Roy Jones Jr's alleged "weak opposition"

[BattlingNelson]

We've discussed this before.

Before he'd lost his belts, sure. But not afterwards. The belts were passed around before Roy obtained them.

Those belts was Mickey mouse belts at the time Roy picked them up. The way I see it, you give way to much credibilty to corrupt alphabet organizations when you know that DM was so clearly the man of the division.

I never agreed with Dariusz being held to to ransom by the Org's, although he could have dropped the WBO belt. But either way, what happened had nothing to do with Roy.

I'm looking from Roy's perspective from 2000-2001.

At that point he was the world's best fighter with all three of the main belts.

Belts that was not won from the champ, so Again it was just Mickey mouse trinkets.

If you were the world's best fighter with all the main belts, and you'd been robbed in the Olympics, and you'd also seen Dariusz cheat to get an opponent disqualified, would you have gone to Germany? Honestly?

If I wanted to prove that I was the best and not just wanting to be a beltcollector and moneygrabber, then for sure yes. It's about legacy.

Unless Roy was offered crazy money, there was no point in him putting the IBF, the WBC and the WBA belts on the line, just for the opportunity to win Dariusz's lightly regarded WBO belt. He had nothing to gain and everything to lose.

We are talking the real lineal championship here. Not alphabet trinkets. You are missing the point.

I'll say this: If Dariusz hadn't have lost those belts that he'd won from Hill, then Roy would had to have gone to Germany to fight Dariusz. He would had to have made the concessions and travelled. The onus would have been on him. But again, why would he have done it when he'd already got the belts? Boxing is a ruthless business. Roy had no moral obligation to travel because of what had happened to Dariusz three years earlier.

I don't think any fighter in Roy's position would have gone over to Germany unless they'd been paid obscene amounts of money.

The onus was rightly on Roy. He really did not want the championship. He wanted Money and trinkets.

[robertzimmerman]

BattlingNelson,

Those belts was Mickey mouse belts at the time Roy picked them up. The way I see it, you give way to much credibilty to corrupt alphabet organizations when you know that DM was so clearly the man of the division.

I'm not giving any credit to those Org's.

Belts that was not won from the champ, so Again it was just Mickey mouse trinkets.

And? Was Roy supposed to turn down title fights?

If I wanted to prove that I was the best and not just wanting to be a beltcollector and moneygrabber, then for sure yes. It's about legacy.

Roy did want to fight him, he just didn't want to go to Germany.

Again, try and put yourself in his shoes and see things from his perspective.

He was the consensus pound for pound number 1 fighter in the world.

He'd been scarred from the Olympics.

Go and watch the first fight between Dariusz and Rochigianni. Dariusz cheated to get him disqualified.

It's easy for you to sit at a keyboard and say that Roy should have gone over.

I'm sure you'd have felt very different had you been in the exact same position that Roy was in.

Although it was unfair how Dariusz was treat by the Org's, ask yourself why he gave up the WBA belt, and hung on to the lightly regarded WBO belt?

Ask yourself why he wasn't chomping at the bit to get Roy in the ring to obtain his old belts?

He clearly had no intentions of fighting Roy, as you'll see if you look at his resume.

We are talking the real lineal championship here. Not alphabet trinkets. You are missing the point.

You are missing the point.

Germany was renowned for bad decisions, and Roy was well within his rights to not travel, if he thought he wasn't going to get a fair shake. After watching the Roch fight and some of Ottke's, I don't blame him.

The onus was rightly on Roy. He really did not want the championship. He wanted Money and trinkets.

Roy didn't have to jump through hoops to fight a guy who only held the WBO belt, who's best win was against Hill, who Roy had destroyed with absolute ease. Roy didn't heed to prove himself. He'd have fought him in the U.S. but he was never going to travel and put himself at a disadvantage. After talks had broken down, he tried to fight Hopkins. When Hopkins made it clear he wasn't interested, he then fought Ruiz and Tarver.

Who did Dariusz go on to fight?

It would have been great had they fought. But Roy didn't need him to solidify his resume and his legacy.

[BattlingNelson]

BattlingNelson,



I'm not giving any credit to those Org's.

What??

Are you delibereately trolling me?

You said that DM was in his right to expect Jones to come to him UNTILL he had his belts taken away from him in the most hideous of fashions!

So after DM no longer had the belts (that you value so dearly), the onus was suddenly on DM to come to Roy. Is that not giving an insane amount of credit to those org's????

And? Was Roy supposed to turn down title fights?



Roy did want to fight him, he just didn't want to go to Germany.

And you give him a pass for that. Why?

Again, try and put yourself in his shoes and see things from his perspective.

He was the consensus pound for pound number 1 fighter in the world.

He'd been scarred from the Olympics.

Go and watch the first fight between Dariusz and Rochigianni. Dariusz cheated to get him disqualified.

It's easy for you to sit at a keyboard and say that Roy should have gone over.

I'm sure you'd have felt very different had you been in the exact same position that Roy was in.

