To the people who bash Jones' resume..

[Amsterdam]

You all are just sickening, let's review what we have here in Jones' complete resume which includes all notable class fighters that did anything worth mentioning -

James Toney
Bernard Hopkins
Virgil Hill
John Ruiz
Montell Griffin
Mike McCallum
Reggie Johnson
Eric Harding
Clinton Woods
Julio Cesar Gonzalez
Jorge Fernando Castro
Thulani Malinga
Antonio Tarver

All save for Tarver, were either outclassed or outright destroyed, this counts for a lot in the resume department because fights need to be measured on how they were won.

I personally find nothing wrong with that resume listed above, the only issue with Roy is what could have been if the oppurtunity to add Eubank, Benn, Michalczewski & McCllelan, which would make that a top 5 resume all in all.

As it stands, top 30 fighter, without a doubt. It's sickening how he's underrated and ranked these days by some, who then only prop up to an insane level some guy from the early 1900's.

[brooklyn1550]

Excellent post...

People who claim that Roy's competition and resume is terrible and filled with police officers don't have the slightest clue to what they are talking about.

His resume is great and it includes 17 or 18 world champions and perhaps 4 future hall of famers (Hopkins, Toney, McCallum, and Hill). He's won titles at 160, 168, 175, and HW - which in itself is a remarkable accomplishment.

You hit it right on the button. Many people seem to ask "what could have been?" While he is a top 25-30 fighter of all time, he could have enhanced his legacy even more if he defeated Benn, Eubank, and Michalczewski.

People should view Roy's career by his excellence against world-class fighters for almost a decade.

[Stickandmove]

One of the best ever - without a doubt. I wish he'd fought Eubank in 94', Benn in '95 (before Mcclellan fight), Collins in '96, McClellan in '97 (if he'd never fought Benn), Michalczewski around '98 and Calzaghe around 2000.

If he'd beaten all of them perhaps he could have been top 3 of all time. He is rightly criticized for managing to 'avoid' all of those guys, but I agree that he's still top 30 of all time.

[Amsterdam]

One of the best ever - without a doubt. I wish he'd fought Eubank in 94', Benn in '95 (before Mcclellan fight), Collins in '96, McClellan in '97 (if he'd never fought Benn), Michalczewski around '98 and Calzaghe around 2000.

If he'd beaten all of them perhaps he could have been top 3 of all time. He is rightly criticized for managing to 'avoid' all of those guys, but I agree that he's still top 30 of all time.

Hell, if he'd done all of that, he'd be the #1 of all time.

G-man uninjured from that Benn fight likely would have had a decent run before fighting Roy. Eubank in 94 would have been a class win, as would have Benn in 95.

Then Dariusz in '98 and Calzaghe in 2000, giving both great exposure and the oppurtunity for bigger matches after their respective fights and with that, the ability to gain enhanced resume's.

It'd be hard to rank people over him with all of those added to the already established excellent resume, because he simply would have outclassed them all, giving further credit than simply gaining wins.

[andyZOR]

One of the best ever - without a doubt. I wish he'd fought Eubank in 94', Benn in '95 (before Mcclellan fight), Collins in '96, McClellan in '97 (if he'd never fought Benn), Michalczewski around '98 and Calzaghe around 2000.



I wish he fought Michalczewski too. : /

Sucks this matchup wasn't made...

[tliang1000]

You all are just sickening, let's review what we have here in Jones' complete resume which includes all notable class fighters that did anything worth mentioning -

James Toney
Bernard Hopkins
Virgil Hill
John Ruiz
Montell Griffin
Mike McCallum
Reggie Johnson
Eric Harding
Clinton Woods
Julio Cesar Gonzalez
Jorge Fernando Castro
Thulani Malinga
Antonio Tarver

All save for Tarver, were either outclassed or outright destroyed, this counts for a lot in the resume department because fights need to be measured on how they were won.

I personally find nothing wrong with that resume listed above, the only issue with Roy is what could have been if the oppurtunity to add Eubank, Benn, Michalczewski & McCllelan, which would make that a top 5 resume all in all.

As it stands, top 30 fighter, without a doubt. It's sickening how he's underrated and ranked these days by some, who then only prop up to an insane level some guy from the early 1900's.

They are bunch of ignorant HATERS! Jones got one the best!

[China_hand_Joe]

Jones resume is a hell of a lot better than Willie Pep's, Hopkin's, Robinson's, Armstrong's and Greb's.

[standing 8countboxing]

It isn't about what he did accomplish in the ring, it's about what he passed up. His resume is a very solid one, considering many of the fighters on the list are still considered good Light Heavyweights now. He beat them that easily. The problem here is he seemed to pass up a lot of opportunities as mentioned by previous posters. RJJ took advantage of an opportunity he couldn't pass up, which is getting paid 5 million dollars to take on less than stellar opponents. If you want to blame him then blame HBO as well for not putting any pressure on him to fight any of those other guys. RJJ took advantage of a situation that I'm sure most other people would. High reward minimum risk (as minimum as boxing can be) With all that though, the resume starts to look better the farther time goes on.

[kg0208]

Jones is always judged on what he could have done as opposed to what he has done.

Honestly though, there are very few who don't rank him in the right spots, anywhere from 25-40 on most lists. There are a few who rank him outside the top 100 fighters, but they are such a minute minority.

[China_hand_Joe]

Jones is always judged on what he could have done as opposed to what he has done.

Honestly though, there are very few who don't rank him in the right spots, anywhere from 25-40 on most lists. There are a few who rank him outside the top 100 fighters, but they are such a minute minority.

Top 10 would be more right.

[kg0208]

It isn't about what he did accomplish in the ring, it's about what he passed up. His resume is a very solid one, considering many of the fighters on the list are still considered good Light Heavyweights now. He beat them that easily. The problem here is he seemed to pass up a lot of opportunities as mentioned by previous posters. RJJ took advantage of an opportunity he couldn't pass up, which is getting paid 5 million dollars to take on less than stellar opponents. If you want to blame him then blame HBO as well for not putting any pressure on him to fight any of those other guys. RJJ took advantage of a situation that I'm sure most other people would. High reward minimum risk (as minimum as boxing can be) With all that though, the resume starts to look better the farther time goes on.
Actually HBO confirmed that they were putting pressure on Jones to fight Benn, Collins, and Liles. They put offers out there and were rejected. The interview has been posted here numerous times.

Each fighter and their fans claim that Jones was ducking them, but if HBO, who would make MORE money if Jones fought these guys says they were turned down by the fighters, I see no logical reason for them to lie.

Jones should have tried harder to make the fights happen IMO, but my problem is that there seems to be a double standard applied when judging Jones. Its rare that anyone points out all the fighters Hopkins passed up, or many other ATG's.

[tays001]

great thread i say top 25 or 30

[standing 8countboxing]

Actually HBO confirmed that they were putting pressure on Jones to fight Benn, Collins, and Liles. They put offers out there and were rejected. The interview has been posted here numerous times.

Each fighter and their fans claim that Jones was ducking them, but if HBO, who would make MORE money if Jones fought these guys says they were turned down by the fighters, I see no logical reason for them to lie.

Yes, I've heard what HBO has said, but there is a difference of "putting pressure" on him and actually doing something about it. I just find it hard to believe not a one of those fights could have been made. HBO knew full well what RJJ meant to them at the time, he was the face of the network while the heavyweights were nonexistant. Once again I am not discrediting RJJ, but for HBO to play innocent is asinine.

[brooklyn1550]

Jones resume is a hell of a lot better than Willie Pep's, Hopkin's, Robinson's, Armstrong's and Greb's.

Robinson's or Greb's? By what criteria?

Title defenses? Number of title fights? Or by the quality of opposition?

[kg0208]

Yes, I've heard what HBO has said, but there is a difference of "putting pressure" on him and actually doing something about it. I just find it hard to believe not a one of those fights could have been made. HBO knew full well what RJJ meant to them at the time, he was the face of the network while the heavyweights were nonexistant. Once again I am not discrediting RJJ, but for HBO to play innocent is asinine.
Well Jones said that HBO was putting pressure on him and that didn't believe he was making an honest effort to make a fight with those guys. Hopkins was apparently the only fighter considering the offer (what happened there I am unaware of). So they made offers, and I know the one to Benn was more than he had ever made for a fight. They were turned down according to Jones, and then confirmed by HBO. What we don't know is how much of an effort was made, and how hard they negotiated.

I still feel Jones should have made more of an effort to fight DM in a neutral space. I also feel that he could have defended that MW title more, but most don't realize Jones was going back and forth between MW and SMW for a while, and has 12 fights at SMW, not just the title defenses.

The point is though, Jones is often judged by who he didn't fight, instead of who he did. Based on who he fought and how he beat them, he is still an ATG.

[standing 8countboxing]

Well Jones said that HBO was putting pressure on his and that didn't believe he was making an honest effort to make a fight with those guys. Hopkins was apparently the only fighter considering the offer (what happened there I am unaware of). So they made offers, and I know the one to Benn was more than he had ever made for a fight.

I still feel Jones should have made more of an effort to fight DM in a neutral space. I also feel that he could have defended that MW title more, but most don't realize Jones was going back and forth between MW and SMW for a while, and has 12 fights at SMW, not just the title defenses.

The thing is RJJ was getting five million to fight anyone, it didn't matter who it was against. RJJ was smart and made the most money he could have in certain situations. Why fight another top tier fighter when you can fight a B level or even C level and still get 5 million. On a buisness end it made the perfect sense, and RJJ is a very rich man right now because of it.

[China_hand_Joe]

Robinson's or Greb's? By what criteria?

Title defenses? Number of title fights? Or by the quality of opposition?

Quality of opponent and manner of victory combined together.

[China_hand_Joe]

I hope that is a really bad joke man...

YOU could say he has a better resume than Hopkins (although B-Hop is still a consensus p4p top ten in his 40's, while RJJ faded away in his 30's) - you could even say he would/could beat all of those fighters - but to say his resume was better than Pep, Robinson and the like is just fucking insane.



Of course he is better than Hopkins. Hopkins has nobody like Hopkins and Toney on his resume, nor a Ruiz. Aging well doesn't isn't even enough to give him any kind of case for having a better resume than Jones. Hopkins lost to Jones the only elite fighter he ever fought at an appropiate weight. Now Hopkins impressed me enough whilst losing to Jones for me to place him top 40.

Hopkins' loss to Jones was one of his most impressive performances.

Hopkins is only concensus top 10 now because people are moronic anyway.

Joppy, Johnson and a few welters is zero match for Jones.

[kg0208]

I hope that is a really bad joke man...

YOU could say he has a better resume than Hopkins (although B-Hop is still a consensus p4p top ten in his 40's, while RJJ faded away in his 30's) - you could even say he would/could beat all of those fighters - but to say his resume was better than Pep, Robinson and the like is just fucking insane.

He never fought Calzaghe, Eubank, Benn, Michalczewski, McCllelan and others that were considered among the best in the world during his reign. He also never even tried to avenge his loss to Johnson, and refused to give B-Hop a rematch. He hasn't beat a top fighter since he beat Tarver in their first fight years ago (in which many observers say Tarver really won). He hand picked his opponents like Floyd Mayweather and therefore will always be a "what if" guy.

Top 30 fighter yes, but no higher IMO b/c he didn't fight everybody like the fighters you listed above did!

He didn't refuse to give Hopkins a rematch. Hopkins priced himself out. He knew 50/50 was not what he deserved.

[Jack]

YOU could say he has a better resume than Hopkins (although B-Hop is still a consensus p4p top ten in his 40's, while RJJ faded away in his 30's) - you could even say he would/could beat all of those fighters - but to say his resume was better than Pep, Robinson and the like is just fucking insane.Age is absolutely irrelevant. Should Tyson be ranked low because he was shot by most peoples prime, around 30? No. Should Benitez be ranked especially higher because he was world champion at 17? Foreman was lineal champion in his 40's too, so surely he must be the ultimate ATG?

Age is just a number. If every single fighter aged the same, then it would be relevant. Hopkins has aged better than others, so it's not an amazing feat for him to still be on top.

[China_hand_Joe]

He didn't refuse to give Hopkins a rematch. Hopkins priced himself out. He knew 50/50 was not what he deserved.

Why don't Americans embrace Roy Jones, who is just about the best ever produced?

I can't work out why the American media turned on him, he must have made some enemies at one point.


But within 10-20 years he'll be considered top 10 universally anyhow.

[kg0208]

Objectively? Jones resume doesn't equal his talent. Americans have always been judgemental about people not fulfilling their talent totally.

Wait and see what happens to LeBron James if he doesn't win a title in the next 5 years.

