how would rjj's legacy be different ??

[Easy-E]

I've noticed that a lot of boxing fans practice what can be called "revisionist history", meaning for example that they evaluate the skills and career of a great fighter 1 way up until he has a notable loss or 2, and then sometimes go full circle and re-evaluate his whole career and history if he has a devastating or shocking loss. Of course it's ok to re-evaluate boxer's careers, but it doesn't show much wisdom to call a fighter great, a pound for pound champion, etc. until something goes wrong, and then to turn right around and say that he was never all that hot to begin with, he only beat bums until he ran into a certain fighter, etc. This happened with Charles "Sonny" Liston back in the 1960s and happened again with Roy Jones Jr. after his losses to Tarver and Glen Johnson.

To me it makes more sense to view great athletes as just ordinary men who have exceptional physical skills rather than as something close to gods who can do no wrong. That way when they fail it's not such a blow to our sense of who they were to begin with.

Roy Jones Jr. is an all-time great, an athlete and boxer on the level with Sugar Ray Robinson and Muhammad Ali. Perhaps his prime didn't last quite as long as that of Robinson, but no matter how he looks now in the ring, he totally dominated whatever division that he was fighting in for a long time, in excess of 10 years perhaps.

this is a great post, welcome to bs
you will now feel my badblood like karma

[Easy-E]

Roy Jones career's is and always will be debatable, but he was the best P4P fighter of 90's no doubt.

fighter of the decade in the 90's!

[joker]

If he left the game earlier and went to the booth.

[Londonerzz]

the haters on this thread are just looking like fools

roy jones won world titles from middleweight to heavyweight. he was the greatest pound for pound fighter of his generation. full stop.

[Derranged]

I've noticed that a lot of boxing fans practice what can be called "revisionist history", meaning for example that they evaluate the skills and career of a great fighter 1 way up until he has a notable loss or 2, and then sometimes go full circle and re-evaluate his whole career and history if he has a devastating or shocking loss. Of course it's ok to re-evaluate boxer's careers, but it doesn't show much wisdom to call a fighter great, a pound for pound champion, etc. until something goes wrong, and then to turn right around and say that he was never all that hot to begin with, he only beat bums until he ran into a certain fighter, etc. This happened with Charles "Sonny" Liston back in the 1960s and happened again with Roy Jones Jr. after his losses to Tarver and Glen Johnson.

To me it makes more sense to view great athletes as just ordinary men who have exceptional physical skills rather than as something close to gods who can do no wrong. That way when they fail it's not such a blow to our sense of who they were to begin with.

Roy Jones Jr. is an all-time great, an athlete and boxer on the level with Sugar Ray Robinson and Muhammad Ali. Perhaps his prime didn't last quite as long as that of Robinson, but no matter how he looks now in the ring, he totally dominated whatever division that he was fighting in for a long time, in excess of 10 years perhaps.

Great post.

[opethdrums]

[jason100x]

After the Ruiz fight, I think Roy should have made Tarver come up to heavyweight if he wanted to fight him, rather than Roy losing all that weight to go down to LHW again.

[Kendo]

thank you thats what i said all along. if tarver wanted roy so bad he would have went up to fight roy. roy beat champs. how can you say he didnt fight anyone. virgil hill come a body shot that you can hear echo for a few rows. he fought champs. ok thats like saying tarver didnt fight anyone bc he fought just about everyone roy did. tarver will sit there and say that roy didnt right no one. thats not saying much for him. like someone said he handed toney his ass. toney sits there and says that he didnt train properly for the fight. is that roys fault? is it roys fault that maybe even if all the champs where nobodys is that roys fault? tarver and roy where face to face after the ruiz fight and tarver extended his hand and said cong**** champ. than in a room full of people decided to stand up. like roy said i find it hard to get up for a fighter that wont say anything to my face. if tarver wasnt such a ***** he would have moved up to fight roy. he fights guys when they are right for the picking. knowing roy had to shead all the weight off was going to make him weak. roy is going to go down as one of the best fighters.

[GasPed]

I've noticed that a lot of boxing fans practice what can be called "revisionist history", meaning for example that they evaluate the skills and career of a great fighter 1 way up until he has a notable loss or 2, and then sometimes go full circle and re-evaluate his whole career and history if he has a devastating or shocking loss. Of course it's ok to re-evaluate boxer's careers, but it doesn't show much wisdom to call a fighter great, a pound for pound champion, etc. until something goes wrong, and then to turn right around and say that he was never all that hot to begin with, he only beat bums until he ran into a certain fighter, etc. This happened with Charles "Sonny" Liston back in the 1960s and happened again with Roy Jones Jr. after his losses to Tarver and Glen Johnson.

To me it makes more sense to view great athletes as just ordinary men who have exceptional physical skills rather than as something close to gods who can do no wrong. That way when they fail it's not such a blow to our sense of who they were to begin with.

Roy Jones Jr. is an all-time great, an athlete and boxer on the level with Sugar Ray Robinson and Muhammad Ali. Perhaps his prime didn't last quite as long as that of Robinson, but no matter how he looks now in the ring, he totally dominated whatever division that he was fighting in for a long time, in excess of 10 years perhaps.

Excellent, excellent job. People need to go back and replay Jones' fights from the 90's. He fought all sorts of top 10 contenders and made them all look like clowns. Once in a lifetime talent, that's what he was - too bad his recent performances have blinded people to that.

[jason100x]

People were way too harsh on Roy with those losses. Maybe his head isn't in the fight game anymore, but it's true, when he was the man, he dominated people and made them look terrible even if they were good aside from fighting him.