Roy Jones - Who Would You Choose...

[Russell]

To upset a prime super middle Jones?

[McGrain]

Archie Moore.

[Russell]

How would Archie manage it, do you think?

[McGrain]

How would Archie manage it, do you think?

Well Archie is one of the greatest punchers that ever lived, the KO king. The thing about Jones is you must hit him, you can't outbox him. How do you hit him when you can't outspeed him (and almost no-one can)? You must use smarts, feints, intelligent countering and most of all feint fake opportunities to provide countering opportunities.

Moore was absolutley the expert at all of these things, perhaps to the exclusion of every other boxer - the best ever.

With his astonishing durability and stamina, Moore could conievabley lose 12 rounds and then score that shot. Moore by KO.

To be fair though, Moore was never good enough at 168 to get the job done, it was later he got good enough. So this would have to be prime Jones having his first fight at 175.

At 168 proper, maybe give him Greb?

[Sweet Pea]

I think Jones schools Moore, I mean nearly shuts him out, Toney style. Me and McGrain have argued this over and over. He thinks Moore would lead Jones on and KO him on the way in. I think Jones is far too fast and could easily pot shot on Moore all day. If Patterson stood right in front of him and managed to not get caught, Jones's much more conservative approach does the trick. Moore is simply too stationary, and not quick enough to catch Jones, considering Jones's speed and unorthodox style is the worst possible style for a stationary counter-puncher.

If Moore won, it would be on a one shot KO. I give Charles a much better chance than Moore, but at 175, not 168.

At 168, I favor Jones over all, but Greb is a possibility. Jones at that weight may well be the one to negate a lot of Greb's attributes though.

[McGrain]

Yeah, Greb...you got to wonder how Langford would go too. Jones would certainly need to do 12/15 hard rounds to get the job done...

[Russell]

So, sans somewhat obvious and already debated answers like Greb and Moore...

Who else?

[McGrain]

So, sans somewhat obvious and already debated answers like Greb and Moore...

Who else?

Nobody really. 168 isn't a heavily explored weight, there are guys at 160 you might pick and 175, but at 168, it's such a young division and you can't confidently move people up or down because weight is an issue and Jones is a monster.

[dpw417]

Nobody really. 168 isn't a heavily explored weight, there are guys at 160 you might pick and 175, but at 168, it's such a young division and you can't confidently move people up or down because weight is an issue and Jones is a monster.
Totally agree. At super middle, I think that I would take Jones over anyone...(I also agree that Moore would eventually catch Jones at light heavy) :good

[Sweet Pea]

Totally agree. At super middle, I think that I would take Jones over anyone...(I also agree that Moore would eventually catch Jones at light heavy) :goodBAH!

[SteveO]

Ray Leonard?

[Sizzle]

It's a long list to be honest.

Current fighters I'd favour are Joe Calzaghe, and a prime Bernard Hopkins.

Throughout history there are too many to list. Moore, and Charles are good picks though.

[Sweet Pea]

Ray Leonard?At SuperMiddle? He would get destroyed.

[Sweet Pea]

It's a long list to be honest.

Current fighters I'd favour are Joe Calzaghe, and a prime Bernard Hopkins.

Throughout history there are too many to list. Moore, and Charles are good picks though.You'd favor Calzaghe over a prime Jones? Too many to list at 168? Please list them. I consider it a very short list, but then again, you consider Floyd better than Roy.

edit: Nevermind, I've argued with you before on these points, you're the Jones hater.

[dpw417]

BAH!
Right back atcha.
Not even Superman in the comics won all the time...:yep
Being the very best in the super middles is not a bad thing.

[Russell]

Lets consider middleweights here as well.

[Russell]

And junior middleweights, if there are any.

[MSTR]

It's a long list to be honest.

Current fighters I'd favour are Joe Calzaghe, and a prime Bernard Hopkins.

Throughout history there are too many to list. Moore, and Charles are good picks though.

Calzaghe and Hopkins are great fighters, but i can't see either of them doing anything to neutralize the supreme skills of RJJ. Jones was simply too hard for most people to figure out, and IMO was on another level then these guys. I haven't seen anyone who could beat Jones in his prime at 168. IMO he is the closest thing we have seen to an unbeatable fighter. He had speed, power, elusive defense, a terrific offense and a massive range of punches that he threw from all sorts of angles. He could do so many different things inside the ring, and could fight from both the inside and the outside with ease. A very intelligent fighter who could literally do stuff that defied traditional boxing technique. Most importantly, at this weight he had a solid chin. He would attack and finish up relentlessly.

[Sweet Pea]

And junior middleweights, if there are any.Roy was very green there, I'd take someone like Hearns or McCallum to beat him.

At 160, Greb and Monzon are decent choices.

At 168, nobody really.

At 175, Foster, Charles(50/50), and possibly Spinks.

[MSTR]

What I look at most of all at 168 is how he beat his opponents. Guys like Tate, Sosa, Toney, Pazienza and Brannon were totally embarrassed and made to look like mugs in there. Comparitively against other top guys like Nunn, Eubank, Benn ect ect they may not have won, but they made competitive fights. Jones was simply on another level to all these guys. How people compare the skills of Floyd to Roy is totally beyond me. Watch Floyd taking guys like Baldomir or Sosa the distance, or have to wait until the middle rounds to dispose of guys like the average Brusselles, when Roy in his prime was absolutely annihilating fighters on this level. Floyd is a great fighter no question, but there is no doubt in my mind that Roy is on another level entirely.

