What if: Roy Jones Jr. vs. Joe Calzaghe Prime for Prime

[abadger]

I'll accept it most likely RJJ by UD would be the bookies and peoples favourite, but KO by R1, or R5? Man handled?

I know RJJ was and still largely is, one of the most talented boxers we've seen in recent times, but people do put a little too much excessive belief that he was untouchable in his prime.

Sorry guys, but no ones untouchable, as much of a nice hero story of perfection it is.

Calzaghe was right at the top area in the SMW division at that time, and has since been proven to be the best. Few accepted he was the best or even so good when RJJ was in his prime. Yet he was younger, fitter, had less brittle hands and KO power, more stamina than what he is now beating Kessler and Hopkins.

So it's ridiculous to say it wouldn't be a good match up. Many thought that would be the case, and sadly it doesn't surprise me many still go along with that despite Calzaghe recently proving himself. For me, he was always this good, and could always perform at Hopkins level, and was dangerous without hand problems too. Joe has also shown he trains and rises to a massive challenge, and is motivated to do well against better competiton. He always brings out more than the opponent somehow within. So I see it a 60-40 fight in RJJ favour. Nov 08 I see it 60-40 in Joes favour, which is surprising considering he's unlikely to even KO RJJ's weak chin, with his brittle hands.

Excellent post, as ever. Agree 100%, no boxer is untouchable and Jones in particular has been conclusively proved to be eminently beatable. Anyone saying he would destroy calzaghe is not looking at the two fighters objectively, and failing to appreciate that when the best fighters meet, it more often than not results in a competitive fight.
________
Chevrolet corvette c1

[supermandathoe]

I have never seen one specific thread made so many times.

[Johnny Rebel]

Calzaghe KO's Jones in one!

[IMDAZED]

Jones's speed makes him a very heavy favourite to win by UD.

I give a prime Calzaghe a chance though. Jones has a lot of flaws in his technical game, especially defensively, he never looked good under pressure and could often appear vulnerable, just no-one was ever able to exploit it. We know he is vulnerable to KO so Calzaghe has a chance if he could somehow turn it into a real war. No easy task.

Wow. Completely false. On the contrary, Jones was at his very best against pressure fighters. Don't let the Glen Johnson bout fool you - that was an aberration.

Jones was a counterpuncher of the highest level; fighters who came forward and threw a lot were eaten alive. Look at the rugged Merqui Sosa who - after being given the Ring Magazine award for Best Chin - got dropped hard and taken out in two by Jones (although the stoppage was a tad premature).

In his prime, Jones struggled with counterpunchers like himself (Griffin, Harding) but certainly not the pressure fighters. I doubt Jones would have stopped Calzaghe but he would have won a wide UD.

[abadger]

Wow. Completely false. On the contrary, Jones was at his very best against pressure fighters. Don't let the Glen Johnson bout fool you - that was an aberration.

Jones was a counterpuncher of the highest level; fighters who came forward and threw a lot were eaten alive. Look at the rugged Merqui Sosa who - after being given the Ring Magazine award for Best Chin - got dropped hard and taken out in two by Jones (although the stoppage was a tad premature).

In his prime, Jones struggled with counterpunchers like himself (Griffin, Harding) but certainly not the pressure fighters. I doubt Jones would have stopped Calzaghe but he would have won a wide UD.

Sorry, I don't agree. Roy is better now and did improve in his career, but to me he often looked distinctly out of ideas when caught on the ropes or having to deal with a landing, sustained attack.

Admittedly, in his prime no-one was ever able to exploit this vulnerability because Roy's speed was such that the opportunities to really hurt him were few and far between, but the vulnerability was definitely there.

For me Roy was at his best on the relatively rare occasions he chose to use his jab frequently, because again, his speed almost removed any chance of him being hit going in or out. When his jab was working well he was able to patiently open up his opponents defense and throw his amazing combinations at exactly the right time, with maximum effect. That was my own personal favourite Roy Jones.
________
F9

[Chunk..]

Calzaghe Nuthuggers - The Names...

_Ricky_
Johnny Rebel
Tunney
sparked_85
boxing_great
x-LuKe-x
GodOfWar
F_R_K_O
dc6112
GreatJoe
hardmanbrit
hugh grant
jarulejt
KrisSilver
mECHsLAVE
munray
Ryuuzaki
ScarletBoxer

Keep your eye out for these lot in the Calzaghe threads.

Watch your back for these lot in this thread!

[IMDAZED]

Sorry, I don't agree. Roy is better now and did improve in his career, but to me he often looked distinctly out of ideas when caught on the ropes or having to deal with a landing, sustained attack.

I take it you didn't watch too many fights of his at 160 or 168, did you? Be honest. At 175, I might agree with you but, then again, we are talking about his prime here.

