Roy Jones Jr vs ATG at middelweight/super middle

Simple topic Guys.

RJJ at the peak of his powers vs greats h2h at middle or super.

Who do you think could beat him and why?

No one comes close except a rematch with an on his game, no emergancy hospital appointments, James Toney.

Michael Nunn maybe.

What about Hagler or someone of that level. I think RJJ would box his ears off but Hagler is tough and could hurt him if he gets carless.

I'd only call Monzon a favourite, think his jab and timing would contain the speed of Jones to an extent, sooner or later his power would start to tell. He's equally adept at fighting at range or in close, going to the body or the head.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I'd only call Monzon a favourite, think his jab and timing would contain the speed of Jones to an extent, sooner or later his power would start to tell. He's equally adept at fighting at range or in close, going to the body or the head.

Interesting. Have seen Monzon but not as much as would like. Must check out more of his fights. I think Jones could be a genuine top ten great if he had retired after heavyweight. In fact would possibly break top 5??

AdamT wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I'd only call Monzon a favourite, think his jab and timing would contain the speed of Jones to an extent, sooner or later his power would start to tell. He's equally adept at fighting at range or in close, going to the body or the head.

Interesting. Have seen Monzon but not as much as would like. Must check out more of his fights. I think Jones could be a genuine top ten great if he had retired after heavyweight. In fact would possibly break top 5??

Doubt it.

Boxing critics are a very particular bunch when it comes to the honored top 10. Roy would top any top ten ability list but he has simply not got the names be mentioned in an ATG top 10 list.

Based on talent he would but his overall record isn't quite good enough, not being the man at any weight doesn't help either.

On a head to head basis he would be hard to beat for anyone. He was a true freak in his prime. He could do things wrong and still not get caught, similar to Ali.

Ali is the greatest heavyweight ever. He had his own style. Never seen Ali go to the body much and he leaned back from punches rather than the usual slip the head side to side.

Jones is similar. He is perhaps more textbook than Ali but he could punch from any angle and his reflexes and speed are second to none. Loved watching Jones fight.

Do you think prime Roy beats the current super 6 S/M like Ward and co?

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Do you think prime Roy beats the current super 6 S/M like Ward and co?

Yes he most certainly does. Ward is talented and would make it tough but I cant see him beating Jones.

Jones knocks froch out after a heavy beating

Nunn vs Jones jr.......Would be a purists dream..............Styles make fights and the Nunn that beat Tate would be hard for anyone in history to beat even SRR......The speed, angles, head movement completely humiliated a very good, talented Olympian that outclassed the decent Olajide to win the title...

I think Hoppo and Jones both beat Hagler.............Think Jones can do a Turpin on Robbo who probably beats any welter who ever lived..

Can't see any of the Super-Middleweight champions we've had so far beating him (as it happens, Jones himself has often stated that 168 was where he felt most comfortable and happy, and where he was at his absolute best in every aspect). Love Toney to death, but Roy would always have been a rotten match up for him, weight problems or no. Calzaghe, Eubank, Benn, Kessler etc simply not in Jones' class. I wouldn't rule out Ward giving him a good test, mind you. A very smart fighter with adaptability and a nice balance of defence and attack to break up the other guy's rhythm. He could give Jones similar problems to the ones Griffin did in his first fight with Jones, but I'd still take Roy there in general.

More interesting at 160 with a lot more intriguing fights and names to pick from. Generally the only guys who made Jones struggle (some of these were above Super-Middle, but you get my drift) in or around his peak were canny guys who used feints, hit that balance between attacking and defending and went for quality over quantity; Hopkins at least contained Jones to a certain degree albeit he never looked like winning, McCallum and Griffin made him look a bit unsure of himself at times and Tarver's cagey approach caused him problems in their first fight. People talk about Jones' chin being dodgy and therefore look to aggressive types with a big punch such as McClellan, Jackson, Ketchel, Golovkin etc as having a great chance against him, but for me it's a small puncher's chance and that's it. I'd actually take Jones' power to crack their chins before vice versa.

Take a look at Thomas Tate's tussle with Julian Jackson, for example. Cracking fight (forget the cards, they were far too wide) in which Tate dealt well with Jackson's power and was able to slug with him for long periods and come through the full twelve rounds, despite Jackson landing plenty of leather - this against one of the greatest knockout artists ever. Gets in with Jones about eighteen months later and is totally obliterated by his left hook in two short rounds, the only stoppage loss on his record. You don't want to be slugging with Jones!

