How good was Roy Jones in his Prime??

First topic message reminder :

Jones came up on another thread so I made a new to see how good people thought this guy was at his best. Imo he is one of the best of all time. Yes he is rubbish now but he is nothing like he was when he was at his best he is so slow now it is unbelievable and he gets knocked out in almost every fight now to pretty rubbish fighters trust me these guys would have no chance against him when he was at his best. How good to people rate him when he was at his best and how washed up do people think he is now? I must say it is a shame to see him washed up now when he was once so good it is like watching Holyfield I think he should quit before he gets brain damage being knocked out so many times is not good.

And i'm not going to reply, another fool who thinks RJJ belongs in the same breath as Wilde has tipped me over the edge.

Whoever brought Wilde up in this debate needs to be the target of my ire. Before that, things were travelling nicely with me arguing a case for RJJ's greatness. However - if we're comparing Wilde with RJJ - there's no serious comparison. The one's resume has quality in abundance. The other's is RJJ.

Scottrf wrote:Moore took 21 years without the number of boxers to choose from increasing to get into the IBHOF. None of Jones' opponents will get that opportunity. McCallum and Trinidad will likely make it too.

McCallum and Trinidad were decades (almost literally in the case of McCallum) past their prime. If they count, RJJ counts for Calzaghe. And Butterbean gets credit for taking Holmes the distance.

We were just naming guys they beat that will make the HOF. If we are being fussy, Wilde only split a series with Moore, was knocked out by Herman and Villa. So HOF wins might not be a great route to go down.

Two points.

Oxring, I don't see why Moore should be seen as being high above the likes of Toney or Hopkins - certainly not the latter.

Next, Coxy. I never said Jones was greater than Wilde. I simply stated that you're showing massive inconsistency in calling certains wins by Wilde top-drawer but then neglecting / discrediting wins of a similar stature which Jones had. You're incapable of a reasonable and balanced debate when it comes to him.

I'll stick to my belief that, while he can't match Wilde's consistency over such a high amount of fights, that Jones' win column compares well to Wilde's - moreover, I won't reduce myself to sticking words in your mouth or implying that you're a moron for disagreeing with me.

Scottrf wrote:We were just naming guys they beat that will make the HOF. If we are being fussy, Wilde only split a series with Moore, was knocked out by Herman and Villa. So HOF wins might not be a great route to go down.

No we weren't - and I know we weren't because I made the initial point!

We are discussing legitimate wins over people who will end up in the hall. RJJ has Toney - Hopkins if we're being generous.

Wilde has Moore, Lynch and will probably gain a couple of others as the old-timer class increases. There were rumours tancy lee was going to get in in 2009. Given that he is out of living memory - all of these fighters are out of living memory - it does them credit that they're in, what is essentially a modern contrivance.

Chris:

Moore vs Toney:
Well we have Moore - with victories over Pancho, Genaro and more - all real. Then we have Toney. Good MW win over Nunn. squeaks by Johnson, robs McCallum, beats an ancient Barkley, whipped by RJJ then by Montell Griffin, fights bums for a while before beating Jirov - then goes back into the doldrums again.
Moore vs Hopkins:
24 fight Hopkins. Not the Hopkins of today - much much greener. Moore compares very well with that Hopkins.

Or in other words, he didn't get in after 19 years of being eligible, but might as the pool to choose from gets smaller and they induct more old timers every year.

Scottrf wrote:Or in other words, he didn't get in after 19 years of being eligible, but might as the pool to choose from gets smaller and they induct more old timers every year, even though these fighters have passed beyond living memory, so those with sublime skills will be sometimes overlooked for a while; whilst those with lesser skills of today and questionable records make it in first time

Yeah, something like that.

If you like. Doesn't change the fact that with the hall going as it is, soon every 'old timer' world champion will be in, and a few years afterwards almost every boxer. So yeah, he will probably make it.

oxring wrote:

milkyboy wrote:supreme talent undoubtedly, tainted by balco as his almost instant decline came immediately after that broke... of course he was getting on too, so it may have been entirely coincidental, but the smell of doubt remains.

