Sticking up for Roy - someone's got to do it!

First topic message reminder :

Ayup fellas, how do?

You'll all have to forgive me for abandoning my usual 'old fogey' tact and discussing, in detail, a fighter whose peak was reached within the past two decades, but I've decided that if even Rowley can do it (his thread on Lennox Lewis did, after all, garner several million replies), then so can I.

I've spent quite a while recently revisiting some of boxing's more modern masters, which means that I've inevitably had to consider the career of Roy Jones Jr. Praised and derided in equal measure, and a fighter who splits opinion like few others, Jones' career must rank as a supremely strange one in many ways; despite dominating a string of opponents through the Middleweight, Super-Middleweight and Light-Heavyweight divisions over the nineties and early tweny-first century, he never quite captured the public's imaginations and affections the way some of his contemporaries (Oscar De la Hoya, Evander Holyfield etc) or his forerunners (Ray Leonard, Julio Cesar Chavez etc) did and, despite first mentioning the thought of retirement as a twenty-eight year old way back in 1997, he continues to fight on as of 2012, now a shadow of his former self.

I imagine if you'd offered such a prediction of Jones' 2012 predicament at the time, few would have taken it seriously - his thoughts on boxing when he expressed them, as well as his sometimes aloof, no-risk attitude to his own career path, suggested a man who would calculate in a cool manner exactly the right time to bow out, with enough wins on his ledger to secure a spot in the history of the sport, enough money in the bank to live like an Emperor forever and a day and all his faculties intact, a tribute to his apparent shrewdness and abilities to weigh up the old risk:reward ratio.

As it happens, that's not what transpired at all.

The general jist amongst a lot of people I speak to is that Jones has either ruined his legacy and forfeited his right to rank amongst the pound for pound elite thanks to carrying on too long and losing a succession of fights - often in brutal fashion - against men who wouldn't have troubled him during his peak years. Another theory is that he just wasn't that great to begin with, that he only flourished and became the greatest fighter, pound for pound, in the world because his opposition wasn't good enough to challenge this.

Neither theory stands up, for me, and I think many people are doing Jones a great disservice. Looking back at 2011's 606v2 all-time rankings, pound for pound, it seems that Jones wasn't one of the twenty-five or so fighters put forward by anyone as a top fifteen candidate. The more I think about it, the more this seems plainly wrong, to me.

A world champion at Middleweight by 1993, Jones first became a serious candidate for the title of pound for pound number one a year later, when he dazzled the hitherto unbeaten James Toney (himself a legitimate contender for the crown at the time, and the betting favourite beforehand) to a wide, wide points defeat for the IBF Super-Middleweight belt. It wasn't until a whole ten years later, in 2004, that Antonio Tarver brought Jones crashing back down to earth, with a shock second round stoppage of Jones in their Light-Heavyweight title fight.

A simple question o Jones' naysayers - how many other fighters across the whole of boxing history have had a full decade-long run as a (and in most people's eyes, THE) tip top pound for pound fighter, without suffering a legimitate defeat in that time and seldom losing more than a round or two in any fight? Ray Robinson was being touted as the 'uncrowned Lightweight champion as early as 1942, and remained a giant of the sport until retiring temporarily in 1952, but did have the odd blotch in his copy book here and there; defeats to La Motta and Turpin, a fortunate draw (as acknowledged by Robinson himself) against the journeyman Henry Brimm etc. Julio Cesar Chavez didn't lose a world title fight until a decade after his first, either, but during that stretch there was a fortunate decision against Whitaker and a life and death struggle against Meldrick Taylor.

I'm nitpicking there, of course; what I wrote above isn't designed to attempt the almost impossible task of degrading the achievements of either Robinson or Chavez, and the pair of them can, of course, be pardoned for such small blemishes considering the quality of the fighters who caused them. But the point I'm trying to emphasise is this; for a fighter to be as utterly dominant, as ultra-consistent and so successful for a whole decade, at such a high level of operating, is an incredibly rare thing, almost completely unmatched.