[Sweet Pea]

What I look at most of all at 168 is how he beat his opponents. Guys like Tate, Sosa, Toney, Pazienza and Brannon were totally embarrassed and made to look like mugs in there. Comparitively against other top guys like Nunn, Eubank, Benn ect ect they may not have won, but they made competitive fights. Jones was simply on another level to all these guys. How people compare the skills of Floyd to Roy is totally beyond me. Watch Floyd taking guys like Baldomir or Sosa the distance, or have to wait until the middle rounds to dispose of guys like the average Brusselles, when Roy in his prime was absolutely annihilating fighters on this level. Floyd is a great fighter no question, but there is no doubt in my mind that Roy is on another level entirely.I wonder how few actually look at it and see it like this. That is the truth, what you have just posted, I post it often, Amsterdam does the same, and I'm surprised more people don't realize it. Roy is a full level above Floyd.

[DaveTheWave]

Why not Gerald McClellan? He beat Roy in the amateurs... I can see him winning.

[brownpimp88]

Roy was very green there, I'd take someone like Hearns or McCallum to beat him.

At 160, Greb and Monzon are decent choices.

At 168, nobody really.

At 175, Foster, Charles(50/50), and possibly Spinks.
I give michael nunn a very good chance at beating him.

[Russell]

I would too.

Nunn looked at home during his short time at 168. He was unbeaten there, I believe.

[brownpimp88]

I would too.

Nunn looked at home during his short time at 168. He was unbeaten there, I believe. how many times has roy fought somone with superior boxing skills and someone that also possesses great handspeed and footspeed. Roy is more athletic, but when it comes to whos the better 'boxer', its nunn hands down.

If nunn was just a slow plodding fighter, thejn roy would have taken care of business. I just dont think his flashy shit will work on a prime nunn.

[Russell]

Nunn also had great power when he got serious.

Knocked Roldan down with an arm punch...

Going backwards.

[RoccoMarciano]

Nunn also had great power when he got serious.

Knocked Roldan down with an arm punch...

Going backwards.

Isn't there evidence Nunn had ALS? Just wondering :lol:

[Russell]

Want to explain why you're chasing people thread to thread being an asshole?

Explaining why you're an asshole period would do, even.

[RoccoMarciano]

Want to explain why you're chasing people thread to thread being an asshole?

Explaining why you're an asshole period would do, even.

Just waiting for one poster to explain their own stupidity is all. Pretty easy to keep up without a chase at this time.

[Russell]

You should track down the men who were close to Ezzard over the course of his years as a fighter who made the claim.

I didn't invent it, I repeated it.

[RoccoMarciano]

I didn't invent it, I repeated it.

Repeat it in a way that my own education believes it then, Russell. I guess you know more than me regarding the subject. Prove it beyond any shadow and I'll provide kudos in response. If you can't, WELL, you probably should've not mentioned the matter.

[brooklyn1550]

At 168, I wouldn't favor anybody over a prime Jones

[Russell]

Because repeating a claim by men who KNEW the man in question implies that I'm an expert on the subject.

Go fuck yourself fat, balding and looking for a late night pissing contest.

[RoccoMarciano]

Because repeating a claim by men who KNEW the man in question implies that I'm an expert on the subject.



Because you are too worthless to research an erroneous claim?

Any proof from you?

Hell, you even post some strange matches :lol:

[Sizzle]

You'd favor Calzaghe over a prime Jones? Too many to list at 168? Please list them. I consider it a very short list, but then again, you consider Floyd better than Roy.

edit: Nevermind, I've argued with you before on these points, you're the Jones hater.

I can almost hear you go "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!" everytime I type something about Roy Jones that isn't full of praise and godworship for a highly flawed and perpetually overhyped fighter.

Floyd IS better than Roy - Jones deficiencies were highlighted when he began to lose his athletic attributes, truly great fighters can neutralize superb speed and fast feet with effective pressure and great timing, two things Archie Moore was renowned for.

As Jake LaMotta said,
"Anyone who thinks Roy Jones would have a chance against Archie Moore doesn't have the faintest what they're on about."

It is pointless arguing the point with you, because you've been brainwashed by the heroic images of Jones in your young mind, and will refuse to accept anything other than godworship for him. I judge all fighters objectively.

It'll be about ten years before the "general boxing public" sees sense when it comes to Roy.

[Sizzle]

Calzaghe and Hopkins are great fighters, but i can't see either of them doing anything to neutralize the supreme skills of RJJ. Jones was simply too hard for most people to figure out, and IMO was on another level then these guys. I haven't seen anyone who could beat Jones in his prime at 168. IMO he is the closest thing we have seen to an unbeatable fighter. He had speed, power, elusive defense, a terrific offense and a massive range of punches that he threw from all sorts of angles. He could do so many different things inside the ring, and could fight from both the inside and the outside with ease. A very intelligent fighter who could literally do stuff that defied traditional boxing technique. Most importantly, at this weight he had a solid chin. He would attack and finish up relentlessly.

