Roy Jones is the real myth

[bsrizpac]

clean effective punching, to an extent. If a fighter is landing clean effective punches but only making the effort to land/throw a few per round, i favour aggression.

Okay, so I think that, and this is me not kidding or trying to insult you, that you should look up how to score a Unified professional boxing contest. This is not to be mean, you aren't clueless or anything, but I think you should tighten that up a bit.

For example, to counter what you have said, what if the one fighter who is not aggressive is consistently causing damage to the aggressor (not in reference to this particular fight)?

[Super welsh Joe]

i love the way the Americans will not address the steroid issue lol

[daggum]

Listen i didnt think it was a great fight but the best man won !
JC pushed the fight and wanted to engage in some sort of fisty cuffs ,where Hoppkins wanted to hold,hugg,mollest ,sham,and cheat his way to a points victory !
Only one man wanted to make a proper fight of it and thats why he won !

he wanted to engage but he couldnt hit hopkins isnt that the sad part? how is he better if he couldnt hit hopkins? he wanted to make a proper fight of it? wow talking points up the ass here. bottom line hopkins landed all the good punches im sorry if he grabbed too much and threw calzaghe off his game and made him look like ****. i'm sure that was his plan. best man my ass.

[adamk1304]

wales and england are both in the united kingdom yet you can see no correlation between why someone from england would like joe calzaghe? how did your ****** ass stumble onto the internet?

If you had actually read my earlier post, you would've realised that i'm irish you twat, i moved to england a few years ago. Last time i checked, Irish people tend to come from Ireland, not England.

[garryd]

So....you didn't answer the question. Cool.

BTW, I agree that Joe did more during the fight, I've never argued otherwise.

sorry mate ,what question???
Ps i aint no idiot i just wouldnt have wanted hoppkins nore anyone winning a fight that way !

[adamk1304]

so pretty much whatever joe calzaghe does he wins right?

Not at all, If hopkins had actually attempted to throw more than two punches per round, i may have given more of the rounds to him.

[bsrizpac]

i love the way the Americans will not address the steroid issue lol

Already been done over and over you dumb sheep ****er.

[MWMerlino]

You know RJJ is an ATG when mother ****ers are calling him a "myth". Thats even bigger than a "legend."

[abadger]

I'll try to be fair.

Roy Jones was massively talented boxer. His speed and reflexes may be the greatest that the sport has ever seen. About this there can be no argument, you only have to go back and watch some of his prime fights to see it.

However, it is also true that he lacks large amounts of top class competition, though his resume is by no means bad. He holds comfortable wins over both Bernard Hopkins and James Toney, embarassed most of the rest of his competition and beat good boxers in Virgil Hill, Montell Griffin and Clinton Woods. He also won belts from MW to HW which is frankly amazing. On the negative side he never fought the very best guys in his prime at SMW in Eubank, Benn, Collins and McLellan. Any of these on paper would have given him his toughest fight, but tell that to James Toney.

Over time a "Roy myth" has undoubtedly grown up, his awesome skills and the nature of many of his victories does cause many boxing fans to literally see him as a superman who was absolutely unbeatable. Clearly this is an exaggeration because the fact is that in many fights Roy did show some weaknesses, notably a lack of boxing fundamentals, a tendency to ship fair amounts of punishment when on the ropes and he sometimes struggled with southpaws. Notably of course, he did in the end lose to Tarver and Johnson, and while these losses should not be completely overlooked, my feeling is that in truth Roy was both old and/ or weight drained in these fights, so we shouldn't read too much into them. No-one ever beat a prime Roy Jones, though we may also say that the very best boxers were never given the chance to do so.

So we basically have a situation in which the most skilled boxer of the era spent a lot of his career demonstrating his skills to maximum effect, but perhaps did not demonstrate his ability to beat the very best fighters. His critics can legitimately point to the fact he lost to two of the better boxers he faced, but his fans can excuse these losses with a fair degree of justification. What this adds up to in my opinion is that it is justifiable to make Roy favourite against any of those he did not box, and also in prime for prime matchups against the likes of Calzaghe, but it is not justifiable to treat a Roy victory as a foregone conclusion.

Calzaghe would almost certainly have given Roy a very tough fight indeed, most likely walking through Roys shots in order to pressurise the quicker more skilful fighter because not doing so would have resulted in Joe being comprehensively outboxed. Some will feel that this would result in Calzaghe eventually being KOd, and it might, but it is perfectly possible also that Calzaghe might have exposed the weaknesses in Roys game that had been bubbling under the surface for a long time and which were brutally exposed in an older Roy by Tarver and Johnson. Problem is we'll never know.

Roy Jones was a tremendous boxer and often really did look like superman, but in the real world no-one is invincible, that really is just a myth.

[adamk1304]

Okay, so I think that, and this is me not kidding or trying to insult you, that you should look up how to score a Unified professional boxing contest. This is not to be mean, you aren't clueless or anything, but I think you should tighten that up a bit.

For example, to counter what you have said, what if the one fighter who is not aggressive is consistently causing damage to the aggressor (not in reference to this particular fight)?

I was referring to the way i scored this particular fight. If Hopkins had been consistently hurting calzaghe with the punches he threw i would;ve scored more in favour of Hopkins. I just don't believe that a figher should be rewarded for throwing a minimum amount of punches, excessive clinching and constant use of the head.