Did Roy Jones start losing at LHW when his competition stepped up?

[Poet682006]

Still don't think Hopkins lost to Taylor, but that is neither here nor there. Yes he has lost, but he has alsbo beat some good, solid opponents.

As to Ortiz. If he is joke, what do we call the majority Jones' list? It works both ways.

:rolleyes9: Sorry, but that would be Calslaphe's resume :rolleyes9:

[therealpugilist]

And the same applies to Jones opponents. But they still beat him in similar situations. It wasn't like Jones started getting destroyed by young bucks. He was getting beat by his contemporaries.

And when you have to start preaching title belts and weightclasses during the last few eras of boxing you lose me. They have become one of the least relevant barometers of a fighter's status.

really this discussion is becoming a huge circle....the facts are Jones never lost a legit fight til visibly and noticebaly past prime....did lose fights after 35 yes, before then his only lose was by DQ...so its kinda hard to dismiss going 48-1 in your first 49 fights

in closing to answer the threadstarter, did Jones start losing after his competition stepped up? the Answer is no...he beat Tarver in the first fight, already held a win over Hopkins, Johnson was a good fighter but really was he better than Virgil hill who went on to become WBA crusierweight champ 2x and stayed world class until he was 43, nope....so simply put no, he began to lose because he wasnt the fighter he used to be he was 35+

[SergioMaravilla]

really this discussion is becoming a huge circle....the facts are Jones never lost a legit fight til visibly and noticebaly past prime....did lose fights after 35 yes, before then his only lose was by DQ...so its kinda hard to dismiss going 48-1 in your first 49 fights

in closing to answer the threadstarter, did Jones start losing after his competition stepped up? the Answer is no...he beat Tarver in the first fight, already held a win over Hopkins, Johnson was a good fighter but really was he better than Virgil hill who went on to become WBA crusierweight champ 2x and stayed world class until he was 43, nope....so simply put no, he began to lose because he wasnt the fighter he used to be he was 35+

Good post! I respect your opinion, and you make a good point that Jones was still able to beat Tarver in the first fight. I've played devil's advocate in this thread. Personally, I tend to think it's a combination of factors. I think that Tarver and Johnson have terrible styles for Jones. They are certainly better than the likes of Richard Hall and Glenn Kelly. I also think that after coming back from HW, Jones wasn't as strong as he was before. Furthermore, I think Jones wasn't as motivated for these fights, because he wanted the big money fights at HW, this also led to his downfall.

[TheHayeMaker]

A lot of Roy Jones downfall was already mentioned, his age and his coming down from HW. Which is what I believe in too.
I personally think it's his age that just finally caught up with him. A fighter of his style needed all that cat like reflexes and amazing superman abilities more then say a fighter of Hopkins's style. That being said, if Roy never went on to HW, and just stayed at LHW I think he will be dominant until 2008. Once again my opinion. But I believe even in 2008 Roy could have been relevant. He might have picked up a loss or two along the way but it will be competitive losses.

[therealpugilist]

Good post! I respect your opinion, and you make a good point that Jones was still able to beat Tarver in the first fight. I've played devil's advocate in this thread. Personally, I tend to think it's a combination of factors. I think that Tarver and Johnson have terrible styles for Jones. They are certainly better than the likes of Richard Hall and Glenn Kelly. I also think that after coming back from HW, Jones wasn't as strong as he was before. Furthermore, I think Jones wasn't as motivated for these fights, because he wanted the big money fights at HW, this also led to his downfall.

totally agree, it was those combination of things...Jones would have never had an easy time with Tarver...tall, slick southpaw with power decent speed....Johnson on the other hand wouldve been to basic for a prime Jones but I see what you are saying about his style though.

[IMDAZED]

totally agree, it was those combination of things...Jones would have never had an easy time with Tarver...tall, slick southpaw with power decent speed....Johnson on the other hand wouldve been to basic for a prime Jones but I see what you are saying about his style though.

Agreed. But keep in mind Jones at one point fought about seven southpaws out of eight straight fights.

[SergioMaravilla]

Agreed. But keep in mind Jones at one point fought about seven southpaws out of eight straight fights.

Interesting point. However, I think with Tarvers jab, reach, speed and propensity to keep the fight at distance, I think even a 1997 Jones would have struggled with Antonio Tarver. That's not to say Tarver beats him, but I think if Jones fought Tarver at any time he'd have a hard nights work.

[Mr. Invincible]

Although DM would've been a nice addition to Jones resume, i wouldn't call a win over him "career defining". DM isn't a first ballot hall of famer, nor is he an all-time great. Hopkins & Toney on the other hand ARE. Jones already has signature wins. He's proven against great fighters. It's DM who's resume is lacking a win over a great fighter or hall of famer.

It was Roy that rightfully WON all of DM's trinkets and were sporting them around his waist. It was DM that refused to to pull out all stops and make the neccessary concessions in order to get them back. The onus should've been on DM moreso than Roy to make that fight happen, seeing as though he had alot more to prove than Roy. And what possibly could've been better for his career than dethroning the recognized p4p #1 fighter in the sport and taking on and defeating a fighter that was seen as nearly unbeatable? For whatever reason, he barely even made a serious attempt. And his legacy suffered because of it. Today, DM relatively unknown and barely remembered in the boxing world outside of Poland & Germany. While Jones is a legend in the sport and largely recognized as a consensus top 25 ATG.

Even DM's countryman Golota is held in higher esteem, despite having an inferior resume & career, unlike DM, he took on just about every great fighter in his division, win lose or draw. And gets a shit ton more of respect and acknowledgement because of this, despite going full . in alot of those losses

BTW, the RING weren't awarding titles in the 90's when DM beat Hill. When the RING started awarding titles again in the 2000's, Jones won it by beating the #3 guy the division (Eric Harding) after the #2 (DM) refused to face him. And yes, despite DM being the legitimate lineal champ, Roy had more of case of being ranked #1 in the division because he was beating more highly ranked Light Heavyweights at the time, and owned every single belt in the division outside of the one that DM held hostage in Germany, plus completely obliterated the guy that DM won the lineage from just a little under a year after DM struggled to beat him by a round or 2.

Just because you hold lineage in a division, doesn't automatically mean you're the proven best in said division (See: Zsolt Erdei).

And just to further your point, Jones was never ranked lower than Dariusz in the LHW rankings from his inception into the LWH division.

[therealpugilist]

Agreed. But keep in mind Jones at one point fought about seven southpaws out of eight straight fights.

Yea you are right, he knew how to fight southpaws..Although I just think Tarver's length and defense was always gonna make it hard for Jones to look good...he was a huge lightheavyweight with a good chin....Would just have been a wider decision win for Jones but I think since he'd be younger and more active he wins...in all three of their fights when Jones let his hands go, Tarver was handcuffed or befuddled

[THE REED]

Antonio Tarver is not slick.