lets set the record straight on RJJ, who the **** did he dodge ?

[Bozo_no no]

Q)Who was the best?

A)I already said I would have favored Roy if he fought Dariusz, no matter if it was 97 or 03.

Read the question again, and note how you answered a different question. It's funny how you question my reading skills and how I don't answer your questions when you just answered the one question I asked pretending it was "Who do you think would have won if they fought".

LOL.

Get over yourself.

You've already said you thought there was fault on both sides. With that said, who was the best Light Heavyweight in the world in 99/00?

Simple question, and a relevent one.

Because like I've said now 5 times:

Originally Posted by Bozo_no no

the bottom line is that Daruis' career and legacy suffered for ducking the Jones fight. Not the other way around.

Common sense dictates who truly had no interest in fighting who.

When asking about who ducked who, I think the most relevent point is who had more to gain in the fight happening?

Clearly, it was Darius leading a sheltered career who would have greatly benifited from conceding the location (fighting in the US) to make a mega fight with Jones which could have given acclaim to his career he never came close to having.

It doesn't get more simple: Darius needed the fight with Roy, not the other way around.

Darius sat fighting Roy's leftovers in Germany because he had no true interest in the fight. He ended his career being considered a sheltered fighter in the shadow of one of the best fighters of his generation.

You're done here. Enough spinning and bitching. Move along and let it go.

[mECHsLAVE]

Bozo, you COMPLETELY missed the point of this thread. It is not about who we all think is the better fighter. Roy, at his best, was one of the best fighters ever, esp as a MW and SMW. We don't KNOW who is the best, I'm telling you (for the 5th? time) that I would have favored Roy, so that's who I think was the best. We have to guess, because the fight wasn't made. That's the point of this thread, genius.

When he moved to LHW, he was moving into a division that had an undisputed champion, who never lost through Roy's LHW campaign. Roy CHOSE not to fight him. He talked about it, said if there was enough money, etc etc. But he could have fought him if he chose to, HBO, the media, the serious boxing fans, all asked him to make the fight. He chose NOT to. I feel that a fighter of Roy's calibur and standing should have gone to Germany (since Dariusz was the champ) and beaten him. He was begged to for years, and chose not to.

I already answered you like 50 times. You're so funny. You ask one irrelevant question "Who do you think was the best LHW?" See what I said about your arguments being with opinions and mine being with facts? LOL Yes, Roy looked unstoppable. But who knows? Dariusz was a stronger and better fighter than any of the guys Roy was putting on his showcases against. Both Roy and Dariusz had primes about the same time and both seemed to fall apart about the same time, and both "reigned" in the LHW division at the same time, both essentially undefeated, and they NEVER FOUGHT. Both are to blame, as I've said. But Roy MORE SO, because when you are the challenger moving into a division, then you should want to fight the best. You should go after the established champion to cement your mark.

Roy made his mark, but he did it an alternate way. An easier way. What he did was look better against lesser fighters. And the biggest thing was $$$. HBO guaranteed him enough money to defend his title against mandatories, that he saw no reason to take the risk and fight the best fighter besides himself in the division. If I remember right, he was asking 10 million in order to go there, a number he knew would not work out, which is why he said it, I think. Dariusz earned the right to have the challenger come to him because he had already unified the titles and was the recognized champ.

Both fighters had reason to feel they might not get an equal shake in the other's country. The US has had its robberies of foreign champions and so has Germany. Roy got robbed in the Olympics (probably the single best thing to happen to his career) so many give that as a reason he never left his country. They are both to blame, and both would have benefitted by leaving their country. One was champ, one was challenger. Period.

That's my opinion. Fairly simple. Roy was guaranteed so much money by HBO that he was unmotivated to make tougher fights for slightly more money. Why should he have? He opted to not fight Hopkins and went on to fight the Glen Kellys of the world. He opted to not fight Jirov, and went on the fight Clinton Woods instead. In both of those he chose the less money and less risk. Do I blame him? Nah, I'd probably do the same thing. But as a fan, sometimes you like to see that extra drive out of a fighter. I don't care if Dariusz had it or not, I was never a Dariusz fan. But I was sick to death of hearing about him and wanted Roy to shut all that talk up. He never did. Which is why the debate will go on FOREVER.

[Bozo_no no]

Bozo, you COMPLETELY missed the point of this thread. It is not about who we all think is the better fighter. Roy, at his best, was one of the best fighters ever, esp as a MW and SMW. We don't KNOW who is the best, I'm telling you (for the 5th? time) that I would have favored Roy, so that's who I think was the best. We have to guess, because the fight wasn't made. That's the point of this thread, genius.