[China_hand_Joe]

Objectively? Jones resume doesn't equal his talent. Americans have always been judgemental about people not fulfilling their talent totally.

Wait and see what happens to LeBron James if he doesn't win a title in the next 5 years.

Jone resume is still absolutely superb, the only problem anyone can have is the whole steroids question.

[kg0208]

Jone resume is still absolutely superb, the only problem anyone can have is the whole steroids question.

His resume is fine....but to match his talent, which was immense, he would have had to unify MW, SMW, and LHW.

[Orishaman]

You all are just sickening, let's review what we have here in Jones' complete resume which includes all notable class fighters that did anything worth mentioning -

James Toney-Legitimate World Class opponent OB HIS PRIME-great win for RRJ
Bernard Hopkins-Needs to be qualified-this was BHop 23 fight and a step up in class, he was not the boxer we all know today...
Virgil Hill-Past his prime at 34 and last fight he had as a LHW...RRJ on his prime at 29
John Ruiz-We all know that John Ruiz was slow ans lumbering perect match for RJJ, and not a great HW as many of you, including yourself has dis many times...but when convenient to pad he already padded resume....he makes the list...:rofl
Montell Griffin-was good fighter not and elite fighter...once again
Mike McCallum-he was 40 years old way past his prime and he fought one more time after this fight against Toney....then retired...
Reggie Johnson-past his prime, lost everytime he stepped up in class
Eric Harding-not impress, another boxer that loses when stepping up in class
Clinton Woods-again, over hyped boxer, same scenario loses when stepping up in class..
Julio Cesar Gonzalez-so....
Jorge Fernando Castro
Thulani Malinga-reaching now....
Antonio Tarver-lost 2 out of 3 got manhandle on all 3, and almost KO 2 out 3 times...

All save for Tarver, were either outclassed or outright destroyed, this counts for a lot in the resume department because fights need to be measured on how they were won.

I personally find nothing wrong with that resume listed above, the only issue with Roy is what could have been if the oppurtunity to add Eubank, Benn, Michalczewski & McCllelan, which would make that a top 5 resume all in all.

As it stands, top 30 fighter, without a doubt. It's sickening how he's underrated and ranked these days by some, who then only prop up to an insane level some guy from the early 1900's.

RJJ's resume...I am not impress, in fact the names that are not in there are far more telling than the name that are on it....

Now, IMO he fought 4 opponents of equal talents and class on their prime:

1-2( -1 KO) Tarver- Lost 2 of 3, won one by close descion
0-1 (-1 KO) Glencofe Johnson-got decapitaded by Johnson
1-0 (James Toney)-won bu UD......
---------------------------------
2-4 (-2 KO)

Not what you call an elitist killer now....

So if you are going to post stuff, you need to be accurate and imparcial....and your post withoiut qualifying the opponents was lacking on both...

And as I mentioned, the names that stand out on his resume are the ones that are not on his resume:

Hard hitter Michael Nunn in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter Donald Curry in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter in the early 90's at MW Julian Jackson, hard hitter Sumbu Kalanbay also in the 90's at MW, how about the fading Gerald McClellan in 95 instead of McClellan fighting Nigel Benn....or how about hard hitter Nigel Benn in 95, or Dariusz "Tiger" Michalczewski at LHW...

Now any of these guys I mentioned had far better career and resume than the list you posted with the exception of James Toney, BHop and Tarver....why simple the common denominators on all those opponents I mentioned was that they all were HARD HITTERS.......:good

[MagnificentMatt]

I have never doubted his resume, and i dont think many people do. There were just a few fights he never took, which he should have..

[Orishaman]

I have never doubted his resume, and i dont think many people do. There were just a few fights he never took, which he should have..

As I mentioned on my previous post, I do doubt his resume and also you point of the fight s he never took...the opponents I mentioned, all of them could ahve been block buster fights!!

[Jack]

RJJ's resume...I am not impress, in fact the names that are not in there are far more telling than the name that are on it....

Now, IMO he fought 4 opponents of equal talents and class on their prime:

1-2( -1 KO) Tarver- Lost 2 of 3, won one by close descion
0-1 (-1 KO) Glencofe Johnson-got decapitaded by Johnson
1-0 (James Toney)-won bu UD......
---------------------------------
2-4 (-2 KO)

Not what you call an elitist killer now....

So if you are going to post stuff, you need to be accurate and imparcial....and your post withoiut qualifying the opponents was lacking on both...

And as I mentioned, the names that stand out on his resume are the ones that are not on his resume:

Hard hitter Michael Nunn in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter Donald Curry in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter in the early 90's at MW Julian Jackson, hard hitter Sumbu Kalanbay also in the 90's at MW, how about the fading Gerald McClellan in 95 instead of McClellan fighting Nigel Benn....or how about hard hitter Nigel Benn in 95, or Dariusz "Tiger" Michalczewski at LHW...

Now any of these guys I mentioned had far better career and resume than the list you posted with the exception of James Toney, BHop and Tarver....why simple the common denominators on all those opponents I mentioned was that they all were HARD HITTERS.......:good
If you go by this same method of judging fighters, then lets have a look at the prime boxers Hopkins fought, who were top 100 at the weight class he fought them at.

Roy Jones (Slightly before his prime)
Jermain Taylor (Not that good)
Antonio Tarver (Ditto)

These are the three best opponents he faced, who are in the top 100 in that weightclass, so that's why Tito or DLH isn't there.

He goes 1-3 against them. One wouldn't come close to making a top 50 list, and another scrapes top 75.

Brilliant.

[kg0208]

RJJ's resume...I am not impress, in fact the names that are not in there are far more telling than the name that are on it....

Now, IMO he fought 4 opponents of equal talents and class on their prime:

1-2( -1 KO) Tarver- Lost 2 of 3, won one by close descion
0-1 (-1 KO) Glencofe Johnson-got decapitaded by Johnson
1-0 (James Toney)-won bu UD......
---------------------------------
2-4 (-2 KO)

Not what you call an elitist killer now....

So if you are going to post stuff, you need to be accurate and imparcial....and your post withoiut qualifying the opponents was lacking on both...

And as I mentioned, the names that stand out on his resume are the ones that are not on his resume:

Hard hitter Michael Nunn in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter Donald Curry in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter in the early 90's at MW Julian Jackson, hard hitter Sumbu Kalanbay also in the 90's at MW, how about the fading Gerald McClellan in 95 instead of McClellan fighting Nigel Benn....or how about hard hitter Nigel Benn in 95, or Dariusz "Tiger" Michalczewski at LHW...

Now any of these guys I mentioned had far better career and resume than the list you posted with the exception of James Toney, BHop and Tarver....why simple the common denominators on all those opponents I mentioned was that they all were HARD HITTERS.......:good
You're not being factual. All you did was add your opinion to the fighters names :deal You aren't being impartial at all. You are pointing out as many bad qualities as you can while dismissing any factual info (titles, who they beat AFTER Jones fought them, etc) that would make that fighter look good. Example of this....You quote Johnson as being equal to Jones and Jones lost. You call Woods overhyped. Hasn't Woods beaten Johnson? Another example...you call Harding someone who loses when stepping up in class. But you say Tarver was good and in Jones' class....Harding beat Tarver. Your analysis is full of hypocritical stuff like this.

You can do that to ANY fighter. Post Trinidad's resume and I will show you.

[Pimp C]

RJJ always gets shitted on here. His resume is very underrated and he's a top 25 ATG IMO.

[tliang1000]

Jones is in top 10. He have more natural skills than ALI and everyone likes to give ALI as number 1 or 2 greatest.

[Pimp C]

RJJ's resume...I am not impress, in fact the names that are not in there are far more telling than the name that are on it....

Now, IMO he fought 4 opponents of equal talents and class on their prime:

1-2( -1 KO) Tarver- Lost 2 of 3, won one by close descion
0-1 (-1 KO) Glencofe Johnson-got decapitaded by Johnson
1-0 (James Toney)-won bu UD......
---------------------------------
2-4 (-2 KO)

Not what you call an elitist killer now....

So if you are going to post stuff, you need to be accurate and imparcial....and your post withoiut qualifying the opponents was lacking on both...

And as I mentioned, the names that stand out on his resume are the ones that are not on his resume:

Hard hitter Michael Nunn in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter Donald Curry in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter in the early 90's at MW Julian Jackson, hard hitter Sumbu Kalanbay also in the 90's at MW, how about the fading Gerald McClellan in 95 instead of McClellan fighting Nigel Benn....or how about hard hitter Nigel Benn in 95, or Dariusz "Tiger" Michalczewski at LHW...

Now any of these guys I mentioned had far better career and resume than the list you posted with the exception of James Toney, BHop and Tarver....why simple the common denominators on all those opponents I mentioned was that they all were HARD HITTERS.......:good
You have no credibility on this subject for one you don't rank RJJ as a top 100 ATG and two you have Tito rated higher than RJJ.:-(

[Pimp C]

You can do that to ANY fighter. Post Trinidad's resume and I will show you.
Exactly! Tito was outclassed every time he stepped up in comp.

[gutto]

top 10 of all time imo

[Orishaman]

You're not being factual. All you did was add your opinion to the fighters names :deal You aren't being impartial at all. You are pointing out as many bad qualities as you can while dismissing any factual info (titles, who they beat AFTER Jones fought them, etc) that would make that fighter look good. Example of this....You quote Johnson as being equal to Jones and Jones lost. You call Woods overhyped. Hasn't Woods beaten Johnson? Another example...you call Harding someone who loses when stepping up in class. But you say Tarver was good and in Jones' class....Harding beat Tarver. Your analysis is full of hypocritical stuff like this.

You can do that to ANY fighter. Post Trinidad's resume and I will show you.

Clinton and Glencof have tangle 3 times....so!!

[Orishaman]

You RJJ fans are the worht kind.......His resume just don;t hold water...end of story...as I mentioned the names taht are not on his resume, contemporaries on the same weight classes he choose to ignore, I for one would ahve love to see RRJ tangle with Sumbu Kalambay, the cat hit like a truck and would have given RJJ a run for his money of KTFO in similar fashion Glencofe did....similar fighters...

[Orishaman]

If you go by this same method of judging fighters, then lets have a look at the prime boxers Hopkins fought, who were top 100 at the weight class he fought them at.

Roy Jones (Slightly before his prime)
Jermain Taylor (Not that good)
Antonio Tarver (Ditto)

These are the three best opponents he faced, who are in the top 100 in that weightclass, so that's why Tito or DLH isn't there.

He goes 1-3 against them. One wouldn't come close to making a top 50 list, and another scrapes top 75.

Brilliant.

First of all I don't have BHop top 100 either, if you would like to see my top 100 list then go to the thread by the same name...and you will see that neither PBF nor RJJ nor BHop are Top 100.....

Basically you are saying, we don;t care of the period of the fight nor the cirstustances surrounding the fight, you just base it on the name of the fighter on the resume..."Hell I recognied his name...therefore he was good ,and on his prime when he fought RJJ..." come on Dude...everything has to be analysed and taking thing for their face value ...ain;t my style...I like to look at the date and see what the data is telling me ...the facts......

[Orishaman]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[MSTR]

RJJ's resume...I am not impress, in fact the names that are not in there are far more telling than the name that are on it....

Now, IMO he fought 4 opponents of equal talents and class on their prime:

1-2( -1 KO) Tarver- Lost 2 of 3, won one by close descion
0-1 (-1 KO) Glencofe Johnson-got decapitaded by Johnson
1-0 (James Toney)-won bu UD......
---------------------------------
2-4 (-2 KO)

Not what you call an elitist killer now....

So if you are going to post stuff, you need to be accurate and imparcial....and your post withoiut qualifying the opponents was lacking on both...

And as I mentioned, the names that stand out on his resume are the ones that are not on his resume:

Hard hitter Michael Nunn in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter Donald Curry in the early 90's at MW, hard hitter in the early 90's at MW Julian Jackson, hard hitter Sumbu Kalanbay also in the 90's at MW, how about the fading Gerald McClellan in 95 instead of McClellan fighting Nigel Benn....or how about hard hitter Nigel Benn in 95, or Dariusz "Tiger" Michalczewski at LHW...

Now any of these guys I mentioned had far better career and resume than the list you posted with the exception of James Toney, BHop and Tarver....why simple the common denominators on all those opponents I mentioned was that they all were HARD HITTERS.......:good
The fact that you believe Johnson and Tarver to be the best competition in Roys career is absurd. Prime Roy would have crapped on Johnson, this part of your post is complete rubbish.

