Is Roy Jones in the top 20 all time great?

[Sugar Adam Ali]

A lot of talk the last few pages about Roy's skills...

I don't rate his skills that high, his natural ability carried him, and his ring IQ

If Roy had great skills he would have lasted longer and easily made work of guys like target and johnson...
Hopkins and Floyd's athletic ability has been on declined for many years and can adapt and overcome based on skills
Roy was so unorthodox and athletic that once it faded he got owned by tarver twice and life and death once, and old Hopkins turned tarver into a sparring partner...

And I don't wanna hear about Roy and coming back from heavy and weight etc,, the same guys claim toney being out of shape is no big deal

[Sugar Adam Ali]

roy jones and joe walcott do not fight alike .


you seem to think that talent is the only measurement by which a fighter is evaluated. beating comparatively crap fighters and "making it look easy" isn't as valuable as beating better fighters.

mike spinks was a part of [or was a part of the end of] the best LHW era of all time. his LHW resume is much better than roy jones. they're not even in the same conversation, and you're calling him a bum.

Great post,,, dead on

[New England]

A lot of talk the last few pages about Roy's skills...

I don't rate his skills that high, his natural ability carried him, and his ring IQ

If Roy had great skills he would have lasted longer and easily made work of guys like target and johnson...
Hopkins and Floyd's athletic ability has been on declined for many years and can adapt and overcome based on skills
Roy was so unorthodox and athletic that once it faded he got owned by tarver twice and life and death once, and old Hopkins turned tarver into a sparring partner...

And I don't wanna hear about Roy and coming back from heavy and weight etc,, the same guys claim toney being out of shape is no big deal

a man who understands the distinction between skills and talent ^.


i don't think his "skills" were bad, they just weren't on the level of his talent. he's one of the most talented fighters of all time. he's not even close to one of the most skilled.

he relied on his reflexes chiefly. when they slowed, it spelled the end.

[!! Shawn]

roy jones and joe walcott do not fight alike .


you seem to think that talent is the only measurement by which a fighter is evaluated. beating comparatively crap fighters and "making it look easy" isn't as valuable as beating better fighters.

mike spinks was a part of [or was a part of the end of] the best LHW era of all time. his LHW resume is much better than roy jones. they're not even in the same conversation, and you're calling him a bum.

Actually they fight very similar, they both developed their game as ambush fighters highly reliant on positioning and close in lateral movement. They both had styles built around thier ability to throw punches from unorthodox angles.

[!! Shawn]

a man who understands the distinction between skills and talent ^.


i don't think his "skills" were bad, they just weren't on the level of his talent. he's one of the most talented fighters of all time. he's not even close to one of the most skilled.

he relied on his reflexes chiefly. when they slowed, it spelled the end.

I don't think anyone is claiming Roy was the most skilled fighter of all time, or the most fundamentally sound.

I don't think you could argue that there was a more effective style for Roy in his prime though. What he did worked perfectly for the assets he had at his disposal.

[Jc8804]

Your right. The argument is that roy is the beat fighter ever.
On one night , his best night. He wins

[!! Shawn]

roy jones and joe walcott do not fight alike .


you seem to think that talent is the only measurement by which a fighter is evaluated. beating comparatively crap fighters and "making it look easy" isn't as valuable as beating better fighters.

mike spinks was a part of [or was a part of the end of] the best LHW era of all time. his LHW resume is much better than roy jones. they're not even in the same conversation, and you're calling him a bum.

They aren't in the same conversation. Roy would have humiliated him. Spinks was a solid fighter who ground out workmanlike decisions over other great workmen.

He wasn't even as skilled as Roy is. He wasn't fundamentally sound, and lucky enough to exist in an era of stand in front of you fighters.

He wasn't particularly quick, he didn't have good feet, didn't have particularly good balance, he wasn't particularly slick, and his resume isn't nearly as mythical as people make it out to be.

It is very good, but most of his mythology is built around his Holmes wins.

He would have absolutely zero chance against Roy. He just isn't quick enough with his hands or his feet.

Also, Spinks doesn't even belong in the discussion of greatest light heavys ever in my opinion, especially when you have guys like Archie Moore and Billy Conn who campaigned there.

[!! Shawn]

Your right. The argument is that roy is the beat fighter ever.
On one night , his best night. He wins

That is exactly the argument. On his best night, Roy Jones is untouchable.

[BoxingGenius27]

That is exactly the argument. On his best night, Roy Jones is untouchable.

I absolutely agree with this statement

[IronDanHamza]

I don't think anyone is claiming Roy was the most skilled fighter of all time, or the most fundamentally sound.

I don't think you could argue that there was a more effective style for Roy in his prime though. What he did worked perfectly for the assets he had at his disposal.

I don't know.

I think Roy Jones is definitely one of the most skilled fighters of all time.

Yeah he's obviously unbelievably talented and gifted but he also extremely skilled.