When he moved to LHW, he was moving into a division that had an undisputed champion, who never lost through Roy's LHW campaign. Roy CHOSE not to fight him. He talked about it, said if there was enough money, etc etc. But he could have fought him if he chose to, HBO, the media, the serious boxing fans, all asked him to make the fight. He chose NOT to. I feel that a fighter of Roy's calibur and standing should have gone to Germany (since Dariusz was the champ) and beaten him. He was begged to for years, and chose not to.

I already answered you like 50 times. You're so funny. You ask one irrelevant question "Who do you think was the best LHW?" See what I said about your arguments being with opinions and mine being with facts? LOL Yes, Roy looked unstoppable. But who knows? Dariusz was a stronger and better fighter than any of the guys Roy was putting on his showcases against. Both Roy and Dariusz had primes about the same time and both seemed to fall apart about the same time, and both "reigned" in the LHW division at the same time, both essentially undefeated, and they NEVER FOUGHT. Both are to blame, as I've said. But Roy MORE SO, because when you are the challenger moving into a division, then you should want to fight the best. You should go after the established champion to cement your mark.

Roy made his mark, but he did it an alternate way. An easier way. What he did was look better against lesser fighters. And the biggest thing was $$$. HBO guaranteed him enough money to defend his title against mandatories, that he saw no reason to take the risk and fight the best fighter besides himself in the division. If I remember right, he was asking 10 million in order to go there, a number he knew would not work out, which is why he said it, I think. Dariusz earned the right to have the challenger come to him because he had already unified the titles and was the recognized champ.

Both fighters had reason to feel they might not get an equal shake in the other's country. The US has had its robberies of foreign champions and so has Germany. Roy got robbed in the Olympics (probably the single best thing to happen to his career) so many give that as a reason he never left his country. They are both to blame, and both would have benefitted by leaving their country. One was champ, one was challenger. Period.

That's my opinion. Fairly simple. Roy was guaranteed so much money by HBO that he was unmotivated to make tougher fights for slightly more money. Why should he have? He opted to not fight Hopkins and went on to fight the Glen Kellys of the world. He opted to not fight Jirov, and went on the fight Clinton Woods instead. In both of those he chose the less money and less risk. Do I blame him? Nah, I'd probably do the same thing. But as a fan, sometimes you like to see that extra drive out of a fighter. I don't care if Dariusz had it or not, I was never a Dariusz fan. But I was sick to death of hearing about him and wanted Roy to shut all that talk up. He never did. Which is why the debate will go on FOREVER.

You see?

Out comes the essay. You just continue to illustrate how frustrated you are when you feel the need to justify yourself by rambling on like that.

As I said several times over, who the better fighter was does have a great deal to do with who ducked who.

You had a mildly interesting fight that didn't come off because neither fighter wanted to travel to make the fight.

What I keep saying, is the bottom line comes down to who stood to gain more from the fight taking place, and who suffered more for it not taking place.

In both cases, it was Daruis. No one in their right mind regarded him as the best Light Heavyweight in the world during Roy's time there.

That was the specific question I asked you, and one which you laughably avoided answering. Several times you've acknowldged the question, and done a spin job in pretending I asked who you thought would have won if they fought. That's NOT what I asked.


Roy Jones didn't lose out on anything significant by not going to Germany. Darius lost out on a great deal of acclaim, exposure and money he could have had traveling to fight Roy.

In the end, Roy was universally regarded as the better Light Heavyweight and the best fighter of his generation. It couldn't have mattered less in the big picture that that fight didn't come off for him.

The same can't be said of Darius, who lead a sheltered meidocre career missing the opportunity in fighting Roy.

What does that bring us back to in regards to who avoided who?

Oh, that's right:

Originally Posted by Bozo_no no

the bottom line is that Daruis' career and legacy suffered for ducking the Jones fight. Not the other way around.

Common sense dictates who truly had no interest in fighting who.

[Smokin']

Does anyone else find this as funny as I do? I got a question for you, Boozo. Should Floyd fight Baldomir?

[Easy-E]

Does anyone else find this as funny as I do? I got a question for you, Boozo. Should Floyd fight Baldomir?

How is that relevant?

I also think its important to note that in the griffin fight, Roy has dropped montell for the second time. The fight was ruled a ko win for roy, then overturned.

[mECHsLAVE]

Dariusz was huge in Germany, the mecca of European boxing, and made assloads of money over there and was a huge star in Germany. If he wasn't then maybe he would have come here to fight. He never wanted to the same way Roy never wanted to go there. They were bothing making money and were big stars in the sport, in their respective countries. Dariusz's is actually Polish. But he fought out of Germany, because that's the center of European boxing.