[Pimp C]

First of all I don't have BHop top 100 either, if you would like to see my top 100 list then go to the thread by the same name...and you will see that neither PBF nor RJJ nor BHop are Top 100.....

Basically you are saying, we don;t care of the period of the fight nor the cirstustances surrounding the fight, you just base it on the name of the fighter on the resume..."Hell I recognied his name...therefore he was good ,and on his prime when he fought RJJ..." come on Dude...everything has to be analysed and taking thing for their face value ...ain;t my style...I like to look at the date and see what the data is telling me ...the facts......
Yet another reason why you have no credibility here. Hopkins and RJJ aren't top 100 but a one-dimensional fighter like Tito who lost everytime he stepped up is unfuckingbelievable.:patsch :-( I guess you'll have new venom come January when RJJ puts a demolition job on Tito.:lol: :hi:

[Orishaman]

The fact that you believe Johnson and Tarver to be the best competition in Roys career is absurd. Prime Roy would have crapped on Johnson, this part of your post is complete rubbish.

The only fight on the resume of Roy;s that absulutely take my hat off to him was the Julio Cesar Gonzalez fight...he totally outclassed a very good fighter...wikth a good punch

[kg0208]

Clinton and Glencof have tangle 3 times....so!!

LOL...did that go over your head? If Woods can go 1-1-1 with Johnson, and you consider Johnson high level competition, then how can you say Woods is overrated and not give Jones credit for beating him?

If you say Tarver is high level competition, then how can you call Harding bad comp when he beat Tarver?

Your analysis is full of holes like this.

[Orishaman]

Yet another reason why you have no credibility here. Hopkins and RJJ aren't top 100 but a one-dimensional fighter like Tito who lost everytime he stepped up is unfuckingbelievable.:patsch :-( I guess you'll have new venom come January when RJJ puts a demolition job on Tito.:lol: :hi:

When did I said that Tito is top 100, I say you can make a case......for it...regardless of your bias opinions...it is not only me that don;t have RJJ top 100.....Ok...a number of top Boxing writers including Bert Sugar don't have RJJ top 100 ....Ok...so Bert Sugar as no credibility either.....Shit fool.....

[kg0208]

The only fight on the resume of Roy;s that absulutely take my hat off to him was the Julio Cesar Gonzalez fight...he totally outclassed a very good fighter...wikth a good punch

You know the garbage man you are always bitching about that Jones fought? The one you ridicule him for? That's GONZALEZ?

So you give him credit for fighting Gonzalez, but bash him for the garbage man? You don't even know they are the same guy.:deal

[kg0208]

When did I said that Tito is top 100, I say you can make a case......for it...regardless of your bias opinions...it is not only me that don;t have RJJ top 100.....Ok...a number of top Boxing writers including Bert Sugar don't have RJJ top 100 ....Ok...so Bert Sugar as no credibility either.....Shit fool.....
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: ONLY Bert Sugar doesn't have him in his top 100....and I haven't seen proof of that either. Bring us another list that shows all these writers (4th time I have asked you for this, you never produce it).

[kg0208]

First of all I don't have BHop top 100 either, if you would like to see my top 100 list then go to the thread by the same name...and you will see that neither PBF nor RJJ nor BHop are Top 100.....

Basically you are saying, we don;t care of the period of the fight nor the cirstustances surrounding the fight, you just base it on the name of the fighter on the resume..."Hell I recognied his name...therefore he was good ,and on his prime when he fought RJJ..." come on Dude...everything has to be analysed and taking thing for their face value ...ain;t my style...I like to look at the date and see what the data is telling me ...the facts......
Saying someone is overrated is not "circumstances surrounding a fight". It's your personal opinion.

[Pimp C]

When did I said that Tito is top 100, I say you can make a case......for it...regardless of your bias opinions...it is not only me that don;t have RJJ top 100.....Ok...a number of top Boxing writers including Bert Sugar don't have RJJ top 100 ....Ok...so Bert Sugar as no credibility either.....Shit fool.....
Just because Bert Sugar is 100 years old doesn't make him an authority on boxing anymore than me. Bert Sugar lost credibilty when he made that insane statement much like you did here with it. Jones won titles at 160, 168, 175 and HW that alone would make him a top 100 ATG fool.:deal

[Orishaman]

Orisha...

This is just bollocks. It was a big step up for Roy as well AND he was struggling with the weight. It was a good fight that was closely contested, with Roy edging it with hand-speed and athleticism.

Look at how Roy learnt and adjusted during that fight? Incredible! From hopeless on the ropes initiailly, to effectively fighting off of them and maneuvering away.

He took a lot away from that and then beat the shit out of some really good fighters on his way. yes there was a spell when his opposition was less than stellar, but he makes up for it by having beaten some great guys in their prime.

By the same token....when Roy faught Virgil Hill, Virgill had issues making weight, it was his last fight at 175, yet all of you claim it was a great fight...come on Dude.....if you are going to pull that shit....then be fair ...Virgill Hill was done before the fight started it....and the same it can be said when he fought Glenn Kelly....

But the issue here is why not talk about the opposition that he could have fought but didn't...far more refined opposition that the ones he fought suring that peirod...I was clear on my analisys....

[kg0208]

This is Bert Sugar's list Orishaman......Look down at #88 and see who's name is highlighted in Red.

1) Sugar Ray Robinson
2) Henry Armstrong
3) Willie Pep
4) Joe Louis
5) Harry Greb
6) Benny Leonard
7) Muhammad Ali
8) Roberto Duran
9) Jack Dempsey
10) Jack Johnson
11) Mickey Walker
12) Tony Canzoneri
13) Gene Tunney
14) Rocky Marciano
15) Joe Gans
16) Sam Langford
17) Julio Cesar Chavez
18) Jimmy Wilde
19) Stanley Ketchel
20) Barney Ross
21) Jimmy Mclarin
22) Archie Moore
23) Marcel Cerdan
24) Ezzard Charles
25) Sugar Ray Leonard
26) The Original Joe Walcott
27) Jake Lamotta
28) Eder Jofre
29) Emile Griffith
30) Terry Mcgovern
31) Geroge Foreman
32) Johnny Dundee
33) Jose Napoles
34) Pascual Perez
35) Billy Conn
36) Ruben Olivares
37) Joe Frazier
38) Tommy Loughran
39) Sandy Saddler
40) Kid Chocolate
41) Abe Attell
42) Evander Holyfield
43) Geroge Dixon
44) Maxie Rosenbloom
45) Larry Holmes
46) Ted 'Kid' Lewis
47) Marvelous Marvin Hagler
48) Pernell Whitaker
49) Carlos Zarate
50) Thomas Hearns
51) Battling Nelson
52) Beau Jack
53) Ricardo Lopez
54) John L. Sullivan
55) Carlos Monzon
56) Alexis Arguello
57) Carmen Basilio
58) Pete Herman
59) Charley Burley
60) Ike Williams
61) Kid Gavilan
62) Jack Britton
63) Dick Tiger
64) Pancho Villa
65) Panama Al Brown
66) Bob Fitzsimmons
67) Philadelphia Jack O'brien
68) Tiger Flowers
69) James J. Corbett
70) Tony Zale
71) Tommy Ryan
72) Georges Carpentier
73) Sonny Liston
74) 'Kid' Mccoy
75) Bob Foster
76) Freddie Welsh
77) Joe Jeannette
78) Jim Driscoll
79) Jersey Joe Walcott
80) Peter Jackson
81) Ad Wolgast
82) Jack Dempsey, The Nonpareil
83) Manuel Ortiz
84) James J. Jeffries
85) Salvador Sanchez
86) Jimmy Barry
87) Carlos Ortiz
88) Roy Jones Jr.
89) Wilfredo Gomez
90) Aaron Pryor
91) Bernard Hopkins
92) Mike Gibbons
93) Jack Delaney
94) Johnny Kilbane
95) Willie Ritchie
96) Wilfred Benitez
97) Packy McFarlane
98) Rocky Graziano
99) Lew Jenkins
100) Mike Tyson

Next time you quote someone AND use it as part of your argument, make sure you get it RIGHT:deal

[Orishaman]

:lol: Owned, maybe he'll never post about Jones again, apologize, and ban himself now. Probably wishful thinking though.

Wrong Chump....exactly my point ...it was the Garbage man that fought RJJ with the biggest heart, he was totally outclassed and still came coming...and the only fools here are you two Bozo's ...that can't see my point .....yes RJJ resume is such that a Garbage man gace him the best fight.....Montell's 2nd fight , he was done before he came into then ring...it remided me of Spinks v Tyson.....he was mentally beaten....the garbage man gave it his all....

[Orishaman]

This is Bert Sugar's list Orishaman......Look down at #88 and see who's name is highlighted in Red.

1) Sugar Ray Robinson
2) Henry Armstrong
3) Willie Pep
4) Joe Louis
5) Harry Greb
6) Benny Leonard
7) Muhammad Ali
8) Roberto Duran
9) Jack Dempsey
10) Jack Johnson
11) Mickey Walker
12) Tony Canzoneri
13) Gene Tunney
14) Rocky Marciano
15) Joe Gans
16) Sam Langford
17) Julio Cesar Chavez
18) Jimmy Wilde
19) Stanley Ketchel
20) Barney Ross
21) Jimmy Mclarin
22) Archie Moore
23) Marcel Cerdan
24) Ezzard Charles
25) Sugar Ray Leonard
26) The Original Joe Walcott
27) Jake Lamotta
28) Eder Jofre
29) Emile Griffith
30) Terry Mcgovern
31) Geroge Foreman
32) Johnny Dundee
33) Jose Napoles
34) Pascual Perez
35) Billy Conn
36) Ruben Olivares
37) Joe Frazier
38) Tommy Loughran
39) Sandy Saddler
40) Kid Chocolate
41) Abe Attell
42) Evander Holyfield
43) Geroge Dixon
44) Maxie Rosenbloom
45) Larry Holmes
46) Ted 'Kid' Lewis
47) Marvelous Marvin Hagler
48) Pernell Whitaker
49) Carlos Zarate
50) Thomas Hearns
51) Battling Nelson
52) Beau Jack
53) Ricardo Lopez
54) John L. Sullivan
55) Carlos Monzon
56) Alexis Arguello
57) Carmen Basilio
58) Pete Herman
59) Charley Burley
60) Ike Williams
61) Kid Gavilan
62) Jack Britton
63) Dick Tiger
64) Pancho Villa
65) Panama Al Brown
66) Bob Fitzsimmons
67) Philadelphia Jack O'brien
68) Tiger Flowers
69) James J. Corbett
70) Tony Zale
71) Tommy Ryan
72) Georges Carpentier
73) Sonny Liston
74) 'Kid' Mccoy
75) Bob Foster
76) Freddie Welsh
77) Joe Jeannette
78) Jim Driscoll
79) Jersey Joe Walcott
80) Peter Jackson
81) Ad Wolgast
82) Jack Dempsey, The Nonpareil
83) Manuel Ortiz
84) James J. Jeffries
85) Salvador Sanchez
86) Jimmy Barry
87) Carlos Ortiz
88) Roy Jones Jr.
89) Wilfredo Gomez
90) Aaron Pryor
91) Bernard Hopkins
92) Mike Gibbons
93) Jack Delaney
94) Johnny Kilbane
95) Willie Ritchie
96) Wilfred Benitez
97) Packy McFarlane
98) Rocky Graziano
99) Lew Jenkins
100) Mike Tyson

Next time you quote someone AND use it as part of your argument, make sure you get it RIGHT:deal

That is not his list from his book......capice!!