I couldn't disagree anymore.

Joe Calzaghe is not as fast but much, much, more skilled than Jones Jnr, the subtelties of his style are lost on fans who don't know an awful lot about boxing or haven't done any themselves, incidentally the same people who thought Kessler would beat him.

Joe has the better chin, and the much better fighters mentality, he certainly wouldn't let Jones "neutralize" the fight the way he did against Hopkins, his offense is comparable to a hornets nest and he will be more than happy shaking off shots trying to come inside.

[fists of fury]

I like Bob Foster here, but being a light-heavy against Jones' 168 is quite unfair.
Another fighter who I think would give Jones problems would be Victor Galindez. A typical Argie with limitless strength, toughness and endurance, decent power and that animal-like fighting fury about him.

[Russell]

Looking for more obscure picks. Thanks fists.

[fists of fury]

Heh, I tried to pick beyond the usual old suspects. :D

[JohnThomas1]

Ezzard Charles at 168 at the right time would not be the underdog for starters. Even money at worst. He's a damn good pick here.

[ripcity]

Yeah, Greb...you got to wonder how Langford would go too. Jones would certainly need to do 12/15 hard rounds to get the job done...
Langford was the first name to pop into my mind. However I'm not sure he would beat Jones.

[McGrain]

Langford was the first name to pop into my mind. However I'm not sure he would beat Jones.

Put it this way; in a similair thread about Langford Jones' name would need to be given serious consideration. If you need to beat a phenom, I think you need to pick a phenom to get the job done.

[Ezzard]

Greb
Moore
Charles
Langford

They all have the attributes to beat him. All of these would be favourites though so it would not be an upset.

Calazaghe would be close but Jones would get my nod. Benn would win one out of 5 but Jones would be the boss, same with McClellan. Nunn could provide the upset though.

[AREA 53]

I might of harboured a sneaking feeling for a young Jimmy Ellis
At Midlle Young Jimmy acquited himself well with guys like Holman Williams and Rubin Carter, it was a quick deep education, when Jimmy left Middle, on his way to Heavy he started racking up a series of 1st Round Ko's, Curresy of his big right hand and sizzling combinations, culminating in one round KO of Hot-shot Johnny Persol

That Small Heavy Jimmy did not score that many ko's at Heavy was also because of the quality of heavy he faced, Ali, Frazier, Bonavena, Chuvalo, Quarry, Patterson ect, ect, so no disgrace for lack of Ko wins there !

The Ellis Betwwn Middle - Lt Heavy was Fast, a super boxer, could throw sizzling combinations, and had that Big Sneak right hand, at worst i think he woukld prove a real handful for Mr. Jones !

[Minotauro]

Billy Conn was always a small light heavy and 168 would be a good fite for him maybe he could outwork Jones to a decision.

[ripcity]

I'm not sure I can see anyone beating Jones at 168.

[Sweet Pea]

I give michael nunn a very good chance at beating him.Your analysis is some of the worst on this board, and you're very biased toward your little group of favorites, so I could really care less. I see Jones taking Nunn out.

Nunn was a more orthodox boxer, when the hell does that make him a better one? Jones was faster, more powerful, and overall, a more skilled fighter. What advantages does Nunn have? Height? Reach? Jab? How often were any of those tools useful on a prime Roy? His speed and unorthodoxy negated them all. Nunn is much more predictable than Jones was. Toney was doing well against Nunn, just being outworked. Jones shut Toney out.

[Sweet Pea]

]I can almost hear you go "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!" everytime I type something about Roy Jones that isn't full of praise and godworship for a highly flawed and perpetually overhyped fighter.We're talking about a prime Jones. You pointing out all his flaws showing up when past his prime has nothing to do with a prime Jones.

Floyd IS better than Roy - Jones deficiencies were highlighted when he began to lose his athletic attributes, truly great fighters can neutralize superb speed and fast feet with effective pressure and great timing, two things Archie Moore was renowned for.Floyd has trouble with, or is unimpressive against, fighters that Jones toyed with and destroyed. Jones was better in every aspect, he just wasn't as orthodox. Floyd is a full step below Roy.


As Jake LaMotta said,
"Anyone who thinks Roy Jones would have a chance against Archie Moore doesn't have the faintest what they're on about."
I give a fuck what Jake LaMotta says about analyzing others styles why? Jones is THE worst stylistic matchup for Moore. I would bet the house on Jones by wide UD if not late TKO. Terrible matchup for Moore. In a head to head sense, Moore is overrated.

It is pointless arguing the point with you, because you've been brainwashed by the heroic images of Jones in your young mind, and will refuse to accept anything other than godworship for him. I judge all fighters objectively. No, I just understand style matchups, you romanticize the old timers to a digusting degree when you think someone like Corbett was modern and choose pretty much every old timer in fantasy matchups. I am a fan of both eras, and do judge all fighters objectively. I choose many old timers in fantasy matchups as well as modern fighters. I've been labeled a hugger of both sides in different arguments. I have a high opinion of Roy Jones, because, quite simply, he impresses me more than just about any other fighter. That is why you rate fighters highly, is it not?