Forgive me for posing direct questions over and over, lads, but I imagine it's he only way I'll be able to draw some clear picture of all this - why is that Jones' decline can be so heavily held against him, whereas the tepid final years of the careers of Ezzard Charles, Roberto Duran, Ray Robinson etc seem not to harm their legacies at all? The more comical Jones detractors can argue all they like that his defeats to the Calzaghes, Hopkins' and Lebedevs of this world are a reflection of his abilities, but if they do so, then I'd be genuinely interested to know how Robinson can keep his place at the top of their pound for pound rankings, given his nigh-on embarrassing career from 1960 onwards.

And that seems to be the thing with Jones - double standards.

His opposition during his peak years is routinely derided without any good reason. More weight classes and belts, naturally' have made world titlists a far more common commodity in recent tims, but even so, Jones' feat of beating eighteen of them during his career - a record - spanning from Welterweight all the way up to Heavyweight deserves serious commendation. Jones' opposition and list of victims, of course, doesn't compare to a Robinson, a Greb, a Benny Leonard and so on, but nor did it consist of a string of hapless non-entities as some would have us believe.

Hopkins, a modern great who went unbeaten in a decade of Middleweight title fights and has continued to wow us all until very recently. "He was green!" I hear you all shout. And I accept that Hopkins was not yet the fighter who himself became a fixture in pound for pound lists. But look at it this way; even with no amateur career, Hopkins was still more than twenty-odd fights in to his professional tenure and had earned his spot as a ranked contender. If he wasn't ready by that stage in 1993, then when would he have been? Any claims that Hopkins was a routine affair for Jones should be dispelled by his admirable (if unspectacular) performance in the fight; he was the only man, up until that point, to give Jones any problems and also the only man to have managed to negate some of Jones' attacking, something no other 160 lb fighter at the time could have done. Moreover, Hopkins wouldn't lose again for a whole twelve years after this bout. Hardly a patsy then, I think we can agree?

Toney, one of the most lavishly gifted fighters I've ever seen, was given a boxing lesson by Jones so emphatic that it smashed the intimidating aura he once had around him, and there can be no excuses made by Roy's detractors here. Toney had been in sensational form beforehand, looking brilliant at 168 lb when outclassing Iran Barkley, Tim Littles and 'Prince' Charles Williams through 1993 and 1994. "We're looking at a great fighter" was Larry Merchant's take on matters as Toney closed the show against Williams, his last fight before taking on Jones. And Toney certainly did seem to be on the road to greatness, making Jones' feat of shutting him out all the more incredible.

Virgil Hill? A fine operator who was never beaten as decisively by anyone else as he was by Jones. A name which wouldn't look out of place on the ledger of any 175 b champion. Mike McCallum certainly past his best, and going some to compete at Light-Heavyweight, but he performed with honour and intensity in that fight. Julio Cesar Gonzalez was good enough to beat the 'other' Light-Heavyweight of Jones' era, Dariusz Michalczewski, and yet Jones is seldom given any great credit for dominating all twelve rounds against him. The likes of Reggie Johnson, Thulani Malinga and Montel Griffin are routinely branded as 'bums' by the more idiotic boxing 'fans'. Evidently, they were anything but and, I imagine, had they appeared on the ledger of a less notorious fighters they would be received much more warmly as wins.

I regularly see the likes of Jimmy Wilde and Eder Jofre ranked streets ahead of Roy. That's subjective, of course, but as far as I'm concerned he beat better opposition than both of them, and was more dominant within his own era, too. To those who rank Wilde and Jofre within their top tens or twenties, and neglect Jones completely, I'd like to simply ask why and how; how can that pair justifiably be so far in front? Why are their wins over the likes of Tancy Lee and Pal Moore (for Wilde) and Johnny Caldwell and Jose Legra (Jofre) singled out as excellent victories while Jones' against the likes of Hill, Ruiz (there's been plenty of average Heavyweight champions before, but I don't recall too many other former Middleweights going after them and beating them at a canter while being outweighed by 33 lb), Tarver and Hopkins are discarded as irrelevant?

I'm not suggesting that men such as Wilde and Jofre aren't great - I'm arguing that Jones is. So great, in fact, that his achievements would certainly be enough to make him Britain's greatest boxer had he emerged from these shores, for instance (Fitzsimmons, for obvious reasons, being excluded).