1 Sugar Ray Robinson
2 Henry Armstrong
3 Harry Greb
4 Jack Dempsey
5 Benny Leonard
6 Joe Louis
7 Mickey Walker
8 Sam Langford
9 Tony Canzoneri
10 Muhammad Ali
11 Joe Gans
12 Willie Pep
13 Jack Johnson
14 Barney Ross
15 Jimmy Wilde
16 Gene Tunney
17 Roberto Duran
18 Johnny Dundee
19 Rocky Marciano
20 Joe Walcott
21 Stanley Ketchal
22 Jimmy McLarnin
23 Archie Moore
24 Tommy Ryan
25 George Dixon
26 Eder Jofre
27 Abe Attell
28 Jack Britton
29 Bob Fitzsimmons
30 Terry McGovern
31 Ezzard Charles
32 Packey McFarland
33 Ted Kid Lewis
34 Marcel Cerdan
35 Kid Chocolate
36 Pasqual Perez
37 Tommy Loughran
38 Jim Driscoll
39 Emile Griffith
40 Kid McCoy
41 Jim Corbett
42 Billy Conn
43 Jake LaMotta
44 Maxie Rosenbloom
45 Pancho Villa
46 Jose Napoles
47 Sandy Saddler
48 Freddie Welsh
49 Joe Frazier
50 John l. Sullivan
51 Carlos Monzon
52 Kid Gavilan
53 Pete Herman
54 Tiger Flowers
55 Billy Petrolle
56 Sugar Ray Leonard
57 Non Pareil Jack Dempsey
58 Dick Tiger
59 Beau Jack
60 Ike Williams
61 Panama Al Brown
62 Larry Holmes
63 Carmen Basilio
64 Charley Burley
65 Phila. Jack O'Brien
66 Peter Jackson
67 Jimmy Barry
68 Carlos Zarate
69 Georges Carpantier
70 Tony Zale
71 Young Griffo
72 Alexis Arguello
73 Max Baer
74 Marvelous Marvin Hagler
75 Battling Johnson
76 Joe Jeannette
77 Mysterious Billy Smith
78 Wilfredo Gomez
79 Jersey Joe Walcott
80 Rocky Graziano
81 Sonny Liston
82 Harry Wills
83 Ad Wolgast
84 Tommy Hearns
85 Manuel Ortiz
86 Salvador Sanchez
87 Fighting Harada
88 Willie Ritchie
89 James J. Jeffries
90 Johnny Kilbane
91 Bob Foster
92 Mike Gibbons
93 Benny Lynch
94 George Kid Lavigne
95 Aaron Pryor
96 Lew Jenkins
97 Carlos Ortiz
98 Jack Delaney
99 Wilfred Benitez
100 Gene Fullmer

[kg0208]

Wrong Chump....exactly my point ...it was the Garbage man that fought RJJ with the biggest heart, he was totally outclassed and still came coming...and the only fools here are you two Bozo's ...that can't see my point .....yes RJJ resume is such that a Garbage man gace him the best fight.....Montell's 2nd fight , he was done before he came into then ring...it remided me of Spinks v Tyson.....he was mentally beaten....the garbage man gave it his all....

:lol::lol::lol::lol: Yes, Lineal champions are bums. I see your point now Orisha. We are the bozo's....not you. You realize your argument is being shredded. Much like the time you made a list of the top 10 LHW ever and didn't include Jones because he was never Lineal champion.....but had Ezzard Charles on it:deal

[kg0208]

That is not his list from his book......capice!!

:patsch Yeah it is.....show me otherwise.

[kg0208]

That is not his list from his book......capice!!


1 Sugar Ray Robinson
2 Henry Armstrong
3 Harry Greb
4 Jack Dempsey
5 Benny Leonard
6 Joe Louis
7 Mickey Walker
8 Sam Langford
9 Tony Canzoneri
10 Muhammad Ali
11 Joe Gans
12 Willie Pep
13 Jack Johnson
14 Barney Ross
15 Jimmy Wilde
16 Gene Tunney
17 Roberto Duran
18 Johnny Dundee
19 Rocky Marciano
20 Joe Walcott
21 Stanley Ketchal
22 Jimmy McLarnin
23 Archie Moore
24 Tommy Ryan
25 George Dixon
26 Eder Jofre
27 Abe Attell
28 Jack Britton
29 Bob Fitzsimmons
30 Terry McGovern
31 Ezzard Charles
32 Packey McFarland
33 Ted Kid Lewis
34 Marcel Cerdan
35 Kid Chocolate
36 Pasqual Perez
37 Tommy Loughran
38 Jim Driscoll
39 Emile Griffith
40 Kid McCoy
41 Jim Corbett
42 Billy Conn
43 Jake LaMotta
44 Maxie Rosenbloom
45 Pancho Villa
46 Jose Napoles
47 Sandy Saddler
48 Freddie Welsh
49 Joe Frazier
50 John l. Sullivan
51 Carlos Monzon
52 Kid Gavilan
53 Pete Herman
54 Tiger Flowers
55 Billy Petrolle
56 Sugar Ray Leonard
57 Non Pareil Jack Dempsey
58 Dick Tiger
59 Beau Jack
60 Ike Williams
61 Panama Al Brown
62 Larry Holmes
63 Carmen Basilio
64 Charley Burley
65 Phila. Jack O'Brien
66 Peter Jackson
67 Jimmy Barry
68 Carlos Zarate
69 Georges Carpantier
70 Tony Zale
71 Young Griffo
72 Alexis Arguello
73 Max Baer
74 Marvelous Marvin Hagler
75 Battling Johnson
76 Joe Jeannette
77 Mysterious Billy Smith
78 Wilfredo Gomez
79 Jersey Joe Walcott
80 Rocky Graziano
81 Sonny Liston
82 Harry Wills
83 Ad Wolgast
84 Tommy Hearns
85 Manuel Ortiz
86 Salvador Sanchez
87 Fighting Harada
88 Willie Ritchie
89 James J. Jeffries
90 Johnny Kilbane
91 Bob Foster
92 Mike Gibbons
93 Benny Lynch
94 George Kid Lavigne
95 Aaron Pryor
96 Lew Jenkins
97 Carlos Ortiz
98 Jack Delaney
99 Wilfred Benitez
100 Gene Fullmer
LMAO....that is NOT the book from 2006. I am looking at the list:lol::lol::lol:

[Orishaman]

LMAO....that is NOT the book from 2006. I am looking at the list:lol::lol::lol:

Ok you are right, I was looking at the 84 list,but regardless...88 is way down on the fucking list.....it is not like he had it top 50, as you claim you ahve RJJ on your list...ok he made it in 2006 list at 88...big fucking deal...and BTW..the argument of the garbage man it is clear.and if you two Bozos can see it ...then you are far more parcial and bias than I expected...

You can post all the list you want...88...I ma not impressed...no wonder I could no find his name on it...


But good one, thanks for finding the list.....which also proof my point of RJJ resume inflated and not holding water...

[Orishaman]

My top 100 list:

By weight classes:

HW:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Holmes
4. Foreman
5. Marciano
6. Tunney
7. Dempsey
8. Johnson

Cruiser:

1. Evander Holyfiled
2. Sugar De Leon
3. Dwight Quawi


LHW:

1. Bob Foster
2. Archie Moore
3. Michael Spinks
4.Billy Conn
5. Ezzard Charles

SMW:

1. Michael Nunn
2. Frank Liles

MW:

1. Carlos Monzon
2. MMH
3. Tony Zale
4. Henry Grebs
5. Mickey Walker
6. Emil Griffith

JRMW:

1. Tommy Hearns
2. Nino Benvennuti
3. Koichi Wajima

WW:

1. SRR
2. SRL
3. Pernell Whitaker
4. Basilio
5. Ross/McLarnin
6. Mantequilla Napoles
7. Kid Gavilan


JRWW:

1. Aaron Pryor
2. Tony Canzoneri
3. JCC
4. Kid Pambele
5. Nico Loche
6. Benitez


LW:

1. Duran
2. Joe Gans
3. Benny Leonard
4. Lou Ambers
5. Carlos Ortiz
6. Alexis Arguello

JRLW:

1. Sadler
2. Flash Elorde
3. Ben Villaflor
4. Kid Chocolate
5. Kobayashi
6. Samuel Serrano

FW:

1. Armstrong
2. Willie Pep
3. Eder Jofre
4. Sal Sanchez
5. John Kilbane
6. John Dundee
7. Kuniaki Shibata
8. Sugar Ramos
9. Pedroza
10. Esparragoza

JRFW:

1. Wilfredo Gomez


BW:

1. Fighting Harada
2. Jeff Chandler
3. Manuel Ortiz
4. Jimmy Carruthers
5. Ruben Olivarez
6. Sixto Escobar


JRBW:

1. Gerry Penalosa
2. Hirochi Kawashima

FLYW:

1. Jimmy Wilde
2. Pancho Villa
3. Pascual Perez
4. Miguel Canto


JRFLYW:

1. Michael Carbajal

STRW:

1. Ricardo Lopez

[kg0208]

Ok you are right, I was looking at the 84 list,but regardless...88 is way down on the fucking list.....it is not like he had it top 50, as you claim you ahve RJJ on your list...ok he made it in 2006 list at 88...big fucking deal...and BTW..the argument of the garbage man it is clear.and if you two Bozos can see it ...then you are far more parcial and bias than I expected...

You can post all the list you want...88...I ma not impressed...no wonder I could no find his name on it...


But good one, thanks for finding the list.....which also proof my point of RJJ resume inflated and not holding water...
Only thing that proves is what Bert Sugar thinks. I can supply lists that have him in the top 50 all time. Of course then you would be of the opinion that the list was shit (cuz you don't agree with it) You have no argument. Get over it, move on.

You had no IDEA that Gonzalez was the garbage man.

The only fight on the resume of Roy;s that absulutely take my hat off to him was the Julio Cesar Gonzalez fight...he totally outclassed a very good fighter...wikth a good punch

You just called him a very good fighter. When his name was mentioned in the original post, you wrote "So" in red next to it. You said that Jones fighting the garbage man was an illustration of the bad competition Jones fought. MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!

[Orishaman]

Only thing that proves is what Bert Sugar thinks. I can supply lists that have him in the top 50 all time. Of course then you would be of the opinion that the list was shit (cuz you don't agree with it) You have no argument. Get over it, move on.

You had no IDEA that Gonzalez was the garbage man.



You just called him a very good fighter. When his name was mentioned in the original post, you wrote "So" in red next to it. You said that Jones fighting the garbage man was an illustration of the bad competition Jones fought. MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!

I wrote "so" becuase..so fucking what, so I gave him props and now you want to discredit what I said..yes ...Dude..I knew he was the garbage man, totally outclassed the cat yet he kept coming....

[kg0208]

I wrote "so" becuase..so fucking what, so I gave him props and now you want to discredit what I said..yes ...Dude..I knew he was the garbage man, totally outclassed the cat yet he kept coming....
You're response is "So what" when Jones beats "a good fighter" by your own admission? So you admit that even when Jones beat someone you think is a good fighter (and your standards are horrible as is being pointed out constantly) your response is that you don't care.

You don't like Jones and you are biased. This just proves it.

BTW, Woods, the overrated one who loses when he steps up, has beaten that "good fighter" 2 times now. So how is he overrated again? You keep contradicting yourself.

[bigtime9]

Just stop please. You are making a total ass of yourself in this thread, everyone sees it but you.

that's why he's called orishaman..the fuck doesn't rate jones, hopkins, or floyd three of the best of our generation.:lol:

[Orishaman]

Just stop please. You are making a total ass of yourself in this thread, everyone sees it but you.

I am not any more bias than you guys....this is my list, which by the chump...which by the way....you don;t know have of the boxers on the list, clearly show your limited knowledge on the sport...but if I don;t recall wrong you did praised the list when I posted on the other thread....


You and kg can agree with each other , pad each other on the back...but still will not make it so...RJJ resume is not what you guys make it up to be...and you two can;t stand when someone start to point out the many flaws on the resume.....


You made it sound like Harding is sometype of World class boxers , he is not...like I mentioned and I said it again the only names that are worth something on his resume, he was 2-4 and KOed 2 times......those are fact...

So why you two don't mentioned the weight issues with Hill and Glen Kelly or the fact that he never fought any of the better names contemporaies of him at MW or SMW....or for that matter at LHW...he avoided punchers all his life but finally the cat was let out the box on his so so chin.....

[Orishaman]

that's why he's called orishaman..the fuck doesn't rate jones, hopkins, or floyd three of the best of our generation.:lol:

That doesn't make them top 100 ATG automatically......:hi:

[Orishaman]

Well you show your limited knowledge of English with posts like this, and aside from a few in lower weight classes, some of the foreigners, I knew everyone you posted, and it seemed to me you just posted them to show you have a diverse knowledge of fighters. It's ridiculous to put Nunn and whoever else ahead of Calzaghe and RJJ at 168, and the rest of that mess was pretty disgraceful as well.

Joe C is a great fighter but he is not there yet.....it is all on the resume....


BTW..chump...why don't you post a list so we all can see the mighty one...I know chumps like you calling yourself Swet Pea like we supposed to beleive you are somekind of sweet science doctor...please...and yes my english is horibble ..nothing knew here on ESB...old news...and if you think it bothers me....it doesn;'t......

Anyhow...yes that pathetic list is mind and I can argued for why I have eveyone on the list where I have them on the list....

Cool Sweet Pea....:rofl

[Amsterdam]

That's the absolute worst list I've ever seen in my entire life.

Co-signed mate.:deal

KG posted Bert Sugar's also, that was one fucking TERRIBLE list also. None of these imbeciles have any credit in my eyes what so ever. 'Tbooze's' list was more on target than these crappers, even with the holes in his.