As Hammersmith says, Monzon's a decent place to start. Great stamina over fifteen, brilliant jab when he got it going (and it'd need to be in perfect fettle to catch Jones), excellent chin. The downside is his lack of speed and his slow starting - it's not totally impossible that Jones catches him cold or at least gets himself a headstart of three or four rounds on the cards. Not easy to call either way.

Hagler the bigger hitter than Monzon and a bit more fluid, but erratic in fights. I could see Jones making it a safety-first points win (similar to what he did to Hopkins in 1993) over Marvin, but Hagler's power and more aggressive nature means he might make openings (such as getting Jones on the ropes where he wasn't comfortable) which Monzon couldn't. Jones starts as narrow-ish favourite over Hagler for me but it'd take a very strong performance from him to be sure of it.

Outside the obvious examples, Sumbu Kalambay could have given Jones a lot of problems with his mobility, defence and jab....Or he could get sparked in double quick time like he did when he met Nunn, one of the few guys you could say with similar in style to Jones. I tend to think of the Kalambay-Nunn knockout as a bit of a freak ocurrence, though. Kalambay could have frustrated Jones and countered him but probably just didn't have the power or output to win the decision.

Not sure about Hoppo beating Hagler at middlewight. Would actually fancy Toney to get the job done. I would certainly pick Jones to box Hagler to a unaminous decision.

The problem with Marv is................He was outwitted by a lightweight..........He was awful against Vito and Mugabi... and he lost to a three year retired welterweight...

Gives great credence to the case that a smart fighter over 12 could have his number more often than not.

I wouldn't completely rule out a Calzaghe without bad hands either, maybe have Jones a 60/40 favourite for that fight. Calzaghe can adapt, even mid-fight, had power and the only one who could match Jones for speed. Excellent chin also. Joe's best performances also came when he wasn't heavy favourite e.g. Lacy and Kessler.

Also think a prime Hopkins could have caused him problems and had a chance, given his great nullifying abilities of other's strengths. The first fight Hopkins hadn't peaked yet and there second Jones was halfway down the other side of the hill despite being younger than BHop.

Calzaghe, great engine and very good boxer. Very fast and tough with a hard punch before he had hand trouble.

Though could he beat a prime Jones? No chance in my opinion. I honestly don't see any middle or super middle from the last 25 or 30 years beating Jones unless landing a lucky shot. Nobody is getting a decison against him.

Calzaghe being a compact southpaw and technically efficient..........Is a difficult night for anybody.........

Lacy was a good fighter and he was brilliant that night...Kessler win gets better all the time........

Calzaghe a British great no doubt but the Hopkins fight highlighted his weakness. If he didn't have a great engine he wouldn't of got the decision. Jones at his peak was far faster than Hopkins. Better too.

As tough as Joe was I would still pick Jones to stop him late. Calzaghe would keep coming and I think Jones would counter him silly. It is only my opinion of course. I am far from a boxing expert but I definitley see no way Joe could beat Jones

If he'd have retired after Ruiz (or after the first Tarver fight where he went back down in weight afterwards to reclaim the Light-Heavy title, the first man to do so) then I think his top ten claim would have been looking pretty strong. Perhaps not concrete but well in the mix.

The argument about whether or not he was 'the man' in the weight classes he won titles in doesn't have too much relevance, for me. There was no lineage worth speaking of at 168, as it was a division which had never been unified and was pretty new. Toney was obviously the strongest and most in-form Super-Middleweight in 1994 and Jones outclassed him. It was the performance which solidified him as a serious candidate to the pound for pound crown and I don't think unifying against guys like Liles (who turned down an offer from Jones in any case), Benn or Collins would have altered his standing too much. Would have been nice but hardly glaring holes in his record.