Although it was unfair how Dariusz was treat by the Org's, ask yourself why he gave up the WBA belt, and hung on to the lightly regarded WBO belt?

Ask yourself why he wasn't chomping at the bit to get Roy in the ring to obtain his old belts?

He clearly had no intentions of fighting Roy, as you'll see if you look at his resume.

As you said, Roy had no intentions of coming to take the belt away from the champion. Plenty of reasons as to why he did not want to do it, but the bottom line is that he did not as he evidently weighed trinkets and Money more than legacy.

You are missing the point.

Germany was renowned for bad decisions, and Roy was well within his rights to not travel, if he thought he wasn't going to get a fair shake. After watching the Roch fight and some of Ottke's, I don't blame him.

You convieniently only see Things from one perspective because that is what fits your agenda. You fail to mention that bad decisions happens everywhere. Did you notice what happened when german superstars Axel Schulz and Felix Sturm tried their luck against American superstars in America?

Roy didn't have to jump through hoops to fight a guy who only held the WBO belt, who's best win was against Hill, who Roy had destroyed with absolute ease.

After DM beat him that is and it's not like triangular theory ever has worked in boxing dude.

Roy didn't heed to prove himself.

Why not? Why not fight the man of the division? Why give Roy a pass?

He'd have fought him in the U.S. but he was never going to travel and put himself at a disadvantage.

But you expect that the champion should fight at a disadvantage right?

After talks had broken down, he tried to fight Hopkins. When Hopkins made it clear he wasn't interested, he then fought Ruiz and Tarver.

Who did Dariusz go on to fight?

It would have been great had they fought. But Roy didn't need him to solidify his resume and his legacy.

I can understand that you give Roy a pass. To each his own.

[BKM-]

What??

Are you delibereately trolling me?

You said that DM was in his right to expect Jones to come to him UNTILL he had his belts taken away from him in the most hideous of fashions!

So after DM no longer had the belts (that you value so dearly), the onus was suddenly on DM to come to Roy. Is that not giving an insane amount of credit to those org's????



And you give him a pass for that. Why?


As you said, Roy had no intentions of coming to take the belt away from the champion. Plenty of reasons as to why he did not want to do it, but the bottom line is that he did not as he evidently weighed trinkets and Money more than legacy.


You convieniently only see Things from one perspective because that is what fits your agenda. You fail to mention that bad decisions happens everywhere. Did you notice what happened when german superstars Axel Schulz and Felix Sturm tried their luck against American superstars in America?


After DM beat him that is and it's not like triangular theory ever has worked in boxing dude.


Why not? Why not fight the man of the division? Why give Roy a pass?





But you expect that the champion should fight at a disadvantage right?



I can understand that you give Roy a pass. To each his own.

It's no use pal, nothing was ever Roy's fault or responsibility. Zimmerman's mind is as stubborn as Roy's ****.

[BKM-]

Why not? Why not fight the man of the division? Why give Roy a pass?

It's not necessary because woulda coulda's and also because olympics.

Look at how super cool he fought and how he beat his inferior opponents. No need to face any of the biggest legit opponents because Roy would have hypothetically beaten them anyway, so it's like those guys are counted as W's on his record too because woulda coulda.

[Ray Corso]

Prior to Jones moving out of the Light Heavyweight class he had good opposition that presented tests for him.
Jorge Vaca & Glen Thomas were his tests to move on to Bernard and he did very well against all of them.
Thomas Tate
James Toney
Merqui Sosa
Mike McCallum
Montel Griffin (2)
Virgil Hill
Otis Grant
Reggie Johnson
Eric Hardling
are all good competition and were not easy marks. They presented challenges and allowed Jones to gain valuable experience.

I don't think his record is lush with super talents but Roy stands on his own as a unique boxer with great speed and was a pretty intelligent fellow in the ring. Other than continuing far beyond his best he did very well and could give alot of great light heavies a good match!
Ray

[robertzimmerman]

BattlingNelson,

What??

Are you delibereately trolling me?

You said that DM was in his right to expect Jones to come to him UNTILL he had his belts taken away from him in the most hideous of fashions!

So after DM no longer had the belts (that you value so dearly), the onus was suddenly on DM to come to Roy. Is that not giving an insane amount of credit to those org's????

I said that if Dariusz had kept hold of his belts, Roy would have had to have made the concessions to go to Germany to try and get them. But due to the unfortunate circumstances with the Org's, the belts were split up. Lou Del Valle ended up with the WBA, and Reggie Johnson ended up with the IBF. But that unfortunate incident was nothing to do with Roy. Three years after Dariusz had lost them, Roy ended up with all of them, including the WBC. So no, due to those unfortunate circumstances, Roy no longer had to go to Germany to unify the division, as he'd ended up with all of the belts.

A fight between them would have been great. But again, I don't blame Roy for not travelling to Germany.