It seems that it's become fashionable to say that Jones was overrated. Well, I'm going to have to take a different direction, chaps, because if things keep going the way they are, then I truly believe that Jones is in danger of becoming severely underrated amongst some of the 'high brow' fans of the sport.

Sorry for banging on about it, but if we're going to settle this once and for all, let's not to it by halves!

Roy Jones - a phenomenon, a once-in-a-generation talent and a man who simply must command a place amongst the very, very best in the history of the sport. Prove me wrong if you think you can!

Cheers, everyone.

manos de piedra wrote:Jones pretty much owned the LH division up until his loss to Tarver for me. Darius is to Jones what Ottke is to Calzaghe.

Can't agree with this. Dariusz (apart from a dreadful cheat against Roccigiani) usually beat his opponents decisively whereas Ottke pretty much bummed his way through fights with about a dozen of them being controversial or even robberies. Ottke was never the linear champion, DM was. DM was knocking people over in world title fights before Jones Junior moved up to the weight. Calzaghe was a world champion before Ottke robbed Brewer of his belt so it's a duff comparison.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I tend to think jones and DM were both happy enough avoiding each other, it should have happened but both were making good money without the risk of losing. Neither was going to bow to the others demands.

There was hardly a risk of RJJ losing to DM.

Im not saying Ottke was as good as Darius but they occupy a similar position in relation to Jones and Calzaghes record. If Jones is accused of not dominating a division where he beat everybody bar Michaelsewski then I think the same applies to SMW where Calzaghe beat everybody bar Ottke. As much as Ottke gets slated he was still Calzaghes biggest rival until his retirement. I rate Darius as a better fighter though. Still dont give either of the pair much chance at all of beating Calzaghe/Jones.

To some Dariusz might not have stood a chance against Jones but he was however small the biggest risk out there and had cemented his place as the divisions number one before Jones stepped up. Neither wanted to fight away from home where they did good numbers so the fight was always a non-starter.

After Jones beat Ricky Frazier in early 1999, during his post-fight interview with Merchant HBO ran a graphic of four fighters they'd like to see Jones fight in order to quieten some of his critics. One of them was Dariusz, two of the others were Reggie Johnson and David Telesco.

As it goes, his next two fights were against Johnson and Telesco. And sure enough, after trouncing the pair of them he received as little credit as possible. The same people calling for him to 'step up' for those fights beforehand were branding them as soft paydays in the aftermatch.

To be honest, I think it would have been largely the same with Michalczewski, just because of the manner of victory more than anything. Apparently Michalczewski was making some noises about coming to America for the fight in 1999, but he'd have just been slaughtered as those two were. And then we'd likely hear that Michalczewski was a protected European middler.

I think Michalczewski was made for Jones. That performance around that time against Reggie Johnson was ridiculous. How Johnson managed to get up from that left hook, right hand one-two in the third round (it was only the bell which saved him afterwards, mind you) I'll never know. I've never seen hand speed like it at Light-Heavyweight. A stunning piece of boxing, was that.

88Chris05 wrote:After Jones beat Ricky Frazier in early 1999, during his post-fight interview with Merchant HBO ran a graphic of four fighters they'd like to see Jones fight in order to quieten some of his critics. One of them was Dariusz, two of the others were Reggie Johnson and David Telesco.

As it goes, his next two fights were against Johnson and Telesco. And sure enough, after trouncing the pair of them he received as little credit as possible. The same people calling for him to 'step up' for those fights beforehand were branding them as soft paydays in the aftermatch.

To be honest, I think it would have been largely the same with Michalczewski, just because of the manner of victory more than anything. Apparently Michalczewski was making some noises about coming to America for the fight in 1999, but he'd have just been slaughtered as those two were. And then we'd likely hear that Michalczewski was a protected European middler.

I think Michalczewski was made for Jones. That performance around that time against Reggie Johnson was ridiculous. How Johnson managed to get up from that left hook, right hand one-two in the third round (it was only the bell which saved him afterwards, mind you) I'll never know. I've never seen hand speed like it at Light-Heavyweight. A stunning piece of boxing, was that.

That was Roy at his very best. Johnson throws out a lazy jab and is hit with two punches right on the money before his hand is back for defence. Roy couldn't pull the trigger like that from around 2001 onwards and still beat some good opponents in Woods, Gonzalez, Tarver and that win against Ruiz.