[brooklyn1550]

Bert Sugar's list is bad, but if you want to see a bad list, I saw a book at Barnes and Noble called "Boxing's Top 100 by Bill Gray." He used all of these formulas and to my surprise, Chavez was in the top 5 and Daniel Zaragoza was at 29 - ahead of Pernell Whitaker, Alexis Arguello, Thomas Hearns, and Bernard Hopkins. I was going to buy it until I saw his actual list - then I realized it wasn't worth 1 penny.

Here's a link to it...
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[kg0208]

Yeah but Hopkins never got knocked the fuck out !!!

Cool, glad we know the criteria now. Fighters who have never been stopped ahead of all fighters who have been. Right?

You see how that sounds when applied across the board?

[Orishaman]

:lol: You're making fun of my knowledge of boxing yet you don't even know what my screen name is in reference to?

Best of all weight classes? I'll name a few, no top 10's

HW: Ali, Louis, Holmes, Lewis

LHW: Charles, Moore, Tunney, Spinks, Foster, Langford

SMW: Jones Jr., Calzaghe

MW: Greb, Hagler, Monzon, Robinson, Hopkins

JMW: McCallum, Hearns, Norris, Wright, Jackson

WW: Robinson, Griffith, Napoles, Leonard, Gavilan, Walcott, Armstrong

JWW: Pryor, Chavez, Cervantes, Loi, Benitez, etc.

LW: Whitaker, Duran, Leonard, Gans, Ortiz, Williams

SFW: Mayweather, Arguello, Chavez, Nelson

FW: Pep, Saddler(he fought at 126, not 130 for your info), Armstrong, Sanchez, Arguello

SBW: Gomez

BW: Jofre, Harada, Olivares, Zarate

JBW: Galaxy

FW: Wilde, Villa

JFW: Meh

FlyW: Lopez


Just a few.

Talk about my list being wacked..well fool...lets be sure we place the boxers on the division were they had their prime or most win rather than what you think:

Starters...-Sugar Ray Robinson, makes any list of anyone that knows boxing and boxing history as a WW not a MW, SRR record as a WW far surpazed his record as a MW, as a MW his records was above average at best compare with his awsome record at WW.....you have them on both, can only be on one.....

Eder Jofre-Could be considered as BW or FW, he was 25-0 as a FW after 2years hietas...


If you don;t have Ben Villaflor as one of your top JRLW hold the World Title twice for a total of 5 years, fought everyone in the division, and you have Mayweather above him ....your history knowledge is limited...same thing for Samuel Serrano

Your boy Pernell lost his first try to the WBC title against Jose Luis Ramirez (who he beat in the rematch)in 88 it was not until he fought Greg Haugen that he won the IBF Title at LW and not until he fought Nazario to secured the World Title...at at WW he had then title for 4 years until he losted to ODLH in the controversial desicion...


And let's not get on the SMW, RJJ was never a Lineal champ , never.....sure he had a hold bunch of alphabet soup but never for the top of the division.....

BTW...chump when I menioned your name as Sweet Pea as we supposed to beleive you are some kind of Sweet Science Doctor, is because your bou Pernell Sweet Pea Whitaker was a doctor of the science, and if you going to use that name you better understand that when people call sweet science doctor refering to Pernell is becuase he was one...and you well.....


...let just say that you are not even a sweet science nurse.....

BTW......Duilio Loi was a great boxer, slick and can rumble southpaw, his greatness was at LW, but his gretness cause many to duck him for many years it was not untill Carlos Oriz gave him a chance at JRWW that he finally won a title....

[kg0208]

Talk about my list being wacked..well fool...lets be sure we place the boxers on the division were they had their prime or most win rather than what you think:

Starters...-Sugar Ray Robinson, makes any list of anyone that knows boxing and boxing history as a WW not a MW, SRR record as a WW far surpazed his record as a MW, as a MW his records was above average at best compare with his awsome record at WW.....you have them on both, can only be on one.....

Eder Jofre-Could be considered as BW or FW, he was 25-0 as a FW after 2years hietas...


If you don;t have Ben Villaflor as one of your top JRLW hold the World Title twice for a total of 5 years, fought everyone in the division, and you have Mayweather above him ....your history knowledge is limited...same thing for Samuel Serrano

Your boy Pernell lost his first try to the WBC title against Jose Luis Ramirez (who he beat in the rematch)in 88 it was not until he fought Greg Haugen that he won the IBF Title at LW and not until he fought Nazario to secured the World Title...at at WW he had then title for 4 years until he losted to ODLH in the controversial desicion...


And let's not get on the SMW, RJJ was never a Lineal champ , never.....sure he had a hold bunch of alphabet soup but never for the top of the division.....
:lol::lol::lol::lol:

You should read the whole thing again.

One: Lineal champ in this day and age just means LINEAL. Nothing more or less. Because of the ABC belts and politics, the best champion isn't always Lineal....or are you going to tell us now that Erdai is the best LHW in the world:rofl BTW, you rated Charles at LHW and he never held a title there are AT ALL. So how are you going to ridicule someone for rating Jones at AMW for not holding the Lineal title, then rate someone yourself who didn't hold it. Hypocrite.

Two: Sweet Pea's list criteria didn't say that he only placed fighters in one weight class. If you look closely, you will see Robinson at BOTH WW and MW. You will see Chavez ranked 2 times as well...

Three: Beating the top fighter makes you best in the division. Jones beating Toney made him SMW king. LHW is debatable since DM never beat Jones and Jones never beat him.

[KO Boxing]

Yeah but Hopkins never got knocked the fuck out !!!
:huh

So Jones getting knocked out at a late stage in his career proves that a fighter who WASN'T knocked out is greater?

I don't really see how Jones being knocked out late in his career can really have THAT bad of a detriment to his legacy... It's a two-way street. A catch-22, depending on which way you look at it.

IF Roy has a glass chin, he simply must be the greatest fighter to have ever stepped in the ring... considering his glass was only exposed so late in his career, after fighting guys like Hopkins, Toney, McCallum, Hill and being the first Middleweight champion in over ONE HUNDRED years to win a heavyweight title (with a glass chin, nonetheless!).

Surely he's the GOAT, then? (going by YOUR criteria though, which most of his haters seem to subscribe to)

Going by objective criteria, usually used by his fans (conincidentally), puts Roy in a position where he more or less should be, i.e. Top 20-40 (top 10 head-to-head)

[KO Boxing]

Just to add my 2 cents, it's posts like these that clearly show that certain posters have certain agenda's on certain issues.

[doublesuited]

Sweet Pea and Orishaman arguing is the internet equivalent of Golota vs. McBride.

[doublesuited]

I agree that both of you are "two cats who don't know what the hell they talkin' bout," as put by Roy Jones.

[Orishaman]

Orishaman, just stop, I won't respond to everything unless you ask me to, but I will point out that your reading comprehension sucks. I put SRR as both a WW and a MW, and while more consistent at WW, it's possible he fought even better comp at MW, if you actually take a look.

Ok , I agree with that 100%, but if anyone need to learn to comprehend is you, if we are making a top 100 list by weight class as I did, you need to make desicion so you only have boxeers on ONE WEIGHT CLASS, if not it defeat the purpose of the 100 top fighters, if not you would have SRR a the top of the list because you use the WW record but you also ahve him on the top 100 list at 23 when using his MW record..come Dude...we want to see 100 different boxers...

Now that is basic when you make any list...they are all supposed to be different...

:tired

[brooklyn1550]

"two cats who don't know what the hell they talkin' bout,"

Speaking of that...

Judah TKO6 Cotto (no fouls)
Taylor TKO2 Pavlik

Why don't you just go ahead and add "McCline TKO3 Peter"

[Orishaman]

Speaking of that...

Judah TKO6 Cotto (no fouls)
Taylor TKO2 Pavlik

Why don't you just go ahead and add "McCline TKO3 Peter"

WTF......:huh ....WTF......:huh

Peter TKO Wlad in 6:huh ...WTF

[MJRJJ23]

Orishaman... I done a little research on Jones resume about a month ago. I compared jones resume to Hagler, Hearns, and Ray Leonard, and surprisingly going by there opponents records at the time of the fight (for example Hopkins was 22-1 when they fought. Out of those four just listed Jones opponents had a higher winning percentage than Leonards, Hearns and Haglers opposition. Just out of curiousity who's your favorite fighter?

[Orishaman]

Orishaman... I done a little research on Jones resume about a month ago. I compared jones resume to Hagler, Hearns, and Ray Leonard, and surprisingly going by there opponents records at the time of the fight (for example Hopkins was 22-1 when they fought. Out of those four just listed Jones opponents had a higher winning percentage than Leonards, Hearns and Haglers opposition. Just out of curiousity who's your favorite fighter?

I don't doubted...now...it is an issue of qulaity of opposition and by that I simply mean this, better boxers that fight equally top competition are bound to ahve more loses on their record due to the simple fact they are fighting tougher opposition....RJJ opposition even though it mike look impressive record wiase , once you start digging into what the records mean, you realized that many...of RJJ opposition had these issues...

I will always rank SRL, Hearns, and Hagler way ahead of RJJ ...it is a fact....

Now, many of you guys think I hate RJJ, I don;t like him but I don't hate him...and I see that he was a great boxer no doubt but he was not ATG great..and that's the point I try to get across...Bert Sugar have him 88, ok I can accept that..but many on the Forum are taking top 40 material and he is just not there, not with the holes on his resume very the tougher opposition at MW, SMW and LW....the opposition I mentione earlier-Nunn, Jackson, Curry, DM, Benn...Gerald....

[sues2nd]

You all are just sickening, let's review what we have here in Jones' complete resume which includes all notable class fighters that did anything worth mentioning -

James Toney
Bernard Hopkins
Virgil Hill
John Ruiz
Montell Griffin
Mike McCallum
Reggie Johnson
Eric Harding
Clinton Woods
Julio Cesar Gonzalez
Jorge Fernando Castro
Thulani Malinga
Antonio Tarver

All save for Tarver, were either outclassed or outright destroyed, this counts for a lot in the resume department because fights need to be measured on how they were won.

I personally find nothing wrong with that resume listed above, the only issue with Roy is what could have been if the oppurtunity to add Eubank, Benn, Michalczewski & McCllelan, which would make that a top 5 resume all in all.

As it stands, top 30 fighter, without a doubt. It's sickening how he's underrated and ranked these days by some, who then only prop up to an insane level some guy from the early 1900's.

Its been awhile since I said this Am......but GREAT FUCKIN POST BRO!!!!

:good

[The Whaler]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

:happy:happy:happy

[hitman_hatton1]

deffo top 30 of all time for me.

terrific talent.

arguably the most dominant boxer ever.

and he just didn't dominate for a few short years either. :nono

shame he didn't know when to pack it in. :-(

i'd still like to see tito finish him for good though. :bbb :yep

[kg0208]

I don't doubted...now...it is an issue of qulaity of opposition and by that I simply mean this, better boxers that fight equally top competition are bound to ahve more loses on their record due to the simple fact they are fighting tougher opposition....RJJ opposition even though it mike look impressive record wiase , once you start digging into what the records mean, you realized that many...of RJJ opposition had these issues...

I will always rank SRL, Hearns, and Hagler way ahead of RJJ ...it is a fact....

Now, many of you guys think I hate RJJ, I don;t like him but I don't hate him...and I see that he was a great boxer no doubt but he was not ATG great..and that's the point I try to get across...Bert Sugar have him 88, ok I can accept that..but many on the Forum are taking top 40 material and he is just not there, not with the holes on his resume very the tougher opposition at MW, SMW and LW....the opposition I mentione earlier-Nunn, Jackson, Curry, DM, Benn...Gerald....

There you go....saying "Fact" where there is only opinion.

[Archie_Moore]

You all are just sickening, let's review what we have here in Jones' complete resume which includes all notable class fighters that did anything worth mentioning -

James Toney
Bernard Hopkins
Virgil Hill
John Ruiz
Montell Griffin
Mike McCallum
Reggie Johnson
Eric Harding
Clinton Woods
Julio Cesar Gonzalez
Jorge Fernando Castro
Thulani Malinga
Antonio Tarver

All save for Tarver, were either outclassed or outright destroyed, this counts for a lot in the resume department because fights need to be measured on how they were won.

I personally find nothing wrong with that resume listed above, the only issue with Roy is what could have been if the oppurtunity to add Eubank, Benn, Michalczewski & McCllelan, which would make that a top 5 resume all in all.

