P4P whos better? Roy or Floyd

[DiegoFuego]

The quality of opposition is so immense, you can't possibly claim Roy has fought half the competition Mayweather has. People just love Roy for his power, but Mayweather has done more in his time and without ever losing or really even coming close. His only close fight was the one he only had ONE hand.

[Scoooter]

If they were the same size, I think a prime Roy beats a prime Mayweather. But they're both very good.

[S A M U R A I]

Roy Jones



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

[rambov]

I think Roy would be my pick had he not gotten ko'd by the LHW's. He also fought John Ruiz for a title.... and he sucks. So Floyd...but I could be wrong

[pbftxrs316]

Very, very difficult to say.

Mayweather does seem to be bothered by very sharp punchers (the Oscar jab was a good example), and Jones punches pretty sharp.

Jones also made a defensive guru look terrible when he whipped James Toney's ass.

I'd say Jones, but in honesty, we haven't seen enough weakness from either of their prime selves to make even a partially educated guess on this one. I go Jones just because he faced less resistance in the ring during his prime.

And don't give me that **** about him only facing horrible fighters. The James Toney that Jones beat was considered better at the time than any fighter Mayweather has faced (as in, Toney was more respected in 1994 than Castillo was in 2002, Corrales in 2001, Hatton in 2007, etc.).

Very difficult question to answer.

mayweather was bothered by oscar's sharp punches at the highest weight of his career, and past his prime imo. his prime was in late 04 and 2005 imo, when he didn't have problems with sharp punchers, just wild punchers who threw awkward shots from weird angles like chop chop did and bruselles did. floyd's methodical intelligence in the ring was not matched and still isn't. roy was flashy, floyd was methodical fluent. if they fought at the same weight naturally with their styles, i'd pick floyd everytime over jones, every single time, he did more things better, like jab, block, counter imo, although that one is close, threw much sharper punches, this is critical, at 140, floyd threw sharp punches, punches thrown right, and his timing was better than roy's was, he fought off the ropes better, he did everything better, because roy hit harder, and roy may have had faster hands, although that can be argued also to the tee, roy moved more, floyd was faster overall, faster upperbody movement, not just head movement, roy was fast with that also, but faster upperbody movement, especially off of the ropes? roy ******, floyd killed him in this department too.

floyd takes this one.

[Fox McCloud]

^^^^^

Just because Floyd throws sharper punches doesn't mean he has an advantage over Jones. Jones was never really bothered by sharp punchers (or anything for that matter). If you watch Toney-Barkley, you can see how sharp of a puncher James Toney is. Even though Oscar was huge compared to Floyd, that doesn't make any sense as to why Oscar's jab landed so frequently. All that means is that the jab that landed so frequently was going to be a lot more forceful than Floyd had experienced previous to that.

I still am not sure either way, but based on what happened in their careers, it does seem like Jones would have a slight advantage. Whether that would mean **** in the ring, we'll never know.

By the way, I've seen all of Floyd's fights, and the reason he looks so sharp at 140 (as well as powerful, and just overall ridiculously dominant) was because he really didn't fight anyone of great quality. Corley or Gatti is the best fighter on his resume at 140, which really... isn't anything to brag about.