The more I think about that win against Ruiz the more impressive it becomes. An average plodder like Chavez Jr now sits near the top end of the Middleweight division purely because of the size advantage he holds over the opposition and he damn near took out the recognised number 1 at the weight with size as his only real advantage. For Jones to beat someone who is that much bigger than him naturally and to do it with some to spare is just ridiculous.

^ that happened with Mayweather too Brian kenny is it? Taunting him - offering him the next lot of opponents - Mayweather overwhelms then over and over again. I think its the curse of the exceptional.

88Chris05 wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:And he doesn't have a record @ 175lbs to be considered a top 10 ATG at the weight. A completely shot LMW Mike McCallum doesn't do much for me and his record there is just a bit thin.

Rankings go on achievement, not how supposedly good they were against average opposition.

Glen Kelly followed by Clinton Woods (or was it the other way round, or with a fight or two inbetween? Pff who cares) doesn't really change my mind either.

Out of interest, Coxy, don't you think the same criticism could be thrown at Foster, in that case? If you wanted to cast an overly harsh eye on his Light-Heavyweight reign, there were very few names of the 175 lb elite in there; Tiger was going some to even compete at Light-Heavy (great Middleweight, mind you) and was pretty long in the tooth, as well. Finnegan a damn good fighter, but not a great one and, his fantastic losing effort first time out against Conteh aside, didn't do much after losing to Foster. Rondon, likewise, a nice technician, but not the sort who'd trouble someone like Roy. Then you have the gatekeepers who seemed to be there at 175 lb for an eternity, such as Fourie, Quarry, Rouse etc.

Of those fighters above, which of them could have troubled Jones? Foster's competition at the weight was sound, but not outstanding for the most part - but like Jones, the sheer dominance he had over his peers adds points to his tally. Good fighters were crumbling in Foster's wake, just as good fighters were being made to look silly by Jones.

Foster got out just before he lost his title in the ring, of course, whereas Jones had his title days ended emphatically more than once, and on the basis that Foster was a natural, in fact a very big Light-Heavyweight (a contrast to Roy, who stated as late as 2008 that he could still make Super-Middleweight if he wanted to) and also because I feel he's a safe bet to beat Jones, I'd agree that Foster should be a spot or two ahead of Roy in the all-time Light-Heavyweight standings. But if Foster makes it in to your ten than Jones simply has to as well, surely?

Apologies it took me a bit of time to come back to you Chris.

I do stress the point that I'd rather not get in to a "who beats who debate" - We'll only end up discussing advances in scientific methods if we do.

For sake of arguement I'll post my top 10 LHWs:

Charles
Langford
Spinks
Moore
Tunney
Foster
Loughran
Rosenbloom
Bivins
Greb

Foster at the weight was simply silly in terms of power, but he cannot be blamed for a lack of huge class in his era as he fought all the guys he could. What he does have though are 3 names- Rondon, Tiger and Finnegan that do enough for me at the weight to rank him ahead of RJJ... His names at the weight are weak to say the least, and he certainly wouldn't get ahead of any of the aforementioned names in my eyes.

Its difficult to classify Langford as a light heavyweight. He operated more often as a heavyweight or what would now be classified as cruiserweight and the light heavyweight division was practically non existant for most of his career so there was never really any incentive for him to fight in that weight class.

I think it's basically difficult to classify Langford in any single division to be honest, Manos. I remember how Jimmy Stuart put it, saying that Langford rendered the term 'pound for pound' almost meaningless; early in his professional career he was beating Gans at 140 lb, soon after he was boxing a draw with the Welterweight champion in Walcott, then he as mixing it with Middleweights such as Ketchel, then eventually moving up to fight the Light-Heavyweights such as O'Brien before finally mixing it with the big fellas such as Jeannette and Wills near the end of his prime years.

Much of his best work is spread fairly evenly across those weights. As a fighter in the overall sense, he's one of the very, very greatest but I can never make him amongst the elite (as in, top ten or so) in any single weight class.

Major issues would be rosenbloon and langford who simply shouldn't be ahead of. Jones at 175lbs, hes in the same bracket as Greb and conn which is high praise indeed.