There was no lineage at 175 since Spinks vacated back in 1985, and by the time Jones moved up to Light-Heavy in 1996 the Ring Magazine had stopped awarding belts to who they believed to be the consensus man. Michalczewski unified belts against Hill, fair enough, but neither were lineal champions going in and nobody thought either of them were in the same league as Jones. Does his win over Hill in 1997 make Dariusz the man at the weight? Maybe if Jones wasn't there at the time, or if the Ring were awarding belts, it might have done, but I don't think Michalczewski's claim was concrete to be honest. After that, Jones consistently took on a much better class of opponent than Dariusz, dealt with them in much more impressive fashion and on the occasions where they did have mutual opponents, Jones tended to dominate them in a way Michalczewski couldn't. When the Ring started awarding titles again in 2001 it would have been a joke to have awarded it to Michalczewski instead of Jones, for me. Michalczewski had a claim in 1997, but it evaporated over the next few years in my eyes as he plundered through the division's B-listers while Jones went from strength to strength.

Strictly speaking, Ezzard Charles was never 'the man' at 175 by virtue of never beating the champion for the title there, either. Different scenario and circumstances, but I'm just highlighting that while titles of that nature have gravity, what you actually do in the ring matters more. Jones was clearly the best Light-Heavyweight in the world by a considerable distance for about seven years, with or without the scalp of Michalczewski (not saying I wouldn't have liked Jones to have taken care of that bit of business just to quieten his critics, mind you).

Michalczewski was hard done by to be stripped by the WBA and IBF, and maybe if he hadn't have been things could have been different all-round, as Jones would likely have had to travel to get the titles. But after being stripped he needed to do more than just line up endless WBO mandatories in Germany while showing no inclination to fight Jones if he wanted to convince people that he really was the man. Sympathy can't extend that far!

Virgil Hill was the lineal champion Chris, his fight with Henry Maske pitted the top two 175lbers against eachother, to be pedantic.

Neither he nor DM were too fussed fighting but is definitely one of those fights which would have been good to see. Jones heavy favourite but the ramrod jab of DM could have made it interesting.

I wouldn't have classed Hill as lineal champ personally, Hammersmith, but that's just me. I think until Jones moved up to 175 the division was lacking a really outstanding fighter and most of the titlists were quite evenly matched. I'll take your word on Hill and Maske being numbers one and two (I'm presuming you mean Ring ratings here?) but I'm not sure I'd rate Maske any higher than an old McCallum or Jeff Harding.

Don't have any real objection to anyone who says that Dariusz was top dog by rights at some stage, just tend to think it ended up meaning nothing in subsequent years as the quality of their title reigns ended up being worlds apart.

Good fighter, Dariusz. Good fitness, could punch a bit, tough and as you say a very nice jab. Just don't see him landing it against Jones though, and Michalczewski was just too easy to hit for me as well as being vulnerable to speed. I think Jones would have shut him out or eventually stopped him.

At SMW I'd love to see him against Ward, Calzaghe and Froch

I'd back Joe to beat him every day, Ward would be intruiging and Froch as I'd like to see him get a pasting

Joe is a good fighter no doubt but would be very shocked to see him beat Jones at his best. Sure he outclassed Jones when he thought him but anybody that follows boxing knows that was in no way the real Jones Jr.

Wasn't the real Calzaghe either but Roy had fallen much further than Joe had. Everyone and his dog knew Calzaghe was there for his US swansong. Even the Kessler fight was against a version of Calzaghe who was slightly on the downward slope.

Have always found it difficult to pinpoint the "best" version of Calzaghe as when he fought Eubank, he was nowhere near the fighter he was during his SM reign but he wasn't plagued with that hand trouble either. A version of the Calzaghe who beat Lacy but combined with the earlier incarnation that could still throw a punch without fracturing six bones would have been a formidable match-up even for Jones.

DAVE667 wrote:Wasn't the real Calzaghe either but Roy had fallen much further than Joe had. Everyone and his dog knew Calzaghe was there for his US swansong. Even the Kessler fight was against a version of Calzaghe who was slightly on the downward slope.

Have always found it difficult to pinpoint the "best" version of Calzaghe as when he fought Eubank, he was nowhere near the fighter he was during his SM reign but he wasn't plagued with that hand trouble either. A version of the Calzaghe who beat Lacy but combined with the earlier incarnation that could still throw a punch without fracturing six bones would have been a formidable match-up even for Jones.

I always feel the Jones and Calzaghe fight mirrors the Tyson vs Lewis Fight. Calzaghe and Lewis were probably not quite at their full best but Tyson and Jones were a long way off.

The best Calzaghe was the one that beat Lacey. that was his best night. If he didn't have hand trouble he would have got him out of there for sure. Lacey took a beating that night. He may have been overrated but he was a genuine world champ and most people were picking him to beat Joe and that Joe has seen better days.