We should note, that whilst we have a long list of athletes who were linked to BALCO by BALCO and Conte - Roy Jones jr was not amongst them.

true enough oxring. i believe he was found to have taken something previously available in supplements prior to being banned and not considered particularly hardcore. My point was he has been tainted by balco due to timing and association. He had tested positive for a banned substance from an earlier fight.... and public awareness of the scale of drug abuse among top athletes heightened in the wake of the scandal. Balco broke between the ruiz and tarver fights and the amount of muscle roy put on for the ruiz fight raised a lot of eyebrows at the time. Jones wasn't on the balco list, unlike his sister marion ; and shane mosley), but it didn't stop the rumours that his career could have been'enhanced'.

balco breaking coincided with roy's decline... the perfect recipe for conspiracy theorists.

I'm unaware of any drug that improves your speed and reflexes, and i for one don't doubt the guys talent. Far from it. Fairly or unfairly his career has a question mark though.

Lads have not followed the debate from the start but taking the Hall of Fame as any kind of guarantee of quality is a shaky premise at best, if you do this at featherweight you are accepting Barry McGuigan acheived more, or was a better fighter than Naseem.

Scottrf wrote:If you like. Doesn't change the fact that with the hall going as it is, soon every 'old timer' world champion will be in, and a few years afterwards almost every boxer. So yeah, he will probably make it.

Disagree. Percy Jones still isn't in - peerless for years though he was, career cut brutally short by WW1. He did as much as McGuigan.

Oxring, if memory serves me correctly, Moore lost on a foul to Genaro, didn't he? Even if I'm mistaken, I don't think he's a good a win as Hopkins, far from it in fact. Beat some top names, yes - and lost almost as many times to them, as well as to a host of non-entities. Again, there is the tendancy with old-timers to only look at their wins but totally ignore all of their losses. People are happy to point out that Jones lost to Tarver, but I doubt they'd want to hear how Moore lost to various journeymen at various times.

Not denying that Wilde beat some very good fighters or that he's great beyond any doubt. But the double standards are shocking. As I predicted, Coxy wanted to offer up any excuse possible for Wilde losing to Villa and / or Herman. But everyone knows that if anyone tried the same with Jones' losses to Tarver and Johnson, all we'd hear is "Nope, no excuses, he got knocked out and lost, found out by the better boxer, wasn't old, no excuses."

oxring wrote:

Scottrf wrote:If you like. Doesn't change the fact that with the hall going as it is, soon every 'old timer' world champion will be in, and a few years afterwards almost every boxer. So yeah, he will probably make it.

Disagree. Percy Jones still isn't in - peerless for years though he was, career cut brutally short by WW1. He did as much as McGuigan.

You can disagree all you like but it's a fact about the way the hall functions.

Scottrf wrote:

oxring wrote:

Scottrf wrote:If you like. Doesn't change the fact that with the hall going as it is, soon every 'old timer' world champion will be in, and a few years afterwards almost every boxer. So yeah, he will probably make it.

Disagree. Percy Jones still isn't in - peerless for years though he was, career cut brutally short by WW1. He did as much as McGuigan.

You can disagree all you like but it's a fact about the way the hall functions.

Still disagree. Stating "fact" doesn't make it so. Sure, they keep electing "old timers" - from a limited pool. However - there's hardly any film of these people - so boxers are going to miss out. A la Percy Jones. Sid Smith isn't in it yet, to my knowledge either.

Re: Chris.

I'm not going to argue Coxy's point for him - as I do feel that RJJ is a great. I also firmly believe that Wilde's record is better than RJJ - especially when accounting the circumstances of each fight. Wilde, a flyweight fighting and beating Moore and Lynch at bantam? Most commissions wouldn't even sanction the fights nowadays. Whereas it is easy to pick holes in many of RJJ's better wins - eg McCallum, Trinidad.

1 thing I will not do is criticise RJJ for the losses to Tarver and Johnson. The most stupid decision he ever did - for sure IMO was to drop the 24lbs of muscle to try to fight at LHW again. He has never been the same since. Tarver beat Roy's ghost. In the same way as Wilde was giving away over a stone when he lost to Herman - and even then it was a bad stoppage (and Villa should have been DQd for his punch after the bell ).

People often criticise old-timers by using modern standards to judge them - which I don't think is fair. If Tarver or Toney were forced to fight every couple of weeks to put food on the table - they'd ship a few more losses as well.

oxring wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

oxring wrote:

Scottrf wrote:If you like. Doesn't change the fact that with the hall going as it is, soon every 'old timer' world champion will be in, and a few years afterwards almost every boxer. So yeah, he will probably make it.

