Roy Jones Jr's alleged "weak opposition"

[robertzimmerman]

The Old LefHook,

What you have told me is that in between his weak mandatories Jones took even weaker stay busy fights with hamburger like Pazienza. He had the power and the prestige to make any fight in the world he wanted. When you hog purses, promotional rights and choice of site the way Jones did, you better believe it is going to be hard to make fights with guys who know they will probably lose, sir. Send all the lawyers you want out to parley. They can report later that you tried. But the fact is you didn't try, unless everything your way, including the money, is trying.

You clearly have no intention of having an objective debate.

You have ignored everything I've written.

How did he have the power and prestige to make any fight he wanted?

He couldn't MAKE people fight him.

How on earth can you ignore the fact that Liles's own manager said that he was so pi$$ed, because Frankie blew a great fight by asking for too much money?

Yes, we know there were fighters who did want to fight Roy when he was peak. But they were also many who didn't.

You are being completely biased.

Roy fought Vinny Pazienza for around $3m, whilst his handlers, The Levin Brothers, along with his advisor at the time, Greg Fritz, were trying to reach a compromise with King for fights against Benn and Liles.

Why do you think Roy only stayed 2 years at SMW? He could have stayed there for many years. But he moved up to LHW when he couldn't unify at SMW. Those were the actions of an ambitious fighter, not the actions of a guy who only wanted easy fights.

He should have dropped the scrub belts keeping only the best, and then sought only the highest grade fights. His career and his legacy would be far better. He would be richer too. Otherwise you tell me how a guy with that talent and ability is lucky to make the top ten on light heavyweight lists these days and does not make the low twenties on most AT lists, when he should have made himself recognized as the greatest fighter of all time with few dissenters.

Have you even read my previous post?

Yes, the scrub belts were useless. I agree with that. But the main three belts that he had: the IBF, the WBA and the WBC, all put forward mandatory opponents such as: Brannon, Frazier and Kelly etc.

It would have been pointless for him to ditch any of those main belts. Like I told you yesterday, he already had trouble in making big fights when he was the unified champ, so having less to bring to the table would have made it even harder. He had to fight guys like Ricky Frazier. Because again, if he hadn't have done, he couldn't have unified against Reggie afterwards, and then he'd have had to have watched two guys fighting for his old belt.

Pointless.

[soul_survivor]

I'm not even that big a fan of Roy Jones so no it's not my "fandom".

The difference between Toney and Roy Jones is Roy Jones dominated his opponents.

But this thread isn't about Roy Jones vs Toney I don't really think that needs to be debated really.

All this thread is about is the specific fighters listed and whether they are as "weak" as people tend to claim.

I don't recall ever hearing Toney fought weak opposition.

But you used that same criteria to label Toney as someone who was overrated. It has to work both ways.

And compared to your average, run of the mill fighters, then yes, we can argue that Jones fought good opponents but here we had one of the most naturally gifted athletes of his time and he didn't fight a single, prime, ATG. There's Hopkins, who was green but let's give him that...who else is there?

He could, at the very least, have fought THE unified champ Dariusz instead he fought Hill coming off of a loss to Dariusz and I don't but the whole money/location argument. If he wanted the fight, he would have got HBO to get him the fight.

Also, did you not label Jones the fighter of the decade for the 90s? Sub par opposition and most of the wins were playful sparring sessions, yes he won most rounds and got some KOs but he hardly obliterated these guys, it's not like Tyson late 80s or something. Holyfield, Oscar, Lewis, Whitaker, all had more distinguished careers and opponents than Jones.

So, to sum it all up, Jones wasted his prime years and by the time he decided to fight legit threat and/or travel, he was so old, his career became a highlight reel of KOs...of him being KOd.

[IronDanHamza]

But you used that same criteria to label Toney as someone who was overrated. It has to work both ways.

And compared to your average, run of the mill fighters, then yes, we can argue that Jones fought good opponents but here we had one of the most naturally gifted athletes of his time and he didn't fight a single, prime, ATG. There's Hopkins, who was green but let's give him that...who else is there?

He could, at the very least, have fought THE unified champ Dariusz instead he fought Hill coming off of a loss to Dariusz and I don't but the whole money/location argument. If he wanted the fight, he would have got HBO to get him the fight.

Also, did you not label Jones the fighter of the decade for the 90s? Sub par opposition and most of the wins were playful sparring sessions, yes he won most rounds and got some KOs but he hardly obliterated these guys, it's not like Tyson late 80s or something. Holyfield, Oscar, Lewis, Whitaker, all had more distinguished careers and opponents than Jones.

