Who has the more tougher resume, DLH or RJJ?

[-Hyperion-]

tougher??gotta be oscar by a mile...

[The Wire]

more tougher.........................

Yeah I know I apologise for that!

[THE REED]

So if that's the case then what about Calzaghe staying undefeated 11 years, defending his title 21 times, being undisputed champion at 168 and 175...? .

Joe stayed in the same weight class the entire time... now if that was the WW division, then that would be glorious.. but it wasnt, it was the weakest division in the entire sport.

And Joe IS/WAS not undisputed at 175...

But he (Calzaghe) didn't fight anyone and that's the problem I have with both fighters. Toney was severely weight drained. Roy's fault? No but it does tarnish the win. Hopkins chased a rematch for years once he became a better fighter and didn't get it, why? It would have been a huge fight but Roy didn't want it. IMO he's one of the most protected fighters in modern history.

You might wanna do your research.... I read a back and forth interview that went on for 3 days straight at BTALK.com

Bernard said hed like to fight ROY for a 50/50 split... roy immediately came back, and said he appreciated Bernard being fair, and was excited, and told BTalk to tell Bernard send over the contract, and lets do this.

Well Bernard did send the contract over, Roy Immediately called BTalk, and told us what the contract said.


AFTER GOLDEN BOY TAKES 25%... THEN Roy and Bernard Will split it 50/50.

Does that sound like a 50/50 split to you? and does it sound like Roy was the one who didnt want the fight?

If your gonna make a point, try to at least think it through.


And I like how you use James Toney being weight drained as a reason for him losing... yet bringing up weight drainage for Roy, is just an excuse.

Double standards get a little ree****yaluss around here sometimes.


On that note, i Gata leave.

[THE REED]

no response??????

[Dan...]

Oscar fought the better fighters I think. Having said that he lost to most of the great fighters he has fought. The losses to Mosley and Tito hurt Oscar's legacy a little and those losses at his prime are probably the significant reason as to why I would rate Roy over him all time wise.

[IMDAZED]

Oscar fought the better fighters I think. Having said that he lost to most of the great fighters he has fought. The losses to Mosley and Tito hurt Oscar's legacy a little and those losses at his prime are probably the significant reason as to why I would rate Roy over him all time wise.

Not to mention...

Oscar didn't fight the real champ at 130

Didn't fight the real champ at 135

Didn't fight the real champ at 140

Finally fought the best at 147 and arguably lost every fight.

Never beat anyone of note at 154 except for a damaged Vargas

[Pugilistic™]

De la Hoya.

[Darkstar]

Im really starting to see these Roy fans come out. The thought that any one voted for Jones on this question is just plain scary.

The question was who fought the better competition. De La Hoya by a mile and a half.

[Dan...]

Im really started to see these Roy fans come out. The thought that any one voted for Jones is just plain scary.

The question was who fought the better competition.

As much as I think you are a Roy hater I agree with you. Anyone who voted Roy over Oscar in this poll is just ridiculous, Oscar has clearly fought the better fighters.

[IMDAZED]

Are you denying what I'm saying? Or trying to be funny?