Admittedly, in his prime no-one was ever able to exploit this vulnerability because Roy's speed was such that the opportunities to really hurt him were few and far between, but the vulnerability was definitely there.

What vulnerability? What fighter isn't vulnerable? What are you saying here??

For me Roy was at his best on the relatively rare occasions he chose to use his jab frequently, because again, his speed almost removed any chance of him being hit going in or out. When his jab was working well he was able to patiently open up his opponents defense and throw his amazing combinations at exactly the right time, with maximum effect. That was my own personal favourite Roy Jones.

You mean the 168lb version...?

Really, I don't understand your post. You say you disagreed but can you point to any super middleweight bout where he looked bad against a pressure fighter? Or even at 175 up until the Tarver fight? Thanks in advance.

[Knicksman20]

I take it you didn't watch too many fights of his at 160 or 168, did you? Be honest. At 175, I might agree with you but, then again, we are talking about his prime here.



What vulnerability? What fighter isn't vulnerable? What are you saying here??



You mean the 168lb version...?

Really, I don't understand your post. You say you disagreed but can you point to any super middleweight bout where he looked bad against a pressure fighter? Or even at 175 up until the Tarver fight? Thanks in advance.

Exactly! Jones fought very well off the ropes in his prime & sometimes went to the ropes intentionally to bait opponents into getting caught with his counters. The Merqui Sosa fight was a prime example of this. And you're right the fight was stopped prematurely.

[SupremeElectron]

Roy Jones by TKO. This fight definitely gets stopped in the mid rounds.

[abadger]

I take it you didn't watch too many fights of his at 160 or 168, did you? Be honest. At 175, I might agree with you but, then again, we are talking about his prime here.



What vulnerability? What fighter isn't vulnerable? What are you saying here??



You mean the 168lb version...?

Really, I don't understand your post. You say you disagreed but can you point to any super middleweight bout where he looked bad against a pressure fighter? Or even at 175 up until the Tarver fight? Thanks in advance.

First, I'm quite certain I haven't seen as many Roy fights as you have, but I'm not just ignorantly criticising him from the persepective of a Calzaghe fan, nor am I only talking about his later career. I've watched several of Roy's biggest fights, and some that have been recommended to me as standout performances, I'm not a Roy 'expert' but I like to think I am able to judge a fighters potential strengths and weaknesses based on the evidence of my eyes. I've seen him face (off the top of my head) Hopkins, Toney, Pazienza, Tate, Byrd, Thornton, Sosa, Griffin x 2, Reggie Johnson, Glen Johnson, Tarver x 2 and Woods. Quite probably I haven't seen all of Roy's best performances, but I don't think that makes my opinion invalid, I think I've seen enough.

I should say that I'm not talking about Roy 'looking bad', I'm talking about moments in fights, even those that he won, even those that he looked great in, where a potential weakness in his game was apparent. I fully admit that Roy was so incredible that success against him is relative, like against Mayweather, and is not measured by nearly beating him, but in fact by giving him any trouble at all.

For me I'd say a good example of what I'm talking about, at SMW is the Pazienza fight. For some people this is Roy's biggest ever display of talent. Sure, in the end Roy blew him away, but in the opening rounds Pazienza had Roy on the ropes several times, looking to me like he didn't know how to get out. He took Pazienza's punishment well enough, and went on to win, but if you look past that, then you can see that being under pressure is not Roy's favourite place. I think you see the same thing at places in the Hopkins fight, amongst others, to be honest I'd say he's been like that his whole career and is actually at his best in these situations right now.

So I reiterate, I'm not slamming Roy, I'm not saying he's a bad fighter, he was incredible, and I favour him to beat Calzaghe. You make a good point when you ask "What fighter isn't vulnerable?", they all are to a degree, and no fighter is immune from having moments in a fight when they are on the receiving end. I'm just saying that to me Roy looked to have a definite weakness in this area, and I think its pretty clearly observable. You may disagree, maybe its just that Roy was so incredible in other departments that any slight flaw is magnified, it could be true. However I don't believe it is out of place to note that Roy was described as lacking fundamentals throughout his career, and that this referred to his lack of technical ability on the inside, his habit of jumping into punches and his reliance on his relexes to get him out of trouble. In fact I'm sure that most agree that this lack of fundamentals caught up eith him in the end, proving that in fact, they were real vulnerabilities all along. I admire the jabbing Roy because that was the style that best overcame his vulnerabilities and made him close to being an unbeatable boxer.

At the end of the day all I'm saying is this: Roy Jones did have clear and observable flaws in his game throughout his career which his natural ability was able to compensate for. Against a top class boxer the potential is there for his opponent to exploit those flaws, however unlikely that might be. I think that is a reasonable argument, and surely in countering, you are not arguing that Roy was flawless?
________
E-Class