[Sweet Pea]

I couldn't disagree anymore.

Joe Calzaghe is not as fast but much, much, more skilled than Jones Jnr, the subtelties of his style are lost on fans who don't know an awful lot about boxing or haven't done any themselves, incidentally the same people who thought Kessler would beat him.

Joe has the better chin, and the much better fighters mentality, he certainly wouldn't let Jones "neutralize" the fight the way he did against Hopkins, his offense is comparable to a hornets nest and he will be more than happy shaking off shots trying to come inside.Please explain the highlighted. I find it to be a(for lack of a better word) retarded statement.

[Amsterdam]

At 168 OR 160, nobody, deal with it.:deal

Too fast, too intelligent, incredible timing, delivery and good power, way too hard to even hit for any fighter who ever fought at 160-168, even guys like Monzon and Hagler.

Not a Jones fan here, just realistic.

And Calzaghe fans - shut the fuck up, he would NOT beat Jones, take a couple rounds maybe? Sure, maybe not even, but he would not beat Jones.

Greb fans - :rofl

[Amsterdam]

Your analysis is some of the worst on this board, and you're very biased toward your little group of favorites, so I could really care less. I see Jones taking Nunn out.

Nunn was a more orthodox boxer, when the hell does that make him a better one? Jones was faster, more powerful, and overall, a more skilled fighter. What advantages does Nunn have? Height? Reach? Jab? How often were any of those tools useful on a prime Roy? His speed and unorthodoxy negated them all. Nunn is much more predictable than Jones was. Toney was doing well against Nunn, just being outworked. Jones shut Toney out.

Jones TKO's Nunn at 168, IMO.

He hit just as hard as Toney did.

[Russell]

Your analysis is some of the worst on this board, and you're very biased toward your little group of favorites, so I could really care less. I see Jones taking Nunn out.

Nunn was a more orthodox boxer, when the hell does that make him a better one? Jones was faster, more powerful, and overall, a more skilled fighter. What advantages does Nunn have? Height? Reach? Jab? How often were any of those tools useful on a prime Roy? His speed and unorthodoxy negated them all. Nunn is much more predictable than Jones was. Toney was doing well against Nunn, just being outworked. Jones shut Toney out.

You fail to mention Nunn being heavily into drugs by the time of the Toney fight, and not being at his best weight regardless.

Things you do excuse Whitaker for in, say, the Trinidad fight.

[PhillyPhan69]

Chris Eubank

[werety]

I really can't pick anyone, move up to lhw and im confident Charles beats him though.

[Sweet Pea]

You fail to mention Nunn being heavily into drugs by the time of the Toney fight, and not being at his best weight regardless.

Things you do excuse Whitaker for in, say, the Trinidad fight.

Nunn's best weight was at 160, the weight he fought Toney at, what are you on about? The Toney fight was one of his best performances prior to getting caught late. Whitaker was shot by the time he faced Tito. Nunn had showed no signs of slowing down, and was still very good at 168, afterwards. At 160, he was at his best, and was performing very well against Toney.

Let's not try another post like that again.

[brownpimp88]

Nunn's best weight was at 160, the weight he fought Toney at, what are you on about? The Toney fight was one of his best performances prior to getting caught late. Whitaker was shot by the time he faced Tito. Nunn had showed no signs of slowing down, and was still very good at 168, afterwards. At 160, he was at his best, and was performing very well against Toney.

Let's not try another post like that again. nunn showed no sign of slowing down?:lol: Try the iran barkley and marlon starling fights.

You completely overrate roy jones, so i could care less about ur analytical skills you know it all.

Yeah nunn does have the height and reach advantages and he could always outbox roy. he aint no david telesco or richard hall. You know the guys roy looked so invincible against.:lol:

I mean wasn't Michael Nunn roy's mandatory at one point, yet he wouldnt fight him, that seems odd to me. Roy Jones Jr. was a cherry picker, dont try and act like james toney was not weight drianed for this fight. Everyone on this forum was making excuses for curry after he got his ass kicked by honeyghan, toney had to cut 40-50 pounds for this fight and everyone including roy knew about his weight problems.

[Pat_Lowe]

nunn showed no sign of slowing down?:lol: Try the iran barkley and marlon starling fights.

You completely overrate roy jones, so i could care less about ur analytical skills you know it all.

Yeah nunn does have the height and reach advantages and he could always outbox roy. he aint no david telesco or richard hall. You know the guys roy looked so invincible against.:lol:

I mean wasn't Michael Nunn roy's mandatory at one point, yet he wouldnt fight him, that seems odd to me. Roy Jones Jr. was a cherry picker, dont try and act like james toney was not weight drianed for this fight. Everyone on this forum was making excuses for curry after he got his ass kicked by honeyghan, toney had to cut 40-50 pounds for this fight and everyone including roy knew about his weight problems.

James Toney would have always lost to Roy Jones. The speedster usually beats the defensive technician. Toney is at his best when a fighter comes straight to him ala the Jirov or Barkley fight. His footwork isn't great. When Roy Jones potshotted from the outside Toney didn't have any success countering.