So, to sum it all up, Jones wasted his prime years and by the time he decided to fight legit threat and/or travel, he was so old, his career became a highlight reel of KOs...of him being KOd.

I used the same criteria how?

My criteria for Toney being overrated is he didn't dominate or have an impressive performance against a top level opponent and he struggled and lost to sub par opponents. Jones did neither of those things.

This thread isn't about whether Jones has a great resume or not it's about the specific fights listed. No more no less.

It's not about who he could have of should have fought or who his best wins are.

The fights listed, that's it.

[robertzimmerman]

Yeah, this is what the Jones fans offer. "He would have". Even though he didn't.

And for the latter, I was one of those people. As a kid RJJ was the second fighter I started following and thought he was a God. Now I know a lot better both about his resume and his fighting abilities. I no longer rely on hypotheticals in his favor or blaming everyone but him for his unacceptable resume.

And why didn't he?

If you're interested enough, do some research.


Eubank:

Forget it. Eubank has said that fighting Roy in his prime would have been suicide. He's also said that he was only content to defend his WBO belt on SKY/ITV.


Calzaghe:

Forget it. When Roy was prime, Joe was content to defend Eubank's old WBO belt in Europe. Although he was a great fighter, he was a relatively unknown fighter in the U.S.

In 1999, he stated that he wasn't chasing Roy, and that he didn't want tough fights.

In 2003, he said he thought that he could give Roy a great fight, maybe his greatest, but he knew what his capabilities were, and he'd have needed 'The Crown ***els' to fight him, due to the element of risk involved.


Liles:

Forget it. Frankie was offered a career high payday to fight Roy, but turned it down. His own manager has verified it.


Dariusz:

The fight that everyone wanted to see. To cut a long story short, neither guy would travel. But nobody should have an issue with the world's best fighter not having wanted to go to Germany with all three of the main belts. Especially when he'd been scarred from the Olympics, and Dariusz had feigned injury to get Graciano Rochigianni disqualified. Other than a huge some of money, Roy had nothing to gain and everything to lose. Dariusz like Calzaghe, was more than content to repeatedly defend his lightly regarded WBO title against whoever his manager lined up for him.


Hopkins:

Another huge fight that should have happened in 2002. Hopkins demanded a 50/50 split, even though Roy had beaten him, and he would have had to have come down in weight for a CW. Roy and HBO then offered Hopkins $6m, but he refused and wanted $10m. After negotiations had broken down, Roy went on to fight Woods and Ruiz, whilst Hopkins had a year out of the ring before coming back to fight Morrade Hakkar.


Collins:

He was desperate to fight Roy, and I've got an enormous amount of respect for him. But when Roy couldn't unify the main belts at SMW, he opted to move up to LHW for a new challenge. Collins was left behind with his WBO belt.


Benn:

Benn was also desperate to fight Roy in 1995. But Roy's handlers, The Levin's, couldn't deal with King, as it was reported that they wanted future options on Roy.


Holyfield:

Roy and Greg Fritz went to Atlanta early in 1998, to meet with Evander and his attorney, Jim Thomas. Jim Thomas has stated that Evander respectfully turned down the idea of fighting Roy, as at the time he felt as though he was in a no-win situation.

Thomas has also stated that a fight between them was close to being made in 2003 after Roy had fought Ruiz. But the deal was scuppered after King and Murad Muhammad got greedy, and after King had refused to pay Evander money which was owed to him from a previous fight. According to Thomas, Evander was furious. Which is why he ended up fighting Toney instead, even though there was no title at stake, and the guaranteed purse was for less money.


Everything I've wrote above can be backed up.

Roy did not only want to fight easy fights.

Boxing is a ruthless business, with things happening behind the scenes that the average fan is not privy to.

Under different circumstances, Roy could have fought many of those fighters listed.

Although Roy's resume could have been much stronger, it's still very good. His resume is as good as almost anyone else's who fought around the same weight classes in the same era. It is in no way, unacceptable.

[BKM-]

And why didn't he?

If you're interested enough, do some research.


Eubank:

Forget it. Eubank has said that fighting Roy in his prime would have been suicide. He's also said that he was only content to defend his WBO belt on SKY/ITV.


Calzaghe:

Forget it. When Roy was prime, Joe was content to defend Eubank's old WBO belt in Europe. Although he was a great fighter, he was a relatively unknown fighter in the U.S.

In 1999, he stated that he wasn't chasing Roy, and that he didn't want tough fights.

In 2003, he said he thought that he could give Roy a great fight, maybe his greatest, but he knew what his capabilities were, and he'd have needed 'The Crown ***els' to fight him, due to the element of risk involved.