Disagree. Percy Jones still isn't in - peerless for years though he was, career cut brutally short by WW1. He did as much as McGuigan.

You can disagree all you like but it's a fact about the way the hall functions.

Still disagree. Stating "fact" doesn't make it so. Sure, they keep electing "old timers" - from a limited pool. However - there's hardly any film of these people - so boxers are going to miss out. A la Percy Jones. Sid Smith isn't in it yet, to my knowledge either.

It doesn't, but it being a fact makes it so. If there are 100 world champions who haven't made the hall and 3 get put in each year then yes, they will all get in with the hall going as it is.

Scottrf wrote:

oxring wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

oxring wrote:

Scottrf wrote:If you like. Doesn't change the fact that with the hall going as it is, soon every 'old timer' world champion will be in, and a few years afterwards almost every boxer. So yeah, he will probably make it.

Disagree. Percy Jones still isn't in - peerless for years though he was, career cut brutally short by WW1. He did as much as McGuigan.

You can disagree all you like but it's a fact about the way the hall functions.

Still disagree. Stating "fact" doesn't make it so. Sure, they keep electing "old timers" - from a limited pool. However - there's hardly any film of these people - so boxers are going to miss out. A la Percy Jones. Sid Smith isn't in it yet, to my knowledge either.

It doesn't, but it being a fact makes it so. If there are 100 world champions who haven't made the hall and 3 get put in each year then yes, they will all get in with the hall going as it is.

Except people who didn't win championships will then miss out. So the Burleys of ancient times are punished.

I agree that Wilde ranks above Jones, just about. That wasn't the issue, and I'm not sure why Coxy saw it fit to try and shove words in my mouth, as if I'd said something to that effect. Was just highlighting that there have been a few sticks used to beat Jones which people wouldn't dream of using against many other old-timers; Wilde was just the example I happened to use, as Coxy was discussing him earlier this week.

Have just checked and the IBRO have him at ten, looks like that list was compiled in 2006 so pretty much when his career was done and dusted. Given many argue that light heavy is the best division historically in terms of strength and two of the guys above him are Langford and Fitz who many exclude from divisional rankings to me this suggests their are plenty others out there who rate him pretty highly.

There's 5 fools on here. Jones in his prime was unbeatable. End of.

rowley wrote:Have just checked and the IBRO have him at ten, looks like that list was compiled in 2006 so pretty much when his career was done and dusted. Given many argue that light heavy is the best division historically in terms of strength and two of the guys above him are Langford and Fitz who many exclude from divisional rankings to me this suggests their are plenty others out there who rate him pretty highly.

You lie rowley. Anyone who rates Jones is a...

I'll let that one lie, shall I?

I'm annoyed at myself Chris - I apologise for getting involved - but I saw the honour of one of my heroes being impeached and I had to spring to his defence.

Captain Lucas wrote:There's 5 fools on here. Jones in his prime was unbeatable. End of.

The magic "end of". How it stimulates discussion and provides evidence in favour of your point.

oxring wrote:

Captain Lucas wrote:There's 5 fools on here. Jones in his prime was unbeatable. End of.

The magic "end of". How it stimulates discussion and provides evidence in favour of your point.

You may as well lock this one, it's done now.

Well go on then, who could beat a prime Jones at middleweight, super-middleweight or light-heavy when he was at his best?

Calzaghe or Collins? Gimme a break!

Good fighters in their own right but a couple of leagues below - yes, a couple!

Can't be anything other than an ATG. Despite only a few grand names including the likes of BHop and Toney he has some fairly decent scalps to bolster his CV with the likes of Tarver, Hill, McCallum, Pazienza, Woods, Malinga, Lucas etc etc all champs of varying degrees of achievement. Add that to winning a title at Heavy and his greatness is assured.

Captain Lucas wrote:Well go on then, who could beat a prime Jones at middleweight, super-middleweight or light-heavy when he was at his best?

Calzaghe or Collins? Gimme a break!

Good fighters in their own right but a couple of leagues below - yes, a couple!

Tunney and Charles. Charles at MW OR LHW. Probably Hagler at MW. I'd have loved to have seen a prime Hearns-RJJ fantasy fight - with Hearns at MW and Jones at MW - that would be a pick'em for me.

Foster at LHW does well against Roy.

Still reckon Calzaghe gives RJJ a fairly decent argument in Roy's prime as well. Although probably loses by a couple of rounds.

