Your Jones opinion...

[ICEMAN JOHN SCULLY]

LOL It is not BS from me and I am not contradicting myself...RJ still apparently has something left in the tank, sure, and he is not nearly as past it as Ali and Louis were but he is also WAY past his absolute best, too. The comparison betwen Ali-Berbick and Holmes and RJ-Johnson and Tarver is that losses suffered when you are obviously past your prime do not count as much as losses suffered earlier. Even if RJ comes back NOW and beats everybody out there it doesnt mean that his prime has magically returned, you know? Anything that transpires after a person's prime is past is just events that were aded to his previous career. It's like if I compare Ali to Louis, for example, I cant take the 1942 Louis and put him against the 1981 Ali and use that as proof of anything. I am always forced to each guy at his best... that is where he should ultimately be judged. Roy may have great day ahead, who knows, but his best day is past

[BROOKLYN CESAR]

Great points!!! I have never doubted that roy wasnt as good as he claimed because imo he was better then he said he was!!! Great Reflexes Awesome Power and Blinding Speed and lets not forget the Amazing Flair he showed along the way!!!

[Vladimir303]

[B]LOL It is not BS from me and I am not contradicting myself...RJ still apparently has something left in the tank, sure, and he is not nearly as past it as Ali and Louis were but he is also WAY past his absolute best, too. The comparison betwen Ali-Berbick and Holmes and RJ-Johnson and Tarver is that losses suffered when you are obviously past your prime do not count as much as losses suffered earlier. Even if RJ comes back NOW and beats everybody out there it doesnt mean that his prime has magically returned, you know?

No it hasn't returned, you're missing the point. Ali's loss to Holmes doesn't take away anthing from him because he was a 100% done. He wasn't gonna beat anybody out there from that point on. Roy was.


You can't have it both ways, giving credit to Roy for winning at age 39 or 40 but ignoring the losses at age 36 against other 36 year olds.

See to me you look like you're babying Roy as a fighter. Just because he wasn't at his absolute peak doesn't mean that the losses don't hurt his legacy, specially since the opponents were his exact age and weren't in their prime either.

[ICEMAN JOHN SCULLY]

The age of the opponents mean nothing...especially because ther eare BOXING years and there are actual years. Ali at 38 was equal to an RJ at 45 or more. When Tarver beat RJ he was only 8 years out of the olympics....RJ was 16 YEARS from them. ANY fighter in history has to be judged on his prime... what happens well past it means little...unless of course you want to start taking away from Ray Robinson's legancy because he lost to Joey Archer when he was elderly in boxing age terms