Tweet
Funny how you say he can't get hit agains't the ropes when.. 3 of his four losses came because he was getting pressured against the ropes (Technically the first Tarver fight was a win, but it provided the formula for the second fight, which is what lead Tarver to try the same thing, that got him an early knockout)
-
-
you say you dont sell roy short, yet you say hopkins is betterwhen roy eaily beat him closer to their primes than now and you inist a fight now means more lmfao...what a hater..
also may i remind you youre the guy who tought 8 rounds to four wa 116-114....
you are reaching now youre holding roy's last fights against him...Comment
-
How do you know this? Lol.. That's the real question. I can go with p4p skill and so can you. But, that argument leans toward Robinson. As far as power, and who caried what with who, and comparing chins, and how they were tested. That's so beyond the realm of predictability. Explain to me how you're SO certain that he'd be KOed by a lesser skilled fighter?Comment
-
I don't have an actual problem with Roy. I rooted for him in some fights. I'm not saying a fight now means MORE. I said, it means that if Hopkins wins now, it proves that Roy wasn't ALWAYS the better man. That's all I said.
I'm not a hater. I don't hate ANY boxer, other than John Ruiz. He just sucks. Horrible. You can bring up that mistake all you want. But it kind of makes your argument seem like you need something else to help you prove a point. You're making a decent argument. Don't dilute it by bringing up an honest mistake. I'm sure you've made a couple in your life yourself.
As far as his last fights. That's what I have to go by. I also said he looked god in his MOST recent two. But right now. I had to bring up recent fights, because I have nothing else to go on, in terms of how a fight would play out now between the two.Comment
-
thats why i said p4p robinson was better, at ww he was a beast..(though if lamotta coukld beat him, and lamotta is nothing special, i still have my doubts about him...)anyway srr's record speaks more than his skills do IMO...i think he was great but i mainly put him as p4p #1 because he faced some killers and beat them...
roy's resume is what could be hold againt him, but his natural skills are the best in the history of boxing....Comment
-
Roy didn't have amazing boxing skills, though. He was just (I say JUST because it is BOXING) very athletic and fast. His defense wasn't GREAT, he didn't have a great chin, and he lacked GREAT fundamentals.You can ask almost any trainer. If you explained his style to a trainer, almost all trainers would say he'd be beat. Than you add in his reflexes/speed and athletism, and it's a different story. Once those things faded, he's a PRETTY good boxer, not a GREAT one though. Also, He lost to Lamotta, once.. Beat him 4 times. So, let's not forget that. It was after he had several dozen fights, too.Comment
-
ok you sound honest so i'll accept my mistake....
but still i think you, like many, have that thing that makes you appreciate old timers more, and have been caught in roys fame that he didnt fight anyone, but it was not just roy's fault, eubank, benn, dariusz and all those guys didnt want to fight him either, roy was dying for a crack at nigel benn after he beat mcclellan, but nigel decided to take a tune up after the tragedy before roy and lost to sugar biy malinga, who roy had already beat...
eubank was a smw when roy was a mw, and has accepte he never wanted any part of roy
dariusz went to roys fight vs virgil hill having just decisioned virgil, and ran away scared when roy broke virgils ribs with a single body shot...and ended up losing to a guy who was humiliated by roy(julio gonzalez)
mcclellan obviously couldnt fight him, so who else was there for him to beat??? hopkins?? the guy who thought he could ask more money than roy even though roy was p4p #1, the bigger draw, and already had a victory over him???/and in top of that roy offered to move down to 168.... thats flat out ducking if you ask meComment
-
Well. You make a decent argument. We'll agree to disagree.Comment
Comment