Liles:

Forget it. Frankie was offered a career high payday to fight Roy, but turned it down. His own manager has verified it.


Dariusz:

The fight that everyone wanted to see. To cut a long story short, neither guy would travel. But nobody should have an issue with the world's best fighter not having wanted to go to Germany with all three of the main belts. Especially when he'd been scarred from the Olympics, and Dariusz had feigned injury to get Graciano Rochigianni disqualified. Other than a huge some of money, Roy had nothing to gain and everything to lose. Dariusz like Calzaghe, was more than content to repeatedly defend his lightly regarded WBO title against whoever his manager lined up for him.


Hopkins:

Another huge fight that should have happened in 2002. Hopkins demanded a 50/50 split, even though Roy had beaten him, and he would have had to have come down in weight for a CW. Roy and HBO then offered Hopkins $6m, but he refused and wanted $10m. After negotiations had broken down, Roy went on to fight Woods and Ruiz, whilst Hopkins had a year out of the ring before coming back to fight Morrade Hakkar.


Collins:

He was desperate to fight Roy, and I've got an enormous amount of respect for him. But when Roy couldn't unify the main belts at SMW, he opted to move up to LHW for a new challenge. Collins was left behind with his WBO belt.


Benn:

Benn was also desperate to fight Roy in 1995. But Roy's handlers, The Levin's, couldn't deal with King, as it was reported that they wanted future options on Roy.


Holyfield:

Roy and Greg Fritz went to Atlanta early in 1998, to meet with Evander and his attorney, Jim Thomas. Jim Thomas has stated that Evander respectfully turned down the idea of fighting Roy, as at the time he felt as though he was in a no-win situation.

Thomas has also stated that a fight between them was close to being made in 2003 after Roy had fought Ruiz. But the deal was scuppered after King and Murad Muhammad got greedy, and after King had refused to pay Evander money which was owed to him from a previous fight. According to Thomas, Evander was furious. Which is why he ended up fighting Toney instead, even though there was no title at stake, and the guaranteed purse was for less money.


Everything I've wrote above can be backed up.

Roy did not only want to fight easy fights.

Boxing is a ruthless business, with things happening behind the scenes that the average fan is not privy to.

Under different circumstances, Roy could have fought many of those fighters listed.

Although Roy's resume could have been much stronger, it's still very good. His resume is as good as almost anyone else's who fought around the same weight classes in the same era. It is in no way, unacceptable.

No disrespect to you but this is history revisionism. I remember what a diva he was and a pain in the arse when it came to making fights. It is simply impossible that in every instance he wasn't the reason the fights didn't happen. The Old Left Hook may have an agenda towards RJJ, but he's far closer to the truth in this thread than most.

The second thing I would like to tell you is that in terms of historic rankings, it actually doesn't matter as much who was responsible. Even if the big bad world prevented him from reaching his true potential in his resume and he's completely innocent, the bottomline is still this: Who did he beat, what did he accomplish? Historians don't give people leniency out of pity. You can't go "Oh it wasn't poor Roy's fault, lets just overlook that and rank him higher anyway because he looked so good against the ones he fought". You get ranked based on your resume, above all, because that's the most factual aspect we have in this sport. Not the woulda coulda stuff.

[robertzimmerman]

Humean,

I've been guilty of claiming and thinking that Jones' opposition was quite weak too in the past but last year I went through most of Jones's fights in the 90s as well as a number of his opposition's other fights and I came away from it not only remembering what an astonishing fighter Jones really was in his prime but also that his opposition was a lot stronger than I had thought. To me the Malinga and Castro wins are very underappreciated, and I also always downgraded the Hopkins win far too much.

Roy has a very good resume. But it appeared to many that it was weak, due to how easy he beat good fighters.

There are definite criticisms of Jones in regards to not fighting tougher opponents when he went to 175 although most of his opponents were in the ring magazine's top 10 (perhaps the rankings were a bit biased in favour of the US light-heavies though). I'd have liked Jones to have fought at least a couple from Benn, Eubank, Calzaghe, Ottke, Collins, Rocchigiani, and Michalczewski. There is just a disappointment with Jones that he got too complacent and didn't test himself enough. It is not all his fault though, you can blame other fighters, promoters, tv networks and the sanctioning bodies too but he does deserve a lot of blame.

As per my previous post, a lot of those guys didn't want to fight him.

I'm not sure why you've mentioned Ottke?

You've made some good points though.

[Humean]

he didn't fight a single, prime, ATG. There's Hopkins, who was green but let's give him that...who else is there
.