[brownpimp88]

James Toney would have always lost to Roy Jones. The speedster usually beats the defensive technician. Toney is at his best when a fighter comes straight to him ala the Jirov or Barkley fight. His footwork isn't great. When Roy Jones potshotted from the outside Toney didn't have any success countering.
yeah but isnt nunn a bad style for roy, hes the superior boxer, hes almost as fast, hes a much better jabber than roy is. Alot of people know roy avoided nunn, i could care less if sweat pae doesnt acknowledge it, nunn even called him out when he officially became roy's mandatory, yet he wouldnt fight him.

[brownpimp88]

I've never stated that nunn would be a clear winner, roy beating him wouldnt be an ultimate shocker. But nunn has just as good handspeed, hes only slightly slower, he throws better uppercuts and he has a better jab. Speed usually works to your advantage if your the better jabber or if your opponent is a slow handed and slow footed fighter, does michael nunn fit the categories of a slow footed/slow handed fighter, nope.

Nunn stood right infront of james toney and outboxed the guy for 9 straight rounds, who else has literally stood right infront of james toney and outboxed him.

[Russell]

Outboxed him while not in the best condition of his career.

On drugs.

While pissed off by Toney's trash talk.

[Pat_Lowe]

I've never stated that nunn would be a clear winner, roy beating him wouldnt be an ultimate shocker. But nunn has just as good handspeed, hes only slightly slower, he throws better uppercuts and he has a better jab. Speed usually works to your advantage if your the better jabber or if your opponent is a slow handed and slow footed fighter, does michael nunn fit the categories of a slow footed/slow handed fighter, nope.

Nunn stood right infront of james toney and outboxed the guy for 9 straight rounds, who else has literally stood right infront of james toney and outboxed him.

McCallum?

[Sizzle]

We're talking about a prime Jones. You pointing out all his flaws showing up when past his prime has nothing to do with a prime Jones.

Floyd has trouble with, or is unimpressive against, fighters that Jones toyed with and destroyed. Jones was better in every aspect, he just wasn't as orthodox. Floyd is a full step below Roy.

I give a fuck what Jake LaMotta says about analyzing others styles why? Jones is THE worst stylistic matchup for Moore. I would bet the house on Jones by wide UD if not late TKO. Terrible matchup for Moore. In a head to head sense, Moore is overrated.

No, I just understand style matchups, you romanticize the old timers to a digusting degree when you think someone like Corbett was modern and choose pretty much every old timer in fantasy matchups. I am a fan of both eras, and do judge all fighters objectively. I choose many old timers in fantasy matchups as well as modern fighters. I've been labeled a hugger of both sides in different arguments. I have a high opinion of Roy Jones, because, quite simply, he impresses me more than just about any other fighter. That is why you rate fighters highly, is it not?

1. The "prime" argument can be applied to any fighter, and is usually blown out of proportion. Joe Frazier was at his absolute peak Vs Ali, but not against Foreman (according to the Frazier fans, anyway), does this mean the Foreman fight should be disregarded completely? Ofcourse not. Roy Jones technical flaws were exposed in a way that hasn't been the case for Bernard Hopkins, because he is the much more polished fighter.

2. Um, well, I'm pretty sure Jake LaMotta knows a whole lot more about boxing than you do. That's your problem - You completely disregard the opinions of other professionals, writers and experts, when in reality it's ALL significant - I'm humble enough to admit I can't possibly know as much about boxing as Jake LaMotta, or about the older fighters than Nat Fleischer, but certain imbeciles not even out of their teens insist they do, on what basis I have no idea.

3. I romanticize old timers? My opinion of Corbett is based on what people like Jack Johnson, Gene Tunney, Nat Fleischer etc. have said about him. His style was based on defense, counterpunching, evasion and footwork. You just look at the date he fought and assume he can't possibly know how to box. This is indicative of your narrow minded block your ears and bang the wall approach to learning about boxing.

4. I don't always pick old-timers in "fantasy matchups", that suggestion is absurd. I would be reluctant to pick anyone over Mayweather at 130lbs, though there are a few, and a prime Hopkins at 160lbs is another one I would favour only a few older fighters. The simple fact is that gloved boxing has been around 120 years+, the "modern era" comprises perhaps 15% of that depending on when you believe it began, so statistically there will be a much greater selection of fighters in the remaining 85% - Especially considering that a case can be made that better athletes, and in general MORE COMPETITORS were attracted during that "85%" i.e., pre1980.

5. I haven't been wrong in predicting a matchup for months, since the Calzaghe-Kessler fight I've made a boatload of cash picking victor and method of result (except the Mayweather fight where I went for decision), so I'm certainly confident in my ability to compare fighters styles and pick a winner.

6. I don't have a high opinion of Roy Jones because he doesn't impress me all that much. His speed is up there with the greatest of all time, which makes him a difficult stylistic matchup for some, but I would still favour a lot of fighters to take care of him - Mayweather is the better fighter in every way.

[Senya13]

Um, well, I'm pretty sure Jake LaMotta knows a whole lot more about boxing than you do.
How exactly did LaMotta prove his knowledge of boxing anywhere? In an introduction for a book about Archie Moore (I think) he wrote some false statements, for example, showing lack of knowledge of history of boxing at the time he was fighting.

