**** Roy not bein prime anymore. 1st loss was a lucky punch. 2nd loss he didn't even fight, and whenever he did he had the better of it. The really bad loss on Roy's resume is the Johnson KO. He truly defeated Roy much worse than Tarver imo.
Roy Jones wasn't in his prime excuse debunked
Collapse
-
How does a trained, professional boxer throw a lucky punch?Comment
-
Comment
-
Jones did not avoid Tarver. They were scheduled to fight except Tarver went and lost to Eric Harding so Roy fought him instead.
He was not the same after cutting that weight. He was terrible in the first fight, he got lucky that Tarver only fought 5 rounds or he would have lost that one too. Say what you like, but if you think that the Jones post-Ruiz was even comparable to the man that demolished Woods, Reggie Johnson, Hall, Griffin, Telesco, Grant, Hill, etc. at LHW you are a certified moron.
I'm a certified moron because I feel that Tarver would have bested Roy at any time period based on him winning 2 out of 3 times, yet, you're the one making excuses as to why Roy lost.
Roy Jones wasn't in his prime the same as Antonio Tarver wasn't in his bottom line so that excuse holds no weight what so ever.
What we're talking about here are two men who are separated at birth by just a few months, and you're going to tell me that Tarver at 34 years old had better physical reflexes than when he was in his 20s?
Seriously, think about that for a moment.Comment
-
Comment
-
i understand your points.
but i'm a roy guy. no way would i ever call it anything other than a lucky punch.
tarver is ****. always has been. always will be.Comment
-
Comment
-
-
Forget about it, you are clearly just a massive hater so there really isn't any point.
I'm a certified moron because I feel that Tarver would have bested Roy at any time period based on him winning 2 out of 3 times, yet, you're the one making excuses as to why Roy lost.
Roy Jones wasn't in his prime the same as Antonio Tarver wasn't in his bottom line so that excuse holds no weight what so ever.
What we're talking about here are two men who are separated at birth by just a few months, and you're going to tell me that Tarver at 34 years old had better physical reflexes than when he was in his 20s?
Seriously, think about that for a moment.
I give Tarver credit, hell, its still ROy Jones out there. But what you are not realising is that it isn't a case of Roy being out of his prime. Forget this line. The issue is how much dropping all that muscular weight in a short period of time affected the dynamics of Roy's body. Based on the evidence that is available - which is a comparison of his performances prior to the Ruiz fight to those after it - I would say that it had a hugely detrimental impact on several aspects of his fight game that made him so effective. He was clearly not the same in so many ways. If you cannot see this and think that Roy fought just as well against Tarver and Johnson as he would have prior to his trip to HW and back then wow, just wow.Comment
Comment