Something to consider about Tarver/Jones

[tyson]

I will never admit to Tarver being a top class fighter.

The best of the worst or worst of the best can be discussed.
He fights like an ass. He is more boring than Hopkins.

And Roy didn't have the reflexes in the third fight. He still had the understanding and intelligence to anticipate the events, but when he needed to rely on the reflexes, he got caught more often than not.

The 5 round was great, but it was equally a fault of Tarver, who clearly took a breather.

If Roy could fight like that the entire fight, he would have easily won, but only if he didn't show any signs of being gun-shy.
He did though.

[Fox McCloud]

^^^^^

Why can't you admit to Tarver being a top fighter?

He beat Glen Johnson once (should have been twice)... Johnson just recently gave Chad Dawson absolute hell.

He beat Jones (twice and gave a good account in the first fight) who actually looks pretty good as of late, so he probably isn't as shot as most people make him out to be.

And now, he beat Woods, which puts him back in the upper part of the division, even after being slaughtered by Hopkins... and anyone who has watched Tarver fight a good fight against anyone knows that isn't what he looks like (against Hopkins) when he is fighting an effective fight.

Tarver is one of the sharpest/most efficient fighters in the sport.

[tyson]

^^^^^

Why can't you admit to Tarver being a top fighter?

He beat Glen Johnson once (should have been twice)... Johnson just recently gave Chad Dawson absolute hell.

He beat Jones (twice and gave a good account in the first fight) who actually looks pretty good as of late, so he probably isn't as shot as most people make him out to be.

And now, he beat Woods, which puts him back in the upper part of the division, even after being slaughtered by Hopkins... and anyone who has watched Tarver fight a good fight against anyone knows that isn't what he looks like (against Hopkins) when he is fighting an effective fight.

Tarver is one of the sharpest/most efficient fighters in the sport.

Personal vendetta, probably.

The nature of the first fight against Jones left a sour taste in my mouth.
I am absolutely confident that the second was a fluke shot from hell. I sincerely believe Jones would have won that fight rather easily, becoming more and more effective than he was in the first round.

Tarver is awkward and a lefty, making his fights ugly and boring. Him beating a 60 year old Johnson doesn't really make him a great fighter in my mind.

Woods shouldn't even be considered when discussing the credentials for rating a top class fighter. He sucks. Particularly in the fight against Tarver.
You can say that was because of Tarver, but it was very remniscent of how Hopkins made Tarver look.

Horrible.

To make myself clear, I think Tarver is a very good fighter. Just not top class.

[Fox McCloud]

Personal vendetta, probably.

The nature of the first fight against Jones left a sour taste in my mouth.
I am absolutely confident that the second was a fluke shot from hell. I sincerely believe Jones would have won that fight rather easily, becoming more and more effective than he was in the first round.

Tarver is awkward and a lefty, making his fights ugly and boring. Him beating a 60 year old Johnson doesn't really make him a great fighter in my mind.

Woods shouldn't even be considered when discussing the credentials for rating a top class fighter. He sucks. Particularly in the fight against Tarver.
You can say that was because of Tarver, but it was very remniscent of how Hopkins made Tarver look.

Horrible.

To make myself clear, I think Tarver is a very good fighter. Just not top class.

To everything you said, fair enough...

except for the 1000 year old Johnson part.

The 1003 year old Johnson just kicked Dawson's ass (whether or not he got the decision, he wasn't hurt, and Dawson got pretty beat up), and it's not like Antonio Tarver is particularly young. He was like 37 when he fought The Road Warrior.

[Knicksman20]

Tarver is a good fighter but not great. And let's not fool ourselves about him though; had this been a prime Jones he fought there's no way in hell Tarver makes it a close fight. Jones in his prime was the closest to a perfect fighter you could have.

[tyson]

That is fair too.

I over-simplified a bit. Johnson has alot of controversial decision losses. I don't know how many of those he should have won.

But I know two things;

1. Many of those fights were ages ago. He is no fine wine.

2. Many of those opponents were ****. Like Woods.

You can make an argument for styles and all that, but it is then easy to brush that off with Johnson being one-dimensional, proved by his inability to adjust and take over fights.
Him beating Dawson may or may not be a big deal, even if he didn't beat him.
Dawson may still be defeated by **** people in the future, making that fight practically irrelevant.

It is relevant in your argument, however, because you use that as proof that Johnson is not shot or over the hill. But to me Dawson was unproven on that level and doesn't really serve as a measuring stick to where Johnson is at, but rather the other way around.