[Sweet Pea]

1. The "prime" argument can be applied to any fighter, and is usually blown out of proportion. Joe Frazier was at his absolute peak Vs Ali, but not against Foreman (according to the Frazier fans, anyway), does this mean the Foreman fight should be disregarded completely? Ofcourse not. Roy Jones technical flaws were exposed in a way that hasn't been the case for Bernard Hopkins, because he is the much more polished fighter.Call him more polished all you want to, Jones still handily beat him when they fought, and quite easily as well.

2. Um, well, I'm pretty sure Jake LaMotta knows a whole lot more about boxing than you do. That's your problem - You completely disregard the opinions of other professionals, writers and experts, when in reality it's ALL significant - I'm humble enough to admit I can't possibly know as much about boxing as Jake LaMotta, or about the older fighters than Nat Fleischer, but certain imbeciles not even out of their teens insist they do, on what basis I have no idea.So because LaMotta boxed, it means he has studied up on boxing history and learned about the greats before and after him? Shaq plays basketball, yet didn't even know that coach Lenny Wilkens(one of the 50 Greatest) played. And as Senya pointed out, where has he proven his knowledge other than writing false info in a book? I'm not claiming to know more than Nat Fleischer, but his bias toward the old-timers overshadows his knowledge.

3. I romanticize old timers? My opinion of Corbett is based on what people like Jack Johnson, Gene Tunney, Nat Fleischer etc. have said about him. His style was based on defense, counterpunching, evasion and footwork. You just look at the date he fought and assume he can't possibly know how to box. This is indicative of your narrow minded block your ears and bang the wall approach to learning about boxing.Of course Fleischer said it, he romanticizes the old timers worse than someone like Bert Sugar even. Johnson himself was primitive, so what really does it matter? Tunney was a more modern fighter, but certainly a better one on film than Corbett. I don't look at the date he fought. In fact, I've tried to argue against people with this way of thinking before because of my love for classical boxing, and found that it was damn near impossible, considering they actually have footage, and the footage kind of ruins your argument.

4. I don't always pick old-timers in "fantasy matchups", that suggestion is absurd. I would be reluctant to pick anyone over Mayweather at 130lbs, though there are a few, and a prime Hopkins at 160lbs is another one I would favour only a few older fighters. The simple fact is that gloved boxing has been around 120 years+, the "modern era" comprises perhaps 15% of that depending on when you believe it began, so statistically there will be a much greater selection of fighters in the remaining 85% - Especially considering that a case can be made that better athletes, and in general MORE COMPETITORS were attracted during that "85%" i.e., pre1980.Prime Hopkins would have about a 25% chance at beating a Roy Jones, so as long as you have that down, you're good. Your argument there is flawed for this reason. We're not talking greatness here, otherwise you have a point(and my own ATG rankings reflect it) we're talking head to head ability. The sport has been in the more modern stages since about the 40's overall, the guys who fought in before then(barring a few pioneers) wouldn't be able to hang with more modern techniques, especially the HW's(hell, even the HW's of the 40's and 50's, for the most part anyway) due to their size are at a disadvantage.


6. I don't have a high opinion of Roy Jones because he doesn't impress me all that much. His speed is up there with the greatest of all time, which makes him a difficult stylistic matchup for some, but I would still favour a lot of fighters to take care of him - Mayweather is the better fighter in every way.
So why does Mayweather have a lot more trouble with the level guys Jones made look amateurish? In every way? Jones was quicker and more powerful. He got hit clean less, even though his defense was much less orthodox. You seem to think moreorthodox=better. I guess you lost a bit of that cash betting on Hill over Jones, or Hopkins over Jones then.

[Mega Lamps]

1. The "prime" argument can be applied to any fighter, and is usually blown out of proportion. Joe Frazier was at his absolute peak Vs Ali, but not against Foreman (according to the Frazier fans, anyway), does this mean the Foreman fight should be disregarded completely? Ofcourse not. Roy Jones technical flaws were exposed in a way that hasn't been the case for Bernard Hopkins, because he is the much more polished fighter.

2. Um, well, I'm pretty sure Jake LaMotta knows a whole lot more about boxing than you do. That's your problem - You completely disregard the opinions of other professionals, writers and experts, when in reality it's ALL significant - I'm humble enough to admit I can't possibly know as much about boxing as Jake LaMotta, or about the older fighters than Nat Fleischer, but certain imbeciles not even out of their teens insist they do, on what basis I have no idea.

3. I romanticize old timers? My opinion of Corbett is based on what people like Jack Johnson, Gene Tunney, Nat Fleischer etc. have said about him. His style was based on defense, counterpunching, evasion and footwork. You just look at the date he fought and assume he can't possibly know how to box. This is indicative of your narrow minded block your ears and bang the wall approach to learning about boxing.

4. I don't always pick old-timers in "fantasy matchups", that suggestion is absurd. I would be reluctant to pick anyone over Mayweather at 130lbs, though there are a few, and a prime Hopkins at 160lbs is another one I would favour only a few older fighters. The simple fact is that gloved boxing has been around 120 years+, the "modern era" comprises perhaps 15% of that depending on when you believe it began, so statistically there will be a much greater selection of fighters in the remaining 85% - Especially considering that a case can be made that better athletes, and in general MORE COMPETITORS were attracted during that "85%" i.e., pre1980.