Both Roy and Dariusz had plenty of money and fame in their own country, enough that to make MORE by leaving wasn't that enticing. Like I said before, I understand why Roy didn't go there, but he should absolutely expect criticism for it. It's what we do when WE have a champion in the US who some foreign fighter is calling out. Does the champion leave his country? I say it's on the challenger. Roy was a bit of a unique case, because of how good a fighter he was at lower weights, but I still have to respect the lineage and side with the champion. Roy should have gone to Germany to make the fight.

Who suffered the most? Not sure, actually. Both were highly regarded amateurs who fought on national tv before turning pro. They both fought a little too long. I think actually both were trying to get the monkey of the other off their back. If Roy had gone to Germany and beaten Dariusz, then I don't think he would have bothered with Tarver after Ruiz. I think he would have retired as a mythical fighter after beating Ruiz.

As for Dariusz. The guy is rich and has an absolute hall of fame career as well. After unifying the titles against Hill, he KO/TKO'd like 15 consecutive fighters. He holds the record for consecutive LHW title defenses. While stayed in Germany the way Roy stayed in the US, Dariusz fought many tough American fighters, and beat every one. Like I've said, their careers have several interesting parallels like that. They also both fell apart at age 35 and bought fought a couple fights too many.

Roy is still fighting, now trying to get Tarver off his back. I wish he'd hang em up already. If he had gone to Germany and beaten Dariusz, I think hardly anybody would be talking about Tarver, because nobody would know who he was if he didn't chase down Roy and get him in the ring.

[mECHsLAVE]

How is that relevant?

It's not a perfect analogy, because Baldomir is not the class of fighter that Dariusz was, but it's perfectly relevant.

Baldomir is the linear champion, as Dariusz was. Floyd just beat the ex-champ Judah (who plays the part of Hill in this scenario) and is regarded as more skilled and beat Judah better than Baldomir did.

But Baldomir holds the lineage. If Floyd goes on to beat Hatton, Cotto and Margarito, and then Baldomir beats them too (I understand that's not going to happen, but I'm trying to paint a picture of what happened in the LHW division back then) then wouldn't you criticize Floyd for never fighting Baldomir? The true championship stays with Baldomir, not with Floyd. Even if Floyd went on to unify them, they'd be paper belts. And the linear champion would remain the champion. That's what happened with Dariusz and Roy, essentially.

Like I said, Hatton, Cotto, and Margarito are all more highly regarded than Baldomir, which wasn't the case with Dariusz and the other LHW contenders like Hall, Griffin, Hill, etc. It's not a perfect analogy, but he makes a relevant point nonetheless. Dariusz reigned for many years and Roy had many, many opportunites to fight him and didn't. And vice-versa. The difference is, one guy held the lineage and one guy did not.

[Easy-E]

It's not a perfect analogy, because Baldomir is not the class of fighter that Dariusz was, but it's perfectly relevant.

Baldomir is the linear champion, as Dariusz was. Floyd just beat the ex-champ Judah (who plays the part of Hill in this scenario) and is regarded as more skilled and beat Judah better than Baldomir did.

But Baldomir holds the lineage. If Floyd goes on to beat Hatton, Cotto and Margarito, and then Baldomir beats them too (I understand that's not going to happen, but I'm trying to paint a picture of what happened in the LHW division back then) then wouldn't you criticize Floyd for never fighting Baldomir? The true championship stays with Baldomir, not with Floyd. Even if Floyd went on to unify them, they'd be paper belts. And the linear champion would remain the champion. That's what happened with Dariusz and Roy, essentially.

Like I said, Hatton, Cotto, and Margarito are all more highly regarded than Baldomir, which wasn't the case with Dariusz and the other LHW contenders like Hall, Griffin, Hill, etc. It's not a perfect analogy, but he makes a relevant point nonetheless. Dariusz reigned for many years and Roy had many, many opportunites to fight him and didn't. And vice-versa. The difference is, one guy held the lineage and one guy did not.

Its a pretty awful example, seeing as everybody already knows floyd is better then baldy.

[Smokin']

How so? Even by using A+B = C logic, Baldomir can beat Floyd as he did beat Judah just as decisevly.

[Smokin']

And by the way, Boozo. Here's a lesson on the 'linear' champion in boxing.

Hill was the true linear champ before Michalczewski/Jones even fought him. Jones fought Hill only AFTER Hill had lost his title belts to undefeated Dariusz Michalczewski. Because Hill was considered the true champion at the time, Michalczewski’s defeat of Hill made him the TRUE linear champion, not Jones.