As it stands, top 30 fighter, without a doubt. It's sickening how he's underrated and ranked these days by some, who then only prop up to an insane level some guy from the early 1900's.

Good post, I like Jones more now then I use to, but I thought the guy went after "paper belts" ratehr then trying to make the toughest fights possible. Still has a pretty good resume and, like I've always said, he is one of the most gifted fighters I have ever seen. :good

[crash]

jones was a ledgend.

[Orishaman]

Did I read that right? You're way off base there, people rate Robinson #1 all time pound for pound because of his combined career at every weight he fought in. They rate him in two weight classes because he was one of the best to ever fight in two weight classes. You can rate people in multiple weight classes, just not a pound for pound list.

Nope ...chump... I was simply stating that putting SRR at the top of the MW list, is a fallacy, since he was good not great at MW, and his record CLEARLY REFLECTS THIS....so I was trying to tell you that if you are talking a weight class ATG, you need to show him where he was the best...not where you think he should be....:patsch

[Snakefist]

Actually HBO confirmed that they were putting pressure on Jones to fight Benn, Collins, and Liles. They put offers out there and were rejected. The interview has been posted here numerous times.

Each fighter and their fans claim that Jones was ducking them, but if HBO, who would make MORE money if Jones fought these guys says they were turned down by the fighters, I see no logical reason for them to lie.

Jones should have tried harder to make the fights happen IMO, but my problem is that there seems to be a double standard applied when judging Jones. Its rare that anyone points out all the fighters Hopkins passed up, or many other ATG's.

Eubanks in an article of which he was interviewed basically said he turned down the fight. He basically said that he didn't want to fight him because he knew he would lose. It's in the Achieves.

[Orishaman]

His resume of defeated opponents at MW was arguably the best of all time, the only detractor are his losses, most of them coming after the age of 35 when he was past his prime. In his prime at MW and even past his prime he had a lot of great wins. He definitely is top 5.

For starters , he was past his prime when he move to MW, he was such a great talent that he still did great...but anyone who is anyone in boxsing will tell you that the greatness of SRR was at WW and not at MW.....sure he had great competion at MW but he also lost to some lesser competition...specially from 1955 on......

[Orishaman]

0o0c8fXHp-4

[Fab2333]

You all are just sickening, let's review what we have here in Jones' complete resume which includes all notable class fighters that did anything worth mentioning -

James Toney
Bernard Hopkins
Virgil Hill
John Ruiz
Montell Griffin
Mike McCallum
Reggie Johnson
Eric Harding
Clinton Woods
Julio Cesar Gonzalez
Jorge Fernando Castro
Thulani Malinga
Antonio Tarver

All save for Tarver, were either outclassed or outright destroyed, this counts for a lot in the resume department because fights need to be measured on how they were won.

I personally find nothing wrong with that resume listed above, the only issue with Roy is what could have been if the oppurtunity to add Eubank, Benn, Michalczewski & McCllelan, which would make that a top 5 resume all in all.

As it stands, top 30 fighter, without a doubt. It's sickening how he's underrated and ranked these days by some, who then only prop up to an insane level some guy from the early 1900's.

awesome post amsterdam:deal

[Orishaman]

What's the point of posting that? He was past his prime by a long ways in that fight. In his prime, he fought and beat way better fighters than Johnson and Tarver. How does he beat them and not those two if he was not past his prime? Makes no sense.

In his prime, as Amsterdam already pointed out, he fought and beat great fighters, and accomplished great things. I'm sorry, but no fighter with his resume and titles in 4 weight classes(especially moving from JMW to HW) is not top 100, especially one as immensely gifted in the ring as him. You have NO case whatsoever for him not being in the top 100. NOT ONE SINGLE POSTER OR KNOWLEDGABLE BOXING FAN/HISTORIAN WILL AGREE WITH YOU!

Some of the RJJ admirers can post a pic of him beating the opposition to a pulp but I can post a video of a beautiful 1-2 combo....come on this is a boxing Forum, not the Roy Jones Jr Admiration Society...

And you are wrong...I can care less about you wannabes boxing experts, ...I am a boxer and trainer and hang around boxing all the time with people that I respect their opinion far more that any wannbes on the internet, like you, and we all agree that even though RJJ resume was "good" not "great", he is not top 100 ATG.....

And the best example of that is Bert Sugar, who I mistankely taught he was not on his top 100, I was srong, yet he was on the top 90 ATG's at 88...88 NOTEVEN CLOSE.....SO DUDE YOU AND ALL THE OTHER CRONIES AT ESB THAT LOVE TO PRAISE RJJ GROW UP .....CHUMP:hi:

[Orishaman]

awesome post amsterdam:deal

You got to love ESB even the huggers have huggers:rofl :rofl

[Orishaman]

If the people you hang out with say Jones is not top 100, they are just as ignorant and un-knowledgable as you. Chump.

Well I guess they are..we all hve over 100 years of boxing experinece between us...so what we know....and coming from you...WTF cares...for all I know you never stepped foot on a Boxing Gym on your life....pick up Sweet Pea name becuase is the only good fighter you can identify..and join a Boxing Forum...

Fool the only ignorant here is you , trying to convinced yourself that RJJ resume is "great" ...it is not....it is "good" ..."good" not great..I will tell you that, Bert Sugar will tell you that, and so will other Boxing writers of any credibility....now people like Armsterdan, Sweet Pea, kg0000 and manyother will tell you different:rofl

[Orishaman]

I agree that the Roy Jones love can be sickening at times but fuck Burt Sugar . These old guys never give the modern fighters credit . They act like the old timers where so great and the new guys are just bums who could only hope to be 25% as good . I bet a new fighter at his best would kick the shit out of 1 of these old time fighters at there best given all the improvements in style , training , ect .... Burt sugar can suck an egg IMO ...

...you still have a chance to delete your post.....:lol:

[Orishaman]

people will always hate and bash on dudes who are great! just the way it goes. roy is the real deal, and fighting the other guys mentioned would have been great, but i feel he did more than enough to solidify his place within the top 15 atg's.

Wow.....:nut

[Orishaman]

Orishaman needs to change his name to OScenileoldman

yeap...old....50 in November 20 to be exact ...OScenileoldman is washed up but still is in better shape that you..and kick your butt inside the ropes and know more boxing that you....and many others Roy Jones Jr. fans.....:lol:

[Fab2333]

You got to love ESB even the huggers have huggers:rofl :rofl
its not about huging, its about having a brain, and any1 can easily see that RJ is definately in the topp 100 ATG. You my friend need help

[kg0208]

Well I guess they are..we all hve over 100 years of boxing experinece between us...so what we know....and coming from you...WTF cares...for all I know you never stepped foot on a Boxing Gym on your life....pick up Sweet Pea name becuase is the only good fighter you can identify..and join a Boxing Forum...

Fool the only ignorant here is you , trying to convinced yourself that RJJ resume is "great" ...it is not....it is "good" ..."good" not great..I will tell you that, Bert Sugar will tell you that, and so will other Boxing writers of any credibility....now people like Armsterdan, Sweet Pea, kg0000 and manyother will tell you different:rofl
:|:|:|:|:|

Funny, you used Bert Sugar as a crutch. You were proven wrong there as well. Ring has Jones in the top 50 fighters. ESPN rated him in the top 50. So who are these credible writers you are always talking about that rate Jones similar to you?:deal

Credible is code for "Agrees with Orisha" who has a pathectic dislike of a fighter and does all he can to discredit his accomplishments. You can whine and cry all you like that everyone isn't credible except you, but in the end, it doesn't mean much. You have nothing but your opinion against a landslide of facts. Its sad really.

[Orishaman]

:lol: You are something else, you don't know more about boxing than me regardless of your ridiculously high age. You may have seen more over the many years, but in terms of analyzation, you're still pretty lame.

What is ridiculous is your stpidity thinking you are actually a good boxing analysist.....sure you are...I don't have to proof nothing to you becuase from your comments I know who I am dealing with....a boxing wantnabe......If I couldn't analyse I would be a loussy trainer....but I am not...so you figure it out chump.....I talk the talk and walk the walk....:hi:

[kg0208]

What is ridiculous is your stpidity thinking you are actually a good analysis boxing.....sure you are...I don't have to proof nothing to you becuase from your comments I know who I am dealing with....a boxing wantnabe......If I couldn't analyse I would be a loussy trainer....but I am not...so you figure it out chump.....I talk the talk and walk the walk....:hi:

Yes, being a trainer makes you a great analyst and very good at ranking resumes. Just like being a good boxer means you'll be a good trainer. Oh wait.......

[Orishaman]

:|:|:|:|:|

Funny, you used Bert Sugar as a crutch. You were proven wrong there as well. Ring has Jones in the top 50 fighters. ESPN rated him in the top 50. So who are these credible writers you are always talking about that rate Jones similar to you?:deal

Credible is code for "Agrees with Orisha" who has a pathectic dislike of a fighter and does all he can to discredit his accomplishments. You can whine and cry all you like that everyone isn't credible except you, but in the end, it doesn't mean much. You have nothing but your opinion against a landslide of facts. Its sad really.

So lets see Bert Sugar made Ring Mag what it is today, but his list is shit and the new Ring Mag is the shit and ESPN, please.....ESPN. where you saw this list on "Who's Number One" at the end on the viewers poll...please ...keep hugging RJJ and beleive that he is great...once again I will say this his resume is "good" not "great" and if you say othersise and keep falling on your ass talking about it....that will make you a blind hugger..but you are already one....

[Orishaman]

Yes, being a trainer makes you a great analyst and very good at ranking resumes. Just like being a good boxer means you'll be a good trainer. Oh wait.......

All I am saying is this -the holes on RJJ resume speaks for itself and speaks volume after we saw his getting KO in consecutive fights that he had problems with heavy hand opponents......

I will say this to make my position with RJJ clear..RJJ had gret talent speed and reflexes , he was never a what you would call a master sweet scientist, he did well becuase his physical talents..now that is totally different to say he is an ATG....his physical attributes don't automatically make him ATG...the only thing that makes a boxer an ATG is the quality of his opponents, and how he faired against the top tier boxsers, and how oftenhe seek to fight the very best of his contemporaries..and IN MY BOOK..RJJ failed on that part....at MW, SMW and LHW.....

[kg0208]

So lets see Bert Sugar made Ring Mag what it is today, but his list is shit and the new Ring Mag is the shit and ESPN, please.....ESPN. where you saw this list on "Who's Number One" at the end on the viewers poll...please ...keep hugging RJJ and beleive that he is great...once again I will say this his resume is "good" not "great" and if you say othersise and keep falling on your ass talking about it....that will make you a blind hugger..but you are already one....

Says the crybaby who is upset because he can't find anyone to agree with him. No one cares when the Devil calls them good....and no one cares when someone who hates a fighter calls his fans "huggers".

I never said Bert Sugar's list sucked...someone else said that. Either way, this isn't really about that is it. You keep saying "Credible writers" rate him as you do. Care to produce ONE writer who rates Jones outside the top 100? You said it, prove it:deal

No one tells you to constantly bash Jones whenever you get the chance. You can't very well bitch and complain that someone defends him when you are always badmouthing him. Like I said.....GET OVER IT.

[kg0208]

All I am saying is this -the holes on RJJ resume speaks for itself and speaks volume after we saw his getting KO in consecutive fights that he had problems with heavy hand opponents......

I will say this to make my position with RJJ clear..RJJ had gret talent speed and reflexes , he was never a what you would call a master sweet scientist, he did well becuase his physical talents..now that is totally different to say he is an ATG....his physical attributes don't automatically make him ATG...the only thing that makes a boxer an ATG is the quality of his opponents, and how he faired against the top tier boxsers, and how oftenhe seek to fight the very best of his contemporaries..and IN MY BOOK..RJJ failed on that part....at MW, SMW and LHW.....

Good for you....and when your book is published and respected by the boxing community, let me know.

Now are you going to produce these "credible writers" who rate Jones as you do?

[Orishaman]

Says the crybaby who is upset because he can't find anyone to agree with him. No one cares when the Devil calls them good....and no one cares when someone who hates a fighter calls his fans "huggers".

I never said Bert Sugar's list sucked...someone else said that. Either way, this isn't really about that is it. You keep saying "Credible writers" rate him as you do. Care to produce ONE writer who rates Jones outside the top 100? You said it, prove it:deal

No one tells you to constantly bash Jones whenever you get the chance. You can't very well bitch and complain that someone defends him when you are always badmouthing him. Like I said.....GET OVER IT.


Read the post above...please...I don;t bash RJJ ..I bahsed the huggers that idolized him as a boxing God..which he is not and not even near it.....idolized him for beating John Ruiz at HW, a second tier boxer and champ....