Joe was sensational that night and also when he beat the undefeated Kessler.

Got to be careful when you discuss hypothetical match ups, because we all see stuff differently and there's no way any of us can prove what we're saying. But Calzaghe beating Jones every time? Even if you'd pick Calzaghe, I personally can't see how anyone could think it's a safe bet or say that Calzaghe was clearly superior.

I think Calzaghe gets a bit too much benefit of the doubt for a career which was largely a disappointment. He's a bit short of dominant performances against top-tier guys to make me think he could be a favourite over a guy in Jones whose speciality was making top-tier guys look clueless. Calzaghe's finest moment as a Super-Middle was beating Kessler by something like 8-4 in rounds - that was an excellent win, don't get me wrong, but it's all relative. If a peak Jones had lost four rounds to a fighter at Kessler's level and been hit / stunned with as many shots as Calzaghe was early in that fight, it would probably be considered a disappointing performance for him!

A close-ish one (but there's no doubt in my mind he won, in fairness) against Reid, a debatable split decision against an aged Hopkins, a fairly comfortable win over Bika and solid victories over guys like Byron Mitchell, Eubank, Woodhall etc; nothing wrong with having these as your career highlights, but not the kind of form line you'd associate with a real all-time great or a head-to-head monster at 168 or 175. Brilliant, brilliant performance against Lacy, of course, who had a good reputation coming in, but I don't think it's unfair at all to question if he was ever all that to begin with when you look at who he'd been fighting prior to Calzaghe and how he's fared since.

The fighters who troubled Jones didn't really bear much resemblance to Calzaghe and making Calzaghe, very good fighter though he was, such an emphatic favourite over Roy seems a bit generous, for me.

Bhop
Monzon
Hagler
Greb

Doesn't actually make my top 10 MWs to be honest and the above all beat him when at the absolute peak of their powers (dispelling the myth that BHop was the scalp he would have been 4/5/6 years later).

That and he has the spectra of his career not exactly being totally legit - there are other websites that have actually reported on this so I'm not saying anything libelous.

Illogical..

Interestingly, some might say bizarrely, jones picked eubank as the one guy around at the time that he'd be nervous about. He figured chris didnt know what he was going to do next, so how could anyone fighting him! Eubank pretty much gave himself no chance against jones and i'm inclined to side with eubank's perspective on this one.

The Benn McClellan fight robbed us of a jones mcLellan superfight. There are plenty who think McClellan was just a crude banger, and he certainly gave a good impression of one, but he had the offensive arsenal to test roy's whiskers more than most could... and he could box when he put his mind to it... enough to beat roy as an amateur. Jones favourite obviously, but not a shoe-in.

Jone's is a hard man to bet against, he looked untouchable at super middle (aside from Griffin 1), but apart from the shut out of the salad dodger there weren't that many tests for him (he obviously looked pretty had a solid win at middle over a fairly inexperienced hopkins). Whose to say hagler doesn't close off the ring and wear him down. Monzon tended to win by attrition, would Roy be there to hit? Maybe over 15. Calzaghe throws in fast bunches, would the second or third shots maybe get through and the workrate give him a chance? I suspect not, but I think you can see most of these fights going either way. Jones would certainly be at least evens against all of them in my book.

Off to remove those splinters from my 'arris.

I'll remove them for you If you like...

....you were too rough with the tweezers last time fella

Are we talking about Jones on, or off PEDs... ;-P

Captain Kirk wrote:Bhop
Monzon
Hagler
Greb

Doesn't actually make my top 10 MWs to be honest and the above all beat him when at the absolute peak of their powers (dispelling the myth that BHop was the scalp he would have been 4/5/6 years later).

That and he has the spectra of his career not exactly being totally legit - there are other websites that have actually reported on this so I'm not saying anything libelous.

It is a matter of public record that Jones (along with his opponent, Hall) tested positive for an anabolic steroid after their fight in 2000. So, nothing libelous about saying so :-).

Not sure how you can pick Greb to beat Jones if i'm honest, fair enough to say he ranks higher but as far as theoretical head to heads go he can't be part of the discussion.