Spinks would also be an awkward opponent for RJJ at LHW. Carries a lot of power in the right and great defensive abilites would frustrate Roy.

Captain Lucas wrote:There's 5 fools on here. Jones in his prime was unbeatable. End of.

perhaps the greatest underestimation since general sedgewick's famous last words "they couldn't hit an elephant at this dist"

Its the inconsistency in comparing Jones with someone like Wilde that I find hard to understand.

Wilde has a hugely padded record. Very thin on a genuine great wins considering he had almost 150 fights.

Nobodys saying he isnt great but this mentality that Jones doesnt deserve to mentioned alongside him is hard to accept.

I constantly see old timers c.vs listed off asif every name on them is a great. Thats not this case.

Guys like Gus Ruhlin, Bob Roper, Fireman Flynn, Gunboat Smith etc passed off as quality wins when the all I can conclude is these guys were the John Ruizs of their day.

Like seriously, how are wins over the likes of Young Zulu Kid, Joe Lynch, Tommy Noble, Tancy Lee etc quality wins superior to the likes of Malinga, Harding, Griffen, Johnson etc Its ridiculous frankly.

alma wrote:Manos I think it's the rose tinted spectacles viewpoint: boxing was better in the old days blah blah blah. Also i think it's a bit of the old 'look at me I've heard of loads of prewar boxers that you've never heard of'

A bit like when people list loads of obscure bands they like to listen to, most of which are actually total bobbins.

I dont even mind that, if its consitent. I mean if you want to big up one boxers win column thats ok if you are willing to do the same for the other. But its when I see Jones opponents dismissed as tomato cans despite most being top ten ranked opponents at the time, and then see guys with losing records bigged up as quality wins I am left at a loss.

6 people mustve forgot

Wondereful, wonderful fighter and with Floyd the two best talents I've seen in my Boxing fan career......Missed a bit of Leonard's early career...

Gold medallist (val barker trophy etc).....multi world champion and the only guy I saw who outclassed Hopkins and Toney......(in fairness Nunn did for a lot of their fight)...

Could do things and pick shots like no other fighter I've seen (including Mayweather).....

Some people say he didn't fight everybody but out of the ones he didn't fight who would really pick him to lose!!

A great intent on ruining his legacy..

manos de piedra wrote:6 people mustve forgot

Classic youtube style comment.

manos de piedra wrote:Wilde has a hugely padded record. Very thin on a genuine great wins considering he had almost 150 fights.

That is utter tripe. Why you reckon that young zulu kid - reckoned as one of the most talented young american fighters in the world - is the same level as a Malinga is ridiculous. Kid was supposed to have possessed a pleasing style and be a slick fighter. Wilde has wins over future bantamweight champions of the world. RJJ-Malinga with them?

If you want to be that revisionist - Duran has very few genuine great wins on his record. 1 win over Leonard, twice avenged. Loses to Benitez, Hearns and Hagler. Beats a green Daveymoore and a not-that-good and many times beaten Barkley. A set of wins over good not great fighters at LW.

Now Duran is one of my favourite fighters of all time - but that's how he's assessed if we're looking at him through the same lens by which you view Jimmy Wilde.

Thin on genuine great wins...I despair.

Didn't lose to Hearns.....Got humiliated....

Not sure Wilde did??? Was he outclassed???

Well now Truss.....seems just like old times

Well Manos is talking tripe......

Back are we??? Better than your front I'm sure..

For the record - don't count this as me agreeing with you re: Duran Truss.

Merely observing that the way Manos views Wilde is inconsistent with the way he views modern fighters.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Back are we??? Better than your front I'm sure..

Truss you remain a continuing source of inspiration to me. I am humbled by your welcome

Wilde has been involved in a lot of debates recently. First the Naz one now this

You seem to have a bit of a problem with Jones, Coxy and it seems a bit out of perspective. Don't think anyone is claiming that his record is immense but it's not substantially different from a lot of fighters that are consistently rated highly in ATG lists.

For what it's worth, he's the best to ever seriously fight at supermiddle (as short as his time there was). At light heavyweight I have him as high as six in my all time rankings. As good as the light heavyweight division has been, I think it would be some doing to come up with ten guys who deserve a place ahead of him.

jones divides like tyson. it seems that some see him as superman and some consequently feel they have to go to extremes to trash his record. I'm unfashionably, middle ground. As gifted a fighter as i've seen, dominant for a large period of time. On the flip side, the quality of opponent not as great as it could have been, when he went he went big time and there is the steroid question mark.