Compare RJJ to a Bob Foster or Archie Moore that seek the best at LHW and HW....shit Bob Foster went after the best of the best in the HW and so did Archie......so please don't glorify RRj for fighting Ruiz...it is not that impressive....

[Orishaman]

Good for you....and when your book is published and respected by the boxing community, let me know.

Now are you going to produce these "credible writers" who rate Jones as you do?
Oh excuse me...I didn;t know you are an accomplished boxing writer with a well respected following .....chump...do you wrote a book? Then STFU claiming that I am....:rofl

[kg0208]

Read the post above...please...I don;t bash RJJ ..I bahsed the huggers that idolized him as a boxing God..which he is not and not even near it.....idolized him for beating John Ruiz at HW, a second tier boxer and champ....

Compare RJJ to a Bob Foster or Archie Moore that seek the best at LHW and HW....shit Bob Foster went after the best of the best in the HW and so did Archie......so please don't glorify RRj for fighting Ruiz...it is not that impressive....

You bash Jones. You posted a video of him being KO'd in this thread that had nothing to do with the topic. You constantly talk about his opposition as though it sucks, even when you contradict yourself. And you never admit or explain the contradictions.

You qualify anyone who thinks Jones is better than YOU think he is as a nuthugger.....and thats just about everyone because less than 10% of this site rates him where you do.

Oh, and comparing Jones to top tier ATG doesn't make him NOT AN ATG. He is not as good a LHW as either of those guys. And Moore was not as good a MW as Jones.

[kg0208]

Oh excuse me...I didn;t know you are an accomplished boxing writer with a well respected following .....chump...do you wrote a book? Then STFU claiming that I am....:rofl

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Difference is, boxing writers who ARE established concur with my opinion. So I have no need to write a book about what is already out there.

You're all alone out there in left field with "YOUR BOOK".

I notice you keep dodging my questions. You gonna produce these writers or what?

[brooklyn1550]

Let me break down Roy Jones' resume...

ROY JONES, JR.
51 WINS, 4 LOSSES, 38 KNOCKOUTS

Bernard Hopkins (Undisputed MW Champion, RING LHW Champion) Future HOFer
James Toney (MW Champion, SMW Champion, CW Champion) Future HOFer
Mike McCallum (LMW Champion, MW Champion, LHW Champion) Future HOFer
Virgil Hill (LHW Champion, CW Champion) Potential Future HOFer
John Ruiz (WBA HW Champion)
Antonio Tarver (Undisputed LHW Champion)
Clinton Woods (IBF LHW Champion)
Julio Cesar Gonzalez (WBO LHW Champion)
Richard Hall (WBO Interim LHW Champion)
Lou Del Valle (WBA LHW Champion)
Otis Grant (WBO MW Champion)
Reggie Johnson (WBA MW Champion, IBF LHW Champion)
Montell Griffin (WBC LHW Champion)
Vinny Pazienza (IBF LW Champion, WBA LMW Champion)
Thulani Malinga (WBC SMW Champion)
Jorge Fernando Castro (WBA MW Champion)
Merqui Sosa
Eric Harding
Bryant Brannon
David Telesco
Derrick Harmon
Thomas TateIBF Middleweight Champion
IBF Super Middleweight Champion
WBC Light Heavyweight Champion
WBA Light Heavyweight Champion
WBO Light Heavyweight Champion
IBF Light Heavyweight Champion
WBA Heavyweight Champion
18 Title Defenses
Defeated over 15 World Champions
Defeated 3 Future Hall of Famers, Potentially 4 and Possibly 5 after January 19th
Won First Title Fight in 1993, Won Last Title Fight in 2003



To me, this looks like a ALL TIME GREAT resume. His sustained brilliance at a championship level, the number of great fighters he beat, the number of champions he beat, the number of titles he won - in 4 weight classes. His resume exceeds Trinidad's, De La Hoya's, and Mosley's.

[Orishaman]

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Difference is, boxing writers who ARE established concur with my opinion. So I have no need to write a book about what is already out there.

You're all alone out there in left field with "YOUR BOOK".

I notice you keep dodging my questions. You gonna produce these writers or what?

All alone....so 88 doesn;t count......no I am not alone on this...once again it proof that love is blind......you love for RJJ blind you from the points I make over and over...but with you is like talking to a fucking "fungo" bat...dammit...dude ...grow up...

BTW, I posted the RJJ video KO becuase some ass hole posted the pic of RJJ busting up......so if is good for the goose.......


BTW, RJJ at 35 lost two consecutive fights by KO in worst way than any of the top MW or LHW in history never did......

[Orishaman]

Let me break down Roy Jones' resume...

ROY JONES, JR.
51 WINS, 4 LOSSES, 38 KNOCKOUTS

Bernard Hopkins (Undisputed MW Champion, RING LHW Champion) Future HOFer
James Toney (MW Champion, SMW Champion, CW Champion)Future HOFer
Mike McCallum (LMW Champion, MW Champion, LHW Champion)Future HOFer
Virgil Hill (LHW Champion, CW Champion)Potential Future HOFer
John Ruiz (WBA HW Champion)
Antonio Tarver (Undisputed LHW Champion)
Clinton Woods (IBF LHW Champion)
Julio Cesar Gonzalez (WBO LHW Champion)
Richard Hall (WBO Interim LHW Champion)
Lou Del Valle (WBA LHW Champion)
Otis Grant (WBO MW Champion)
Reggie Johnson (WBA MW Champion, IBF LHW Champion)
Montell Griffin (WBC LHW Champion)
Vinny Pazienza (IBF LW Champion, WBA LMW Champion)
Thulani Malinga (WBC SMW Champion)
Jorge Fernando Castro (WBA MW Champion)
Merqui Sosa
Eric Harding
Bryant Brannon
David Telesco
Derrick Harmon
Thomas TateIBF Middleweight Champion
IBF Super Middleweight Champion
WBC Light Heavyweight Champion
WBA Light Heavyweight Champion
WBO Light Heavyweight Champion
IBF Light Heavyweight Champion
WBA Heavyweight Champion
18 Title Defenses
Defeated over 15 World Champions
Defeated 3 Future Hall of Famers, Potentially 4 and Possibly 5 after January 19th
Won First Title Fight in 1993, Won Last Title Fight in 2003


To me, this looks like a ALL TIME GREAT resume

I never said that RJJ is not a HOF, bacuase he clearly will be one but an HOF is not necessarly a ATG specially a top tier ATG.....

[kg0208]

All alone....so 88 doesn;t count......no I am not alone on this...once again it proof that love is blind......you love for RJJ blind you from the points I make over and over...but with you is like talking to a fucking "fungo" bat...dammit...dude ...grow up...

BTW, I posted the RJJ video KO becuase some ass hole posted the pic of RJJ busting up......so if is good for the goose.......


BTW, RJJ at 35 lost two consecutive fights by KO in worst way than any of the top MW or LHW in history never did......

88 isn't outside the Top 100 now is it? It's clearly on the inside. And YOU said that Jones is barely top 200 in another thread...so yes, you are alone. You ignore the 20 or so posters who have given you perfectly good arguments. I think its you who is a little blind.

You gonna post those writers or WHAT?

[Orishaman]

88 isn't outside the Top 100 now is it? It's clearly on the inside. And YOU said that Jones is barely top 200 in another thread...so yes, you are alone. You ignore the 20 or so posters who have given you perfectly good arguments. I think its you who is a little blind.

You gonna post those writers or WHAT?

88 is definitevilly inside 100, but that makes him..waht...top 90 ATG list....far from top 40 ATG as you so elocuently have decided to rank him....

[kg0208]

88 is definitevilly inside 100, but that makes him..waht...top 90 ATG list....far from top 40 ATG as you so elocuently have decided to rank him....
Sure is, but it's closer than "Barely top 200" as you rank him. And as I said, Sugar himself is one man. Most writers rank Jones top 50. Sugar isn't the ONLY credible boxing writer. He is still an anomaly himself in this discussion. Just not as much of one as you are.

[Orishaman]

"I tell you what anybody can offer an opinion and back it with selected facts. Someone might think Ray Leonard was a better fighter than Sugar Ray Robinson and if the assessment is backed by selected statistics where Leonard has an advantage over Robinson, then the arguement for Leonard would be valid. But, if we analyze each fighter in 29 categories, as I have, rather than a select few, a fine champion like Leonard does not come close to Robinson. Leonard might emerge as the better man in a few categories, but a broader analysis will strongly favor Robinson. Consider an area such as career activity: Sugar Ray Robinson had 202 bouts in his professional career. In contrast, Ray Leonard had 40 professional fights. I found 533 champions who had more fights in their career than Ray Leonard had, but there are only six champions who had more career fights than Ray Robinson. To me, that means something. Robinson took on more risk and he was rewarded for it. Every time a boxer steps into the ring, no matter how good he is, or how poor his opponent appears to be, he is taking a risk. The degree of risk every boxer undertakes during his career, when compared to his peers, tells us something about each man. When we consider more and different facts, Robinson's advantage over Leonard -- and every fighter -- becomes clear and compelling.


Here are the 29 performance categories that I created to measure and rank 700 champions, and Sugar Ray Robinson's performance compared to category averages. The issue here is Career Quality


To analyze the career performance of 700 champions in 29 categories I developed a ranking system that has no bias and eliminates the need for opinion. While this is a robust and dependable model, I'm not claiming that it's the perfect system, but I strongly believe that a fact-based approach is a better way to rank hundreds of boxers than by the use of facts for the top few and opinions for the rest. I wanted to develop as much solid evidence as possible and have my system produce a consistent ranking by going far deeper than the usual review of wins, losses, knockouts and title fights that serve as the statistical underpinning in other books that rank fighters. I rely on this evidence to provide a different and more comprehensive view of the career of the champions than ever before.

While some ranking books focus only on a boxer's peak years -- a matter of opinion in itself -- Boxing's Top 100 isolates the peak as well as the pre and post peak years. In short, I take every boxer's entire career into account. I show his pre-peak, peak and post-peak years and we can draw conclusions as to how all fighters performed at every stage of their career. In so doing I answer questions such as: Do fighters who win a title at a young age stay on top longer? The most productive periods of a boxer's career are by definition his peak years and in my system we know what the average peak looks like, so we can give more credit to boxers with an above average peak. I don't arbitrarily give weight to any categories, I simply let every champion's performance set his position in each of the 29 categories.

After compiling career profiles of 700 boxing champions from 1882 to 2000, I isolated every champion's career into 29 performance categories. I determined medians for each category, compared every champion's performance - category by category - to overall performance medians, and determined how far above or below median every champion lies in each of the 29 categories. I distilled the results in every category into one score that I refer to as Career Quality. Every boxer's ranking is a summation of his performance in 29 individual category. The end result is his Career Quality score which is a value based on a 1-100 point scale, with 100 being the highest score a boxer can achieve.

My rankings are not influenced by any boxer's fame or historical importance. This is a study of the performance of each champion relative to the career performance of 700 champions. "


I found this very interesting article by Bill Gray and his 29 performance categories:

so lets once and for all use this categories and see where RJJ fall.....

[kg0208]

"I tell you what anybody can offer an opinion and back it with selected facts. Someone might think Ray Leonard was a better fighter than Sugar Ray Robinson and if the assessment is backed by selected statistics where Leonard has an advantage over Robinson, then the arguement for Leonard would be valid. But, if we analyze each fighter in 29 categories, as I have, rather than a select few, a fine champion like Leonard does not come close to Robinson. Leonard might emerge as the better man in a few categories, but a broader analysis will strongly favor Robinson. Consider an area such as career activity: Sugar Ray Robinson had 202 bouts in his professional career. In contrast, Ray Leonard had 40 professional fights. I found 533 champions who had more fights in their career than Ray Leonard had, but there are only six champions who had more career fights than Ray Robinson. To me, that means something. Robinson took on more risk and he was rewarded for it. Every time a boxer steps into the ring, no matter how good he is, or how poor his opponent appears to be, he is taking a risk. The degree of risk every boxer undertakes during his career, when compared to his peers, tells us something about each man. When we consider more and different facts, Robinson's advantage over Leonard -- and every fighter -- becomes clear and compelling.


Here are the 29 performance categories that I created to measure and rank 700 champions, and Sugar Ray Robinson's performance compared to category averages. The issue here is Career Quality


To analyze the career performance of 700 champions in 29 categories I developed a ranking system that has no bias and eliminates the need for opinion. While this is a robust and dependable model, I'm not claiming that it's the perfect system, but I strongly believe that a fact-based approach is a better way to rank hundreds of boxers than by the use of facts for the top few and opinions for the rest. I wanted to develop as much solid evidence as possible and have my system produce a consistent ranking by going far deeper than the usual review of wins, losses, knockouts and title fights that serve as the statistical underpinning in other books that rank fighters. I rely on this evidence to provide a different and more comprehensive view of the career of the champions than ever before.

