read it, and it wasn't what you intended, which is fine unless you refuse to admit that and get all pissy and defensive about it.

Forget it mate. Talking to a brick wall of ego.

[BattlingNelson]

Unless you want me to repeat what I've already written, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I absolutely do not want you to repeat your stuff Again. I'd much rather that you relate to the issues posted, but if this to you Means repeating then hey yes. Let's agree to disagree.

[robertzimmerman]

I absolutely do not want you to repeat your stuff Again. I'd much rather that you relate to the issues posted, but if this to you Means repeating then hey yes. Let's agree to disagree.

Where do we go from here?

From what I've read over the years, I believe that Roy would have fought him in the U.S.

Roy didn't refuse to fight him. He refused to go to Germany.

It would have been great if either fighter had made concessions. I haven't really got an issue if you think it should have been Roy who made them. The issue I have, is that I've given you valid reasons why Roy didn't want to go to Germany, but you've just completely dismissed them.

I can also see things from Dariusz's perspective. If I'd have been in his shoes, I'd have stayed in Germany. I can't really blame him for not going to the U.S. The only thing that irks me, is that in my opinion, he gave fans false hope by writing letters and saying it wouldn't be an issue for him to fight in the U.S. He gave the impression that he really wanted the fight, but when it came down to it, I don't believe he did.

If I analyse each fighters career path and their resumes, it tells me who wanted the big fights and who didn't.

[IronDanHamza]

Clearly you can't see it. Have you been reading anything that's been written? By the way, people aren't assuming anything. What you've written had clear meaning for everyone that read it, and it wasn't what you intended, which is fine unless you refuse to admit that and get all pissy and defensive about it.

Forget it mate. Talking to a brick wall of ego.

Can't see what mate? What am I supposed to be seeing?

Are you trying to tell me what my thread means or what?

I am telling you what it means. How can you tell me what I meant?

How can you say it's not an assumption, then try and tell me what I did or not INTEND?

I am telling you what I meant and "intended" like I've already said that's your problem if you want to take it in a different direction.

[billeau2]

Where do we go from here?

From what I've read over the years, I believe that Roy would have fought him in the U.S.

Roy didn't refuse to fight him. He refused to go to Germany.

It would have been great if either fighter had made concessions. I haven't really got an issue if you think it should have been Roy who made them. The issue I have, is that I've given you valid reasons why Roy didn't want to go to Germany, but you've just completely dismissed them.

I can also see things from Dariusz's perspective. If I'd have been in his shoes, I'd have stayed in Germany. I can't really blame him for not going to the U.S. The only thing that irks me, is that in my opinion, he gave fans false hope by writing letters and saying it wouldn't be an issue for him to fight in the U.S. He gave the impression that he really wanted the fight, but when it came down to it, I don't believe he did.

If I analyse each fighters career path and their resumes, it tells me who wanted the big fights and who didn't.

They should have met in the middle from each man's geographical location...I could hear it now.."And Oh!!!! quick left and Roy is swallowed by a shark!

[robertzimmerman]

They should have met in the middle from each man's geographical location...I could hear it now.."And Oh!!!! quick left and Roy is swallowed by a shark!

Yeah, it's a real shame.

I think Roy would have been far too fast for him.

[Achille]

BKM,



That's your opinion.

But there's lots of factors to consider here:

Roy had to burn muscle in just 2 months to fight Tarver, and he was absolutely exhausted in the last third of the fight.

It was a bigger fight than Tarver-Hopkins, because it was the number 1 and 2 fighters of the division squaring off, with main titles at stake.

Roy made history by dropping back from HW to reclaim the LHW titles.

There's a very good chance that Tarver was drained after his weight loss from his role in the Rocky movie. Mackie Shilstone, who helped prepare Hopkins for the fight and who'd helped Roy prepare for Ruiz, said that he expected Tarver to be flat after the weight loss. Roy, Chris Byrd and Chad Dawson all struggled after dropping weight.

Hopkins' win over Tito was truly great in my opinion. Although Tito did peak at lower weights.

The win over Oscar wasn't great in my opinion, as he'd looked absolutely awful against Sturm in his previous fight.

The win over Winky also wasn't that impressive, as the fight was at 170 pounds, and Winky had never fought at that weight for any of his other fights, in a career spanning almost 60 fights.

You've also got to note, that Bernard didn't commit to becoming a full time MW, until he'd been a pro for 3 years. Bernard is a big guy. He's 6'1, with a 75" reach. He had to make incredible sacrifices both mentally and physically to squeeze down to MW. He had size advantages over almost all of his opponents there. At the time, MW was a weak division, as the former greats had either retired or moved up to higher weights. Until Don King's MW tournament in 2000, he was content to just defend his IBF belt against whoever was put in front of him. He didn't really show any ambition until he'd lost to Taylor twice in 2005. He wouldn't rematch Roy in 2002, turning down $6m and demanding $10m.



The Pavlik win was outstanding, but it's a shame it wasn't at MW.

The win over Pascal was great considering he was 45/46.

I don't think his reign at MW is that impressive, due to what I've wrote above. He eventually had a great win over Tito, but it took him over 6 years, and again, he didn't show any ambition before King's tournament. He even remained at MW for another 4 years after, even though there was nothing else to achieve. I don't think that was great, considering he could have moved up to try and fight better guys at SMW and LHW much sooner. He admitted before he fought Calzaghe in 2008, that he could have moved up to LHW 5/6 years earlier. Staying years in a weak division isn't impressive when you've got better options. Calzaghe stayed at SMW for years when he could have moved up to LHW a lot sooner. Roy could have stayed at SMW for a decade had he wanted too, which would have looked good on BoxRec.

You've got to do a lot of digging if you want to objectively rate a fighter.



That's cool, but he didn't fight many top guys in his prime.



You think he has a better resume than Roy, and you don't think it's close?

Ha! I can't say that I'm surprised.

Are you going to factor in everything what I've wrote above?

Again:

He squeezed himself into a weak division for 12 years, where he was bigger than almost all of his opponents.

He showed no ambition until he'd lost back to back fights with Taylor.

His very best wins were against fighters who'd enjoyed their greatest successes at lower weights.


Roy on the other hand, won titles in 4 weight classes, including a portion of the HW title, even though he'd fought as a JMW in the previous decade.

He made history going up to HW and back, where he overcame adversity against naturally bigger guys.

He dominated the majority of his opponents while he was prime, only losing once in 50 fights on a DQ.


Both were great fighters. And Bernard really trumps him with his outstanding longevity which is an incredible achievment. As everyone knows, Roy should have retired many years ago.


For me, Roy definitely achieved more, he was far more dominant in his prime, he was more ambitious, and all things considered, he has the better overall resume.

For you to say Bernard has a better resume and it's not even close, is absolutely laughable.

One of the most ridiculous things I've read while I've been a member here.

Good post!