5. I haven't been wrong in predicting a matchup for months, since the Calzaghe-Kessler fight I've made a boatload of cash picking victor and method of result (except the Mayweather fight where I went for decision), so I'm certainly confident in my ability to compare fighters styles and pick a winner.

6. I don't have a high opinion of Roy Jones because he doesn't impress me all that much. His speed is up there with the greatest of all time, which makes him a difficult stylistic matchup for some, but I would still favour a lot of fighters to take care of him - Mayweather is the better fighter in every way.

Very good post and I'm going to have to agree with it. Well said. Some may get mad but thats life.

[Asterion]

A lot of Light Heavyweights in history. Moore, Foster, Spinks, Conn, etc.

He beats all Super Middleweight.

At Middleweight, he was great but didn't have much experience, so I would pick many prime ATG Middlweight to beat him.

[Sweet Pea]

Very good post and I'm going to have to agree with it. Well said. Some may get mad but thats life.You said Joe Louis was P4P faster than Roy Jones, so it's safe to say your opinions on him don't exactly equate.

[Sweet Pea]

At Middleweight, he was great but didn't have much experience, so I would pick many prime ATG Middlweight to beat him.He had plenty of experience, and looked great there. His fight with Toney at 168 was his first title fight there, and happened immediately after Jones captured the IBF middleweight title. So if he had arguably his best performance one fight after ending his reign at 160, I think it's safe to say he was near his peak towards the latter end of his 160 run.

[Sweet Pea]

]nunn showed no sign of slowing down?:lol: Try the iran barkley and marlon starling fights.:rofl Immediately after his big performance against Kalambay when everyone thought he was the shit he looks mediocre against Starling and Barkley. That doesn't tell me he was past his prime after one fight, it tells me he simply wasn't as good as you think.

You completely overrate roy jones, so i could care less about ur analytical skills you know it all.You completely overrate your favorites like Nunn, Camacho, etc.


Yeah nunn does have the height and reach advantages and he could always outbox roy. he aint no david telesco or richard hall. You know the guys roy looked so invincible against.:lol:
You forgot Bernard Hopkins and James Toney. Virgil Hill, etc. Nunn KO'd Kalambay with a big shot, and got KO'd by Toney(same guy Jones shut out), and as you said, didn't look good in the two fights directly following Kalambay.

I mean wasn't Michael Nunn roy's mandatory at one point, yet he wouldnt fight him, that seems odd to me. Roy Jones Jr. was a cherry picker, dont try and act like james toney was not weight drianed for this fight. Everyone on this forum was making excuses for curry after he got his ass kicked by honeyghan, toney had to cut 40-50 pounds for this fight and everyone including roy knew about his weight problems.[/quote]Toney may have been a bit weight drained, what does it matter? Style-wise he would've always lost to Roy.

And explain this, what the hell does Jones knowing about Toney's weight issues prior to the fight happening have to do with anything? The contract was already signed for the fight, the fact that Toney decided to be a fat, lazy retard like always doesn't change the fact that Roy signed prior to these issues. It's not like he would've pulled out if Toney wasn't weight drained.

[round15]

In alphabetical order,

Ezzard Charles
Billy Conn
Bob Foster
Archie Moore


Billy Conn is the least likely to knock Roy Jones out but he's the most likely of these four to beat Jones by a convincing decision win. Foster would probably knock him out the earliest of the group.

[brownpimp88]

Toney may have been a bit weight drained, what does it matter? Style-wise he would've always lost to Roy.

And explain this, what the hell does Jones knowing about Toney's weight issues prior to the fight happening have to do with anything? The contract was already signed for the fight, the fact that Toney decided to be a fat, lazy retard like always doesn't change the fact that Roy signed prior to these issues. It's not like he would've pulled out if Toney wasn't weight drained.
still doesnt change the fact that nunn was his mandatory and did not get the shot, why not if roy would have easily beaten nunn like you say, it would look great on his resume. He gave frazier, telesco, otis, glen kelly, and a truckload of other bums title shots, why not his actual mandatory?

Style-wise nunn would have given him a very hard fight, its roy nuthuggers like you that want to belive he was superman.

[Holmes' Jab]

Greb. Possibly Langford and Charles. Not too many others (if any).


Ps: Mayweather plain ain't as good as RJJ was at his best. It's that simple.

[Sweet Pea]

still doesnt change the fact that nunn was his mandatory and did not get the shot, why not if roy would have easily beaten nunn like you say, it would look great on his resume. He gave frazier, telesco, otis, glen kelly, and a truckload of other bums title shots, why not his actual mandatory?

Style-wise nunn would have given him a very hard fight, its roy nuthuggers like you that want to belive he was superman.Roy was a bit of a cherry-picker later in his career, that is true, but that doesn't change the fact that style-wise I would pick him over Nunn. You could say the same for Floyd and Margarito.

[brownpimp88]

Roy was a bit of a cherry-picker later in his career, that is true, but that doesn't change the fact that style-wise I would pick him over Nunn. You could say the same for Floyd and Margarito.
how so? a shutout win for roy or a close fight? I mean sure he can win but i really dont see how hes gonna outclass him. Like i said before, speed wins if you can outjab your opponent or if your opponent is slow footed, nunn would always outjab roy and his hands r also lightning quick.