No, I don't agree with what the Org's did to Dariusz. But you have to ask yourself the following questions:

When the WBA said to Dariusz "You can only keep our belt if you ditch the WBO.."

Why do you think he dropped the WBA?

Was it in disgust, to stick two fingers up to the establishment?

Or was it because he wanted an easy ride with the WBO belt?

And you give him a pass for that. Why?

I've told you why numerous times.

He had no moral obligation to go to Germany because of what had happened with Dariusz 3 years earlier.

Again, he'd been robbed in the Olympics.

Again, he'd seen Dariusz feign injury to get Graciano Rochigianni disqualified.

He was considered the best fighter in the world, and he didn't have to go to Germany to prove he was the better fighter.

He had all three of the main belts.

Is that enough for you?

As you said, Roy had no intentions of coming to take the belt away from the champion. Plenty of reasons as to why he did not want to do it, but the bottom line is that he did not as he evidently weighed trinkets and Money more than legacy.

What belts? The belts had gone. Roy already had all of the belts. Nobody gave a **** about the WBO back then.

You convieniently only see Things from one perspective because that is what fits your agenda. You fail to mention that bad decisions happens everywhere. Did you notice what happened when german superstars Axel Schulz and Felix Sturm tried their luck against American superstars in America?

Of course bad decisions have happened elsewhere. Those guys would be well within their rights to not want to fight American's again.

Of course I'm giving you Roy's perspective. It's a thread where we're now discussing his career.

After DM beat him that is and it's not like triangular theory ever has worked in boxing dude.

We're not talking about triangle theories.

I'm saying that Roy didn't need to go to Germany to prove he was better than a guy who's biggest win was a points decision over a faded Hill.

Why not? Why not fight the man of the division? Why give Roy a pass?

Why did Roy have to take himself to Germany with all of the belts, to prove he was better than Dariusz?

He was considered the best fighter on the planet. A fight would have been great. But Roy didn't have to beat Dariusz to for validation. Roy had already proven he was a great fighter.

Let's assume that Roy had all the belts and was then stripped, which resulted in Dariusz ending up with them.

Then what?

You seriously think Dariusz would have gone to the U.S. to fight Roy?

But you expect that the champion should fight at a disadvantage right?

This is becoming really tiresome.

You are seeing things from your perspective as a fan, and not from the perspective of Roy.

In 2001, Roy was the champion.

Rightly or wrongly, Dariusz at that point was the former champ, and the current WBO belt holder that nobody cared about.

It's hilarious how you trash Roy's career.

Was Dariusz some sort of a superstar who Roy had to fight before he could be declared the best fighter in the world?

Who had Dariusz even beaten for you to be getting so upset?

He defended a lightly regarded belt against decent to poor opposition, before beating a faded Hill on points. That's it. Then he gave up the WBA and kept the WBO.

Look at things from Roy's perspective:

He'd beaten Hopkins with a fractured hand who'd never lost since.

He'd knocked out Malinga.

He'd beaten Toney with ease.

He'd iced Griffin in a round.

He'd easily beat Reggie Johnson.

He'd crushed Hill in four rounds, just after Dariusz had beaten him on points.

He'd smashed up Hall.

He'd beaten Harding.

He'd toyed with Gonzalez.


He didn't need to go to Germany to prove anything.

I can understand that you give Roy a pass. To each his own.

I have given you valid reasons why I gave Roy a pass for not travelling to Germany.

It's not my fault that you won't consider them.

[robertzimmerman]

It's no use pal, nothing was ever Roy's fault or responsibility. Zimmerman's mind is as stubborn as Roy's ****.

What a surprise, you were unable to answer a simple question that I asked you.

[robertzimmerman]

It's not necessary because woulda coulda's and also because olympics.

Look at how super cool he fought and how he beat his inferior opponents. No need to face any of the biggest legit opponents because Roy would have hypothetically beaten them anyway, so it's like those guys are counted as W's on his record too because woulda coulda.

Your flippant sarcasm is only highlighting your ignorance and lack of knowledge on the subject.

No need to face any legit opponents?

Frankie Liles, Chris Eubank, Evander Holyfield, Bernard Hopkins, Joe Calzaghe and Dariusz M, DID NOT WANT TO FIGHT ROY.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

I'll show you various book excerpts, videos and interviews that prove it.

[BKM-]

Your flippant sarcasm is only highlighting your ignorance and lack of knowledge on the subject.

No need to face any legit opponents?

Frankie Liles, Chris Eubank, Evander Holyfield, Bernard Hopkins and Dariusz M, DID NOT WANT TO FIGHT ROY.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

I'll show you various book excerpts, videos and interviews that prove it.

BattlingNelson already proved you wrong on atleast one case. I don't deny that it wasn't always his fault, but to claim that it never was is the biggest joke told in this thread next to Hamza's denial of his true intentions(it's hilarious watching him squirm)

Anyone who vehemently denies any wrong doings on Roy's entire career is a fanboy who you can't reason with. Interestingly you have ignored this question several times so you're being pretty ironic.