No doubt I'll be in very small minority here, but an at his best Herol Graham would be interesting against Jones, very few others match Jones's reflexes and unorthodoxness, but in Graham you have a boxer that would present a unique set of problems for him to work out.
Jones that bit quicker, stronger and definitely harder hitter and so would be favorite, but he would be made to miss more than ever .

He'd potentially make it awkward but Herol being Herol would drift in and out of the fight too much to cause any serious problems, seemed to have an aversion to turning it on in his big fights.

Herol Graham probably Britains most gifted or at the very least, easily the most talented fighter to win a world title.

Graham is good but Jones again is too sharp and athletic. Wouldn't be an easy fight though. Good shout.

To never win a title I meant on previous post

A clear second behind Jim Driscoll in those stakes Adam.

What about Sugar Ray Leonard at middle? I know Leonard had no real career at the weight, but he did have the big win against Hagler. I also know people debate that result, but even if Hagler did shade it, it was a pretty good performance considering Ray's three-year layoff.

I think this version of Leonard would defeat Jones. Every bit as fast, but with sound fundamentals and more of a fighter's heart. He was also a smoother mover with better footwork. Jones would have the edge in strength and power, but I feel Leonard's know-how and experience would give him the edge. Leonard by SD.

Leonard wouldn't stand a chance, it seems like you're describing him at his Welterweight peak but attributing it to the later part of his career.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Leonard wouldn't stand a chance, it seems like you're describing him at his Welterweight peak but attributing it to the later part of his career.

I think saying "he wouldn't stand a chance" is a tad strong. No, I am basing it on his display against Hagler, himself an all-time great.

People debate the Leonard hagler result? Don't know what you mean.

Leonard was never really a middle, and both he and hagler were past their primes when they fought. Can't see Leonard troubling jones myself.  Hearns might be competitive for a while but while tommy carried the weight better, he was less mobile at middle, and jones would find that chin.

Jones would beat Leonard at middle though p4p I would maybe go Ray. F..k I hate comparing greats especially at different weights ha

AdamT wrote:Jones would beat Leonard at middle though p4p I would maybe go Ray. F..k I hate comparing greats especially at different weights ha

Me too, it is a mug's game :-p.

According to Jones, he sparred Leonard as a young amateur in '88. He claims he out-sped Leonard, but that Leonard caught him with a left hook that evened things up. I know nothing can be read into this, but it is interesting nonetheless. I don't imagine Ray went full out against a young amateur, either...

You really can't compare though. Its all objective really.

people love to compare boxers but the sport has changed, it has evolved. Though I don't think the talent pool is as deep as years gone by. Heavyweights are a good example of this. I rate the brothers but the lack of competition from the states proves athletes are going other routes. Boxing only pays well if you reach the very top. A lot of other mainstream sports pays much more to the average athlete.

For every Mayweather that earns millions, there is the 9 to 5 guy who maybe makes a few hundred here or there. If he fights for local titles he may earn 5 or 6 figures. Tough sport for little reward.

AdamT wrote:You really can't compare though. Its all objective really.

people love to compare boxers but the sport has changed, it has evolved. Though I don't think the talent pool is as deep as years gone by. Heavyweights are a good example of this. I rate the brothers but the lack of competition from the states proves athletes are going other routes. Boxing only pays well if you reach the very top. A lot of other mainstream sports pays much more to the average athlete.

For every Mayweather that earns millions, there is the 9 to 5 guy who maybe makes a few hundred here or there. If he fights for local titles he may earn 5 or 6 figures. Tough sport for little reward.

Boxing has devolved, in my opinion. Far less technical fighters around these days. They are more like athletes who throw punches. Plus I have a feeling steroids are rife.

The talent pool in recent years has been pretty rubbish.

Meant the athletes have evolved

Yeah, Herol Graham is an interesting shout as well - one of the few guys who was comparable to Jones in terms of athleticism and agility. There are fights (or sometimes just certain parts of fights) where Graham looked incredible, like against Kaylor or the first couple of rounds of the Jackson fight and Kalambay rematch, but he just seemed to always find a way to have a major lapse at some stage, or a lull where he just couldn't get going or string anything together. The latter was what cost him the McCallum fight, too. It'd probably be the same old story against Roy; gives him something to think about for a while but can't keep it going. Would have been interesting to see though as there weren't many guys who could potentially have made Jones hit a lot of thin air and tested his patience like that.

Tricky with Leonard as he never competed as a Middleweight in his peak. Had he not been out of