[Mega Lamps]

You said Joe Louis was P4P faster than Roy Jones, so it's safe to say your opinions on him don't exactly equate.

You're not helping yourself here. Louis has one of the fastest ever hands at heavyweight (its not an opinion, its a fact so accept it) and was larger than Jones.
You just seem to be one of those fans that are upset to see Jones not be the best at something.

[Sweet Pea]

You're not helping yourself here. Louis has one of the fastest ever hands at heavyweight (its not an opinion, its a fact so accept it) and was larger than Jones.
You just seem to be one of those fans that are upset to see Jones not be the best at something.Louis's handspeed is outdone by other HW's like Ali, Patterson, and Tyson easily. He is larger than Jones yes, but FAR slower. You are the only person in the world who thinks Louis was faster P4P than Jones. That is INSANE, you are absolutely delusional(possibly truly demented or retarded) if you believe that.

[PowerPuncher]

Why not Gerald McClellan? He beat Roy in the amateurs... I can see him winning.

Because just like in the AMS GMAN was a 3round fighter

[PowerPuncher]

I couldn't disagree anymore.

Joe Calzaghe is not as fast but much, much, more skilled than Jones Jnr, the subtelties of his style are lost on fans who don't know an awful lot about boxing or haven't done any themselves, incidentally the same people who thought Kessler would beat him.

Joe has the better chin, and the much better fighters mentality, he certainly wouldn't let Jones "neutralize" the fight the way he did against Hopkins, his offense is comparable to a hornets nest and he will be more than happy shaking off shots trying to come inside.

MORE SKILLED THAN RJJ??? Calazage doesnt even punch straight, he has a horrible defense with no head movement and regularly gets tagged by straight rights.

Calazages strengths are not skill based they are speed and stamina based. Calazage has excellent footwork in defense and attack, great movement.

Take away Calazages Speed and Stamina and watch him get KO'd fast just like RJJ did

BTW Calazage himself admitted he wouldn't beat a prime RJJ

[Sweet Pea]

MORE SKILLED THAN RJJ??? Calazage doesnt even punch straight, he has a horrible defense with no head movement and regularly gets tagged by straight rights.

Calazages strengths are not skill based they are speed and stamina based. Calazage has excellent footwork in defense and attack, great movement.

Take away Calazages Speed and Stamina and watch him get KO'd fast just like RJJ did

BTW Calazage himself admitted he wouldn't beat a prime RJJThat's one of the easiest matchups style-wise to analyze, it makes me laugh when Sizzle talks about his analytical success but chooses Calzaghe over Jones prime for prime.

Calzaghe's strengths are his speed of hand and foot, and his workrate. His weaknesses are his defense and lack of refined technique wheh he is lured into a brawl, which is a definite.

Jones strengths are his speed of hand and foot(both better than Joe's), his elusiveness, and his accuracy and counter-punching ability. Against someone with a high workrate but who is so open, Roy would have a field day with straight punches, especially the straight right. He's not gonna have success using his speed against someone faster, and he's not gonna have success with his workrate when he's constantly being stopped in his tracks(and hurt at times) with big punches.

[PowerPuncher]

As for the question Ezzard Charles would be the strongest candidate.

Archie Moore has 1% chance at best and probably gets KO'd, its funny how people cite RJJs chin past his prime but forget about Moores many KO losses

Conn is excellent and would make it close but wouldn't have enough here

Calazage comes forward and gets picked apart and KO'd. He'd also get beaten to the punch and not have the firepower to worry Jones

Monzon - his jab may bother Jones, but Jones angles, footwork, speed and power would outdo monzon who would be easy to time due to his predictability

The best way to beat Jones Jr imo is to be a very fast long/reaching lead hand jab as Jones neglects the jab and this is a weakness in his style. The fighter would also have to be excellent inside and be strong. Nunn may have the potential to outbox RJJ for some time because of this although he would most likely be KO'd or simple get picked apart by counters at some stage

[PowerPuncher]

That's one of the easiest matchups style-wise to analyze, it makes me laugh when Sizzle talks about his analytical success but chooses Calzaghe over Jones prime for prime.

Calzaghe's strengths are his speed of hand and foot, and his workrate. His weaknesses are his defense and lack of refined technique wheh he is lured into a brawl, which is a definite.

Jones strengths are his speed of hand and foot(both better than Joe's), his elusiveness, and his accuracy and counter-punching ability. Against someone with a high workrate but who is so open, Roy would have a field day with straight punches, especially the straight right. He's not gonna have success using his speed against someone faster, and he's not gonna have success with his workrate when he's constantly being stopped in his tracks(and hurt at times) with big punches.

I watched part of a Calazage fight against the MW Bika and Bika landed the far more meaningful punches timing his right on Joe time and again. Joe was suckered by it and I was left with the feeling Bika could have won but I was talking to my girl and didnt watch it all so I wont call it a robbery and I've only seen 1 person call it a bad decision.

Calazages workrate would give RJJ problems if it becomes close but RJJ should counter Calazage all night and joe has even admitted this in interview

[joekirkbycobra]

no 1 not when jones was in his prime