While some ranking books focus only on a boxer's peak years -- a matter of opinion in itself -- Boxing's Top 100 isolates the peak as well as the pre and post peak years. In short, I take every boxer's entire career into account. I show his pre-peak, peak and post-peak years and we can draw conclusions as to how all fighters performed at every stage of their career. In so doing I answer questions such as: Do fighters who win a title at a young age stay on top longer? The most productive periods of a boxer's career are by definition his peak years and in my system we know what the average peak looks like, so we can give more credit to boxers with an above average peak. I don't arbitrarily give weight to any categories, I simply let every champion's performance set his position in each of the 29 categories.

After compiling career profiles of 700 boxing champions from 1882 to 2000, I isolated every champion's career into 29 performance categories. I determined medians for each category, compared every champion's performance - category by category - to overall performance medians, and determined how far above or below median every champion lies in each of the 29 categories. I distilled the results in every category into one score that I refer to as Career Quality. Every boxer's ranking is a summation of his performance in 29 individual category. The end result is his Career Quality score which is a value based on a 1-100 point scale, with 100 being the highest score a boxer can achieve.

My rankings are not influenced by any boxer's fame or historical importance. This is a study of the performance of each champion relative to the career performance of 700 champions. "


I found this very interesting article by John Benson and his 29 performance categories:

so lets once and for all use this categories and see where RJJ fall.....

And how do you determine the score in each catagory? Because if it's opinion based, you will simply give Jones lower scores. If it's fact based, we should ALL come up with the same scores regardless.

[KO Boxing]

You don't like Roy Jones... okay. Not the first.

[Orishaman]

And how do you determine the score in each catagory? Because if it's opinion based, you will simply give Jones lower scores. If it's fact based, we should ALL come up with the same scores regardless.

Not aat all..this is the best system I seen to rank boxers..as much as I hate to admit that the system ranked PBF 22 on the ATG ..but there it is...the 29 categories range from age the boxer started to fight, retiring age, years as champion, %wins by desicions, % loses by desicion, % KO etc...itis a very well put together system that leave any speculative elements out and deals with pure facts and analysisng all boxers by the same set of categories, he called it "Career Qulity" or "CQ " index base on 100% as the highest .....for example SRR came on top with a "CQ" index of 88 or so..anyway if you are game..I am also...and once and for all proof

[kg0208]

Not aat all..this is the best system I seen to rank boxers..as much as I hate to admit that the system ranked PBF 22 on the ATG ..but there it is...the 29 categories range from age the boxer started to fight, retiring age, years as champion, %wins by desicions, % loses by desicion, % KO etc...itis a very well put together system that leave any speculative elements out and deals with pure facts and analysisng all boxers by the same set of categories, he called it "Career Qulity" or "CQ " index base on 100% as the highest .....for example SRR came on top with a "CQ" index of 88 or so..anyway if you are game..I am also...and once and for all proof
Sure, fine by me. I will see how it rates fighters. I don't have PBF in my top 75 so I already disagree with it. I have never heard of the system.

[Orishaman]

Sure, fine by me.
I am going to by the box :

And I recomended to anyone thatis a serious Boxing Fan:


Boxing Top 100 by Bill Grey....this will take a while but if you are game..so am I....we will post the list from the book...the cat analysed 700 champions careers....

[RAMPAGE0017]

I am going to by the box :

And I recomended to anyone thatis a serious Boxing Fan:


Boxing Top 100 by Bill Grey....this will take a while but if you are game..so am I....we will post the list from the book...the cat analysed 700 champions careers....


Fuck Bill Grey, fuck Bert Sugar, and fuck any other old bastard that thinks he's a genious on boxing just because he has liver spots.

[kg0208]

I am going to by the box :

And I recomended to anyone thatis a serious Boxing Fan:


Boxing Top 100 by Bill Grey....this will take a while but if you are game..so am I....we will post the list from the book...the cat analysed 700 champions careers....


I dunno Orisha....he ranks Virgil Hill as the 17th greatest fighter ever. He has Pep at #39. Frazier at #400. Benny Leonard at #139.

That's kinda dubious.

[Orishaman]

Sure, fine by me. I will see how it rates fighters. I don't have PBF in my top 75 so I already disagree with it. I have never heard of the system.

So do I, but the facts are the facts so I have eat my opinion..since it is systematic and objective system, the same yard stick use for boxers 100 years ago to contemporaries....for example ...related to PBF he wrote this, and BHop also...which I also disagree but I have to say he has a very goos system that leave opinions at the door:

"t's important to note that some of the boxers in my top 100 list are still active. Some are in their prime and some are nearing the end of their career. At one point I thought it would be best to only rank boxers who were retired, but because I ranked fighters in every decade, it was necessary to include active fighters to complete the analysis through the end of the twentieth century. That forced me to do something that I don't like to do and that is to rank champions before their career is over (incomplete information). My ranking of Floyd Mayweather, Jr., is a good example of using peak value to rank a boxer. Right now, after his victory over Oscar De La Hoya in May 2007, Mayweather is thought to be the finest pound for pound fighter in the world. He talked of retiring before and after his defeat of De La Hoya, but if he does quit the ring now the undefeated multi champion Mayweather, would not have the record to be ranked as the finest pound for pound fighter of all time. He would not even be ranked as the greatest fighter of his decade. Mayweather's victory improved his ranking from 32 in the book to 22 right now. De La Hoya (once considered the greatest pound for pound fighter of his time) was ranked number 53 in the book and his loss to Mayweather, Jr. dropped him down to number 77 in my all time top 100 rankings. De La Hoya fell from a CQ of 71.42 in the book to 68.67, while Mayweather's CQ jumped from 76.43 to 80.28. The impact of this fight is felt throughout the Top 100. Mayweather's new ranking at number 22 bumped the previous number 22, Eder Jofre, to number 23. On the other side, De La Hoya's tumble from 53 to 77 pushed Mickey Walker, who had been number 77 in the book, to number 76. The De La Hoya loss improved the ranking of every fighter previously ranked between 53 and 77, by one notch.
Although Mayweather is now said to be the best active fighter in the world, the records say otherwise. It is Bernard Hopkins, not Mayweather, who should still be called the best pound for pound fighter in the world if we consider both men by their records over their entire career, rather than by assuming that Mayweather is better because he is younger and undefeated. Not long ago Hopkins was thought to be the best pound for pound fighter in the world, but he lost a couple of title fights to Jermain Taylor and was nearing age 40, so the media looked for a new man to call the best pound for pound fighter in the world, settling on Mayweather who was undefeated. Despite suffering two losses, Hopkins was not finished with boxing and he continues to be productive in his forties. His pound for pound successor Mayweather, is talking about retiring at age 30. If he does quit now, his ranking will probably be hurt because he retired at a relatively young age ( the median retirement age is 33) and he hasn't fought enough to favorably compare to Robinson, Armstrong, Duran or Chavez. " by Bill Gray

[kg0208]

So do I, but the facts are the facts so I have eat my opinion..since it is systematic and objective system, the same yard stick use for boxers 100 years ago to contemporaries....for example ...related to PBF he wrote this, and BHop also...which I also disagree but I have to say he has a very goos system that leave opinions at the door:

"t's important to note that some of the boxers in my top 100 list are still active. Some are in their prime and some are nearing the end of their career. At one point I thought it would be best to only rank boxers who were retired, but because I ranked fighters in every decade, it was necessary to include active fighters to complete the analysis through the end of the twentieth century. That forced me to do something that I don't like to do and that is to rank champions before their career is over (incomplete information). My ranking of Floyd Mayweather, Jr., is a good example of using peak value to rank a boxer. Right now, after his victory over Oscar De La Hoya in May 2007, Mayweather is thought to be the finest pound for pound fighter in the world. He talked of retiring before and after his defeat of De La Hoya, but if he does quit the ring now the undefeated multi champion Mayweather, would not have the record to be ranked as the finest pound for pound fighter of all time. He would not even be ranked as the greatest fighter of his decade. Mayweather's victory improved his ranking from 32 in the book to 22 right now. De La Hoya (once considered the greatest pound for pound fighter of his time) was ranked number 53 in the book and his loss to Mayweather, Jr. dropped him down to number 77 in my all time top 100 rankings. De La Hoya fell from a CQ of 71.42 in the book to 68.67, while Mayweather's CQ jumped from 76.43 to 80.28. The impact of this fight is felt throughout the Top 100. Mayweather's new ranking at number 22 bumped the previous number 22, Eder Jofre, to number 23. On the other side, De La Hoya's tumble from 53 to 77 pushed Mickey Walker, who had been number 77 in the book, to number 76. The De La Hoya loss improved the ranking of every fighter previously ranked between 53 and 77, by one notch.
Although Mayweather is now said to be the best active fighter in the world, the records say otherwise. It is Bernard Hopkins, not Mayweather, who should still be called the best pound for pound fighter in the world if we consider both men by their records over their entire career, rather than by assuming that Mayweather is better because he is younger and undefeated. Not long ago Hopkins was thought to be the best pound for pound fighter in the world, but he lost a couple of title fights to Jermain Taylor and was nearing age 40, so the media looked for a new man to call the best pound for pound fighter in the world, settling on Mayweather who was undefeated. Despite suffering two losses, Hopkins was not finished with boxing and he continues to be productive in his forties. His pound for pound successor Mayweather, is talking about retiring at age 30. If he does quit now, his ranking will probably be hurt because he retired at a relatively young age ( the median retirement age is 33) and he hasn't fought enough to favorably compare to Robinson, Armstrong, Duran or Chavez. " by Bill Gray


Yes, but we have to know how he WEIGHS those facts. What value does he give what and is it correct?

Can you in any conceivable way rank Virgil Hill as the a Top 20 ATG? You should look at some of the people and where they are ranked on his list.

[Orishaman]

I dunno Orisha....he ranks Virgil Hill as the 17th greatest fighter ever. He has Pep at #39. Frazier at #400. Benny Leonard at #139.

That's kinda dubious.

Yes he does but it is objective not subjective...I will say that the only draw back is that he enphasises the lenght of the career and the lenght of the fighter at the top as champ.....


I actually taught he had Holyfield 17

[kg0208]

Yes he does but it is objective not subjective...I will say that the only draw back is that he enphasises the lenght of the career and the lenght of the fighter at the top as champ.....


I actually taught he had Holyfield 17
It is objective in the analysis, but only so far as the weight he puts in to the measurables. A test is only as good as it's questions. I like his setup and catagories to a point, but it is spitting out weird numbers.

BTW, he has Roy Jones at #37 according to reviews of the book.

[Orishaman]

It is objective in the analysis, but only so far as the weight he puts in to the measurables. A test is only as good as it's questions. I like his setup and catagories to a point, but it is spitting out weird numbers.

The categories are right on IMO, but yes it is weird results...but again it is a brave attent to qualify champions.. and by his top 6 is hard to argued agaisnt:

SRR
Archie Moore
Armstrong
Duran
JCC
Ali

I am out of here...I am an old man after all...we will continue this discussion tomorrow....

[kg0208]

The categories are right on IMO, but yes it is weird results...but again it is a brave attent to qualify champions.. and by his top 6 is hard to argued agaisnt:

SRR
Archie Moore
Armstrong
Duran
JCC
Ali

He has Jones at #37.

[Orishaman]

He has Jones at #37.

I know..but you said it .....it spits out some weird numbers......by this formula it is hard to argue....37 SEEMS AWFLY HIGH BUT THAT'S WHAT HE HAS.......DAMMIT

[kg0208]

I know..but you said it .....it spits out some weird numbers......by this formula it is hard to argue....37 SEEMS AWFLY HIGH BUT THAT'S WHAT HE HAS.......DAMMIT

This supports my argument and even I WON'T use it lol:deal

It has too many odd outcomes. I have Benny Leonard in my top 10...most have him in the top 30. To have him outside the top 100, along with many others invalidates his system IMO. But it's his system.

[Orishaman]

This supports my argument and even I WON'T use it lol:deal

It has too many odd outcomes. I have Benny Leonard in my top 10...most have him in the top 30. To have him outside the top 100, along with many others invalidates his system IMO. But it's his system.

I had B Leonard on my top 20 list...anyway I will buy the book and read the CQ index formula and maybe it need some minor twicking to make it work....

I am out of here........