How many ATG's do you think there are in lets say a space of 10 years? Lets be quite ******* and say 10, now if Roy (or any other fighter we are evaluating) is one of those 10 then that leaves 9, 9 other ATG fighters across the timespan of a decade within a sport of 17 divisions. The chances of one bona-fide ATG fighting another bona-fide ATG are not that high especially not "at the right time". After all Jones did defeat an ATG, namely Bernard Hopkins, and yet he is dismissed for being too green (there is some truth to this). Jones can be accused of not fighting a number of very good fighters but who were the ATG's that he should have fought?

Humean,

As per my previous post, a lot of those guys didn't want to fight him.

I'm not sure why you've mentioned Ottke?

You've made some good points though.

I think the money could have persuaded many, you are being much too favourable to Jones. Ottke was one of the best at 168 so I think it not unreasonable that he could have tried to lure him up in weight. Perhaps Jones wasn't much interested in what was happening in Europe at the time, how times have changed now that the Russians are the only ones who still want to watch him fight and now that he is a Russian citizen.

[robertzimmerman]

Are they? I remember Eubank claiming that Jones told him that Jones didn't want to fight him back in the early 90s. If that is true then it is the reverse of what you are claiming.

No, Roy told him that he'd have been one of his hardest fights had they fought. Roy had lots of respect for him.

Eubank has said many times over the years, that he would only have fought the likes of Roy and Toney etc, had they been mandatories to his WBO belt. And I believe him. But they would obviously have never been made mandatories.

Eubank was content to keep defending the lightly regarded WBO belt in his own little bubble on SKY/ITV. Which was his prerogative. And I respect his honesty. But it should put to bed any queries on why Roy never fought him. The fight was never viable.

Watch the video below from the 2nd minute onwards:

It's an excerpt from: Behind The Gloves - The Super middleweights, by Sky Sports.

If you have the time and you've never seen it, I recommend watching it. There's 7 parts in total and it's on for about an hour. They've also made similar programmes featuring former greats from other weight classes, including: the middleweights and the heavyweights. I found them all really interesting.

http://********/VBw_q1rCa40


Regarding Joe's comments:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Boxing...he.-a060444934

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/i-am...e-6352495.html

[robertzimmerman]

Jones fought decent to good opponents, heck I was impressed with his win over Tarver, considering Jones went straight back from heavyweight to light heavy and into a title fight against an accomplished fighter but where's the stand out names? Where's guys like Eubank and Benn? Politics aside, those fights should have happened and could have happened if he wasn't getting paid millions to fight "ok" guys.

I remember commenting on your thread about toney, which makes this thread weird, or it's just because you can't separate your fandom for Jones from your objective boxing mind. Toney doesn't exactly have great names on his resume but he beat a similar level of opponents as Jones AND much bigger guys at cruiser and heavy. Why hold it against Toney but not Jones?

Roy fought more than just decent to good opponents.

You can't say "politics aside, they should have happened"

That's why they didn't happen.

[robertzimmerman]

But you used that same criteria to label Toney as someone who was overrated. It has to work both ways.

And compared to your average, run of the mill fighters, then yes, we can argue that Jones fought good opponents but here we had one of the most naturally gifted athletes of his time and he didn't fight a single, prime, ATG. There's Hopkins, who was green but let's give him that...who else is there?

He could, at the very least, have fought THE unified champ Dariusz instead he fought Hill coming off of a loss to Dariusz and I don't but the whole money/location argument. If he wanted the fight, he would have got HBO to get him the fight.

Also, did you not label Jones the fighter of the decade for the 90s? Sub par opposition and most of the wins were playful sparring sessions, yes he won most rounds and got some KOs but he hardly obliterated these guys, it's not like Tyson late 80s or something. Holyfield, Oscar, Lewis, Whitaker, all had more distinguished careers and opponents than Jones.

So, to sum it all up, Jones wasted his prime years and by the time he decided to fight legit threat and/or travel, he was so old, his career became a highlight reel of KOs...of him being KOd.

How common is it for a fighter to fight an ATG opponent whilst they are prime?

Roy has Toney anyway. He's an ATG ,who was 26 and undefeated, and who was considered by many has the 2nd best fighter in the world at the time. It's just a shame that Toney's weight issues take the shine off of the win.

It's so easy to type that he should have at least fought Dariusz. Do some research. Kerry Davis of HBO, tried everything to try and land the network the fight.

Roy didn't only fight subpar opposition. And do you know why most of his fights looked like sparring sessions? Because he was that damn good.

You're criticising him for not having obliterated guys like Tyson? Whatever next?

What do you mean "By the time he decided to fight legit threats...." ?

Go and read my previous posts. Everything I've wrote can be backed up.