I always thought he spent the majority of his career above 175 lbs but its difficult to say. He probably weighed in over 175 against most of his opponents, even guys like O'Brien because there wasnt really a light heavyweight division of note. The only division I can really rate him in is at heavyweight because it seemed to be where most of his battles and career took place. The weights back then were all over the place it seems though with fighters often spotting each other sizeable differances and having their weight fluctuate enormously. Ive never really considerd the LH division to be properly really formalised and fully accredited until almost the 1930s in any case. Its a division thats housed a huge amount of talent but comparitively few legitimised champions when you consider how long it took for it to really establish itself and then the freeze out of the black fighters in the 40s. Guys like Tunney, Charles, Greb and Bivins never even fought for the title.

Just to put a different slant on things, lads - Roy Jones against Bob Foster, how do we see that one going? I asked this one particularly because, although I think Jones does very well against most other great Light-Heavyweights, Foster is one bridge which I keep thinking would be too far, as mentioned earlier.

Two or three factors which make me worry for Roy's chances here. The only time Jones ever looked even slightly vulnerable when at his best was when he was on the ropes. Normally the opponent was too slow to catch him there. Foster wasn't a speed demon either, of course, but take a look at how he eats up ring space in front of him. He was so spindly at 175 lb, it looked as if he could advance from the centre of the ring to the edge of it with just one long, menacing stride. One moment he's at range, the next he's taken one of those long steps and trapped you.

If Foster keeps Jones on the ropes then Roy is bang in trouble, I think. Moreover, Jones loved to pile up the points with quicksilver attacks, a flurry thrown in micro seconds before getting out of harm's way. Jabbing, moving and accumulating slowly weren't really his thing. But Foster loved it when his man tried to overwhelm him like that - brutal knockouts of Finnegan, Tiger and Quarry all came in the middle of wild exchanges where both men were throwing leather. Jones could take those chances against the 175 lb men of his day, but all it would take is for Foster to shrug off one of those flurries and that'd be all she wrote, I fear.

Besides, even if Roy does want to jab and move to play it safe, he's fighting a man with one hell of a jab, too.

I'll yield to nobody when it comes to the sentiments of my article here - that Jones has been too readily dismissed by some when it comes to finding his place in history - but Foster's wrong, wrong, wrong for him in my eyes. Foster by clean KO in the mid rounds.

Excellent article Chris, as usual - loved reading it and the subsequent responses. I'd have to say I agree completely, he's one of the most talented fighters of our generation, beating Ruiz was his top 20 ATG slot made for me. You just can't ignore someone who goes from not being a particularly big middleweight to beating a heavyweight and not be something special indeed.

Jones was hammering guys left right and centre through his career. Picking up that loss to Griffin ignored - he went on a blistering unbeaten streak to 49 fights. That is nothing short of incredible, he raced through MW, SMW and LHW then beat the HW champion to show he could then he lost to Tarver - he then lost his confidence somewhat, but lets face it the guy had been through 4 weight divisions, been the best in each and stayed on top for over a decade.

Top 20 - maybe a sneaky top 15 for me.

Foster knocked out a few with a solid jab to the body forcing them onto the ropes then destroying them there with either hand but my favourite is the right hook to the body he used to prevent people moving off the ropes and out of his range. Teddy Atlas recommended JAbbing to Jones body as an alternative as his reflexes were too good to take a shot to the head. You might have picked the one to be a favourite over him - especially considering his size, reach and rather efficient footwork. I wonder if RJJ would be fast enough to back out after coming in to attack.

Prepare for a whole page of people saying Roy Jones Jr was always chinny here Chris based almost entirely on the Tarver and Johnson KO's that happened when he was 35 years old and had 50 fights behind him. I can remember him being put down by Del Valle but he gathered himself quickly and recovered well there but that was about it for Roy Jones Jr being hurt in his peak years. Ali had a great chin and powers of recovery but he was put down more than Jones in their respective primes but he doesn't get called chinny.

As far as a fight with Foster goes I'm torn. I've not seen a great deal of Foster fights but from what I have seen that man could punch like no ones business which gives him a decent chance against any Light Heavyweight in history. What was Fosters chin like at the weight? I know he was put on the canvas on a regular basis as a Heavyweight but did anyone have him hurt at his preferred weight?