Very difficult to rank him on an all time basis because of the above... at his best it's hard to pick someone who would definitely beat him from middle through light heavy on a who beats who basis, but you could pick plenty who you think might.

Name some then..and don't say hagler..

If that's directed at me truss, i will say hagler and monzon and greb and robbo... infact all the usual suspects. At light heavy there's charles and foster and spinks for starters. I can trot out more of our top 10 lists if it makes you happy.

All of whom i've named are atg's and as i stated i wouldn't discount his chances, at his best against any of them, but i certainly wouldn't be suggesting he'd shut them all out and carry them for 9 rounds and ko them in the 10th

A phenom -- an athletic specimen who, sadly, wasted a huge chunk of his career. Jones Sr. handled him with kid gloves initially -- matching him softly in boxing backwaters through his first 20 or so bouts, until the Hopkins fight, in '93.

After emerging against Toney in '94, Roy appeared an unstoppable force, one who threatened that it was his intention to move up and down between middleweight and light heavy collecting belts and scalps -- and he'd have started favourite against anyone at that particular time.

A bit of a recluse and ill at ease with the media, Jones was deeply affected by the plight of Gerald McClellan. Jones became a reluctant warrior -- looking to get rid of his opponents as compassionately as possible (waving in the referee against Thornton and Brannon for instance). He appeared bored with the sport, dreaming up novelty sideshows to keep himself entertained.

He also remained somewhat paranoid thanks to his Olympic experience -- refusing to sign over options to promoters or travel for bouts in Germany and England which would have enhanced his reputation. There weren't many who would have fancied taking him on, though. Chris Eubank, for example, refused to entertain the idea, admitting that Jones looked a fighter without weakness.

Jones was a marvel, at times unstoppable, yet his record could have been so much more. Rematches against Toney and Hopkins would have helped -- although, I don't recall Hopkins ever chasing one down like Toney did.

Jones was great -- but he rates below the likes of Leonard, Duran, Whitaker etc.

superfly

I don't think Toney stands up as a legacy, and i discount the BHop win to an extent as he was a 20 fight (no amateur career that i'm aware of) novice. RJJ wanted zero part of BHop, even after he'd established himself as a big player by nailing Tito for 11 and a bit rounds. Saving that, there isn't another 175lb fighter i'd maintain was "legendary" or even "great". Good probably, but good doesn't make a legacy.

And reeling off the top of my head @ 175:

Charles
Conn
Foster
Rosenbloom
Bivins
Spinks
Loughran
Tunney
Moore
Langford

The last is a dubious one, but wins over Mcvea and O'Brien do it for me.

Fact is RJJ has no real quality wins, unless of course we use the same criteria for Hatton @ 140? Because his level of oppo were about the same to be honest.

I can say it until i'm blue in the face, RJJ does not have an ATG legacy that takes him near the top 30 for me. And i can quite happily name 40 or 50 fighters that i'd rank higher than him. I was more than frustrated with him at the time, weren't you? He was the P4P guy and yet he fought the likes of Richard Hill, Woods and a whole host of mandatory style fighters without chasing the big fish. He was fighting bums. If he'd done a DLH and actually stretched himself then weight doesn't become an issue, Oscar took on all comers at any weight - the same can't be levelled at RJJ now can it?

Fact is the BHop fight was there, the fans wanted it, the networks wanted it, everyone wanted it. Barring RJJ who priced himself out of it even though he was only turning over 160k in PPV buys. If he'd fought and beat him again when both were at the top of their powers then we wouldn't be having this conversation, the fight should've happpened after BHop annhialating Tito. To say he deserved a bigger share is bull and that's justifiable not to fight - he would've earnt a ton more fighting Bhop than the "big money spinning" Clinton Woods.

I've never got the aura surrounding RJJ - it's bloody easy to look great against mediocrity. Ever played a sport where there's been a big fish in a small pond? He didn't stretch himself like DLH did - and sorry my friend but there is absolutely no way, absolutely no way that anyone can argue that statement.

Can you name 50 you'd rank above him please.

I am literally embarresed seeing people try and defend the likes of young zulu kid as a quality opponent. Oxring, coxy - you dont know what your talking about. Sorry.