Is Roy Jones in the top 20 all time great?

[IronDanHamza]

LMAO hill and mccallum were ancient guys,, literally mccallum was 42 years old fighting 4 divisons higher than his prime,,,

Cotto, mosely, oscar, were much better and champions when floyd fought them,, faded yes, downhill yes,,, but nowhere near as bad as mccallum and hill

Certainly for McCallum. McCallum was nothing but a name at that point.

Hill I thought was quite good though. He was #1 at 175 when Jones fought him.

I agree those wins for Mayweather are probably better but Hill was still a good win for sure especially the way he did it.

Funny that Hill is been touted though for Roy and Hearns beat him first and the guy was asking who Hearns had beaten at 160 and above

[Sugar Adam Ali]

If people are crapping on Hopkins, Toney, Hill, Griffin, Johnson, etc, you know the guys RJJ beat, then I can only imagine what they would say if he actually beat Michael Nunn, Eubanks, Collins ect....

Especially when the guys RJJ beat had already beaten guys like Nunn, Eubanks, COllins, etc.

If you schit on the guys Jones beat, how can you say he "should've" fought the guys who he beat had already beaten?

Lastly, after Nunn fought James Toney he was done. I can't for the life of me figure out why/how someone could big up Michael Nunn post James Toney who did absolutely NOTHING

Im not crappy on roy's resume,,, just that it isnt top 20 ATG resume

Roy had a great career, but not a top 20 ATG career

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Certainly for McCallum. McCallum was nothing but a name at that point.

Hill I thought was quite good though. He was #1 at 175 when Jones fought him.

I agree those wins for Mayweather are probably better but Hill was still a good win for sure especially the way he did it.

Funny that Hill is been touted though for Roy and Hearns beat him first and the guy was asking who Hearns had beaten at 160 and above

yeah hill was a solid win,,, and yes the bold is very funny,, thanks for pointing that out

I still cringe when i see that body shot roy dropped hill with,, brutal

[!! Shawn]

Wow this is just not true.

How can you even say Hopkins was in his prime when they fought? His whole styled had changed dramatically when he went on his title run at MW. His whole style - he wasn't near the same fighter that Roy faced.

He clearly hadn't come into his own at the time, and it wasn't even regarded as a GREAT win at the time, let alone a win over an ATG or anything like that. It was a solid win over the #1 contender. the Toney win was great at the time - and so it should have been.

I still can't believe some are actually saying he's top 20 of all times. That is just so far-fetched. Even The Reed says he's not!

Are you kidding me? That B-hop is stylistical the same as the older b-hop with a higher work rate. Hopkins went on to start his middleweight reign a year and a half-later.

Hopkins was 28 if I recall when they fought. How on earth can people convince themselves that a 28 year old fighter who went on to dominate everyone he faced after Roy Jones as not in his prime?

He exhibited all the B-hop skills, slickness, feints, dedication to a gameplan, movement, everything that an older hopkins would be famous for.

Also add in that 160lb, was not Roy Jones best weight, he didn't hit his peak until 168.

So a young green still maturing Roy Jones beat a crafty physically prime Hopkins.

It is a great win, just acknowledge it. It doesn't take anything away from Floyd, don't worry.

[LacedUp]

Im not crappy on roy's resume,,, just that it isnt top 20 ATG resume

Roy had a great career, but not a top 20 ATG career

I got called a hater in this thread for saying Roy jones wasn't top 20 of all times.

He's my favourite fighter! I don't know what it is.
Top 20 of all times is just a hard nut to crack, and I don't think he did it. He lacks a little on the resume side, but he's most certainly an ATG.

[IronDanHamza]

yeah hill was a solid win,,, and yes the bold is very funny,, thanks for pointing that out

I still cringe when i see that body shot roy dropped hill with,, brutal

Oh my word it was beautiful.

Hate him or love him the guy was absolutely amazing.

[!! Shawn]

Certainly for McCallum. McCallum was nothing but a name at that point.

Hill I thought was quite good though. He was #1 at 175 when Jones fought him.

I agree those wins for Mayweather are probably better but Hill was still a good win for sure especially the way he did it.

Funny that Hill is been touted though for Roy and Hearns beat him first and the guy was asking who Hearns had beaten at 160 and above

Im not saying Hill was a great win, I am saying Hill is comparable to the "names" that Floyd has on his resume.

IE, they are just names that didn't offer up much in terms of an actual fight.

[SkillspayBills]

Skills wise Roy Jones Jr. is THE greatest boxer in the history of the sport and would beat anyone that ever laced up a pair of gloves. Resume wise...........is where he is lacking. So top 35-30 for Roy.

[LacedUp]

Are you kidding me? That B-hop is stylistical the same as the older b-hop with a higher work rate. Hopkins went on to start his middleweight reign a year and a half-later.

Hopkins was 28 if I recall when they fought. How on earth can people convince themselves that a 28 year old fighter who went on to dominate everyone he faced after Roy Jones as not in his prime?

He exhibited all the B-hop skills, slickness, feints, dedication to a gameplan, movement, everything that an older hopkins would be famous for.

Also add in that 160lb, was not Roy Jones best weight, he didn't hit his peak until 168.

So a young green still maturing Roy Jones beat a crafty physically prime Hopkins.

It is a great win, just acknowledge it. It doesn't take anything away from Floyd, don't worry.

The Bhop from that time, is certainly not the same bhop. Nowhere near the ring intelligence he showed later on in his career, the dirty tactics, the skills. He would go out and try and take the guys head off - a far cry from the hopkins we saw later on - and he might have started his reign 1,5 years later, but he didn't face a serious opponent before a full 5 years after roy jones.

Let's call it vintage Hopkins then. He hadn't achieved what he has now achieved, and therefore Jones shouldn't get the same credit for it. Otherwise, we can also start saying Clinton Mitchell is an ATG because he took the great Bernard Hopkins' 0.

I'm not sure where you're going with the whole Floyd thing?

[LacedUp]

Skills wise Roy Jones Jr. is THE greatest boxer in the history of the sport and would beat anyone that ever laced up a pair of gloves. Resume wise...........is where he is lacking. So top 35-30 for Roy.

I really can't agree with that.

there are other fighters on the same level - and other fighters whom I feel have more refined skills, defensively namely. Offensively he is one of the best.