Foster was a great fighter with a Hearns like jab. He punched like a mule, but he said he was surprised how the bigger guys walked through it. He hit Frazier squarely on the chin and Joe just smiled and decked him. He has been bounced as a LHW. I think RJJ would have too much speed for him and the angled punches would eventually overwhelm him. Can see RJJ stopping him in 9.

Technically yes - he was caught using an over the counter protein supplement which contained a trace of a substance banned only by the ibf not anyone else. IT was also on the WAda list but boxing doesnt adhere to that.

Alma, if my memory serves me correctly in 1999 Jones and his opponent (I think it was Hall?) both tested positive for a stimulant which was banned by the IBF, but none of the other sanctioning bodies. Apparently Jones reasoned that the stimulant was a part of something he'd taken to numb the pain in his wrist (he'd fractured a wrist against David Telesco, and I think that may have been the fight immediately before the positive test).

He presented his case to the IBF and they were, apparently, satisfied that it had been just a bit of a lax mistake by Jones, rather than any real dishonesty. I believe it was an extremely marginal 'positive' return on the test, but don't take that as gospel.

Whatever the truth, it's of course disappointing, for me anyway. I don't take a "lifetime ban, no mitigating circumstances" stance to these things, however.

He still doesn't deserve the credit he deserves for that. Had it been someone in the black and white era, folk songs would have been written about the superhuman feat and that the guy was a freak of nature.

I think Jones' feat is actually a little undervalued if anything, alma. I'm not sure it's fair to draw the comparison between a top class, but natural, 215 lb Heavy beating an average 248 lb one, because Jones just wasn't a Heavyweight in any sense of the word.

Their weights on fight night may have been 33 lb apart, but I'd imagine that their best / natural fighting weights, or walk around weights between fights, would have something more like a 50-odd lb difference. I don't care how average Ruiz was in comparison to other Heavyweight champions; for a fighter of Jones' size to move up and outbox him with ease is a remarkable achievement.

As for the 18 lb weight increase, I don't think there was anything too suspicious there, really. In preparation for Ruiz, Jones was working with the same fella (can't remember his nam right now, sorry) who'd helped build Michael Spinks in to a Heavyweight almost twenty years earlier. I believe that same man had also worked in a conditioning / strengthening capacity with some others, perhaps Moorer? Either way, the man had an exemplary record in his field as far as I know.

The more I think about it, the more I think that Jones missed a trick in not seeking out Toney for a rematch after beating Ruiz, rather than going back down to 175 lb to take on Tarver for his old Light-Heavyweight titles.

Just a few months before Jones beat Ruiz, Toney had given his career the kiss of life by beating Jirov for the Cruiserweight title. Throughout 2002 / 2003, the governing bodies were slowly phasing out the old 190 lb Cruiserweight limit and replacing it with 200 lb. Toney was 190 lb for the Jirov fight, the last time he physically resembled anything even close to a world-class prize fighter, while Jones wouldn't have had to shed any weight from the 193 lb at which he boxed Ruiz.

Toney had moaned for years that he wanted another chance against Roy, so that fight in 2003 would have been perfectly legimitate, given how well he'd looked against Jirov. It would have given us a greater idea of just how much Toney's weight troubles (rather than Jones' ability) had to do with their 1994 result, or the manner of it more accurately, and also would have allowed Jones the chance to win a Cruiserweight title which, he claims, is the last itch he's trying to cure before retirement as his career slides further and further in to oblivion. If trimming back down to 175 lb was indeed the route of Jones' limp showings against Tarver, then it could well have been avoided with a second fight against 'Lights Out.'

"Sticking up for Roy"

Didn't that have Peter North in it???

Fancy posting a thread like this with coxy on here...

The knockdown Chris is referring to.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyQkaeRgh2Q

With Floyd Mayweather..and...Ray Leonard......one of the three best fighters I've ever "witnessed" in my lifetime....

Toney and hopkins in their primes should be enough to convince anybody,..

TheMackemMawler wrote:The knockdown Chris is referring to.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyQkaeRgh2Q

That is orgasmic

Does your girlfriend insist you watch it before bedtime???

I have a wife my friend - which is the reason I take my pleasures where I can find them.

You should have been a mormon my friend.....