If you understand me.

[!! Shawn]

In the third fight... Roy Jones Jr. actually looked like he had his reflexes back... he was just afraid to throw. The 5th round shows how good he looked if he would have just fired.

Anyway, that, coupled with the fact that he was trying to be overly defensive... to the point that he was more interested in getting away from punches than creating his own offense, makes it pretty astounding what Tarver did in the 10th (I think it was the 10th).

Tarver was able to catch Jones with a right hook (he is not known for having a powerful right hook. He is more known for his heavy straight left), and hurt him badly.

Althought everyone seems to think that Tarver is just a decent fighter who got lucky, he showed quite a bit against Jones in the first and second fight (when Jones looked pretty shot), and looked good in the third fight (when Jones was just hesitant to throw).

I am really starting to think that Antonio is a HELL of a lot better than people make him out to be. That Hopkins fight is the only bad moment of his career for the most part (minus when his jaw was busted in half against Harding, which he later avenged), and that was NOT an accurate representation of what Antonio Tarver can do when he is on his game.

Tarver was an amazing amateur. He is a pretty good pro, but not nearly on Roy Jones level. If you ever actually watch his fight fight with Harding. You will recognize what crap he can be.

[Fox McCloud]

That is fair too.

I over-simplified a bit. Johnson has alot of controversial decision losses. I don't know how many of those he should have won.

But I know two things;

1. Many of those fights were ages ago. He is no fine wine.

2. Many of those opponents were ****. Like Woods.

You can make an argument for styles and all that, but it is then easy to brush that off with Johnson being one-dimensional, proved by his inability to adjust and take over fights.
Him beating Dawson may or may not be a big deal, even if he didn't beat him.
Dawson may still be defeated by **** people in the future, making that fight practically irrelevant.

It is relevant in your argument, however, because you use that as proof that Johnson is not shot or over the hill. But to me Dawson was unproven on that level and doesn't really serve as a measuring stick to where Johnson is at, but rather the other way around.

If you understand me.

Man, this is getting to be one of the best discussions I've had on here in quite a while.

Alright, I'll try to answer each thing.

First, even though Johnson does have about a million losses, a lot of them were in fighters back yards, and a lot are considered to be bad decisions. You make the point that the fighters he lost to were nothing to talk about, but that's the bad thing about ****ty decisions, they always make a lesser fighter beat a better one. Mayweather could have gotten robbed against Baldomir, and it doesn't mean Floyd is worse for it because Baldomir is a bad fighter, it just means he got robbed.

And I agree about pretty much everything in the last paragraph. Clearly Johnson is one dimensional. I felt he got outboxed by Tarver in the first fight, and he got beat a lot worse when Tarver made adjustments, and Johnson... didn't.

The only reason I mentioned Dawson is because Dawson is one of those athletic freak champions that people get excited about (OMFG THE NEXT ROY JONES!!!!11), and Johnson had a damn good fight against him. The boxer is supposed to be able to keep the pressure fighter on the outside with the jab, but Dawson couldn't. One last thing about Chad Dawson... He looks a lot better than he did after Tomasz Adamek kicked O'Neil Bell's ass recently, considering he waxed Adamek like it was nothing.

I wish LHW was deeper so Tarver could test himself against some other fighters, because there are a lot of questions left unanswered. A Hopkins rematch would have been nice to prove whether he looked bad that night because of some external factor, or whether Hopkins was able to make him look bad. It's too bad Johnson lost, because a third fight would have been another good marker on where he is at. Calzaghe would be a good fight for him (even though he would lose), but Calzaghe isn't going to fight him. Finally, he does really need to make and win a Dawson fight before he retires... It's pretty much all there is out there for him now.

[Fox McCloud]

Tarver was an amazing amateur. He is a pretty good pro, but not nearly on Roy Jones level. If you ever actually watch his fight fight with Harding. You will recognize what crap he can be.

The same way Arthur Abraham was crap against Miranda?

I haven't seen it, but to my knowledge, his jaw was severly ****ed up and broken for the majority of that fight.

I will say that Tarver is an on/off fighter.

[THE REED]

The same way Arthur Abraham was crap against Miranda?

I haven't seen it, but to my knowledge, his jaw was severly ****ed up and broken for the majority of that fight.

I will say that Tarver is an on/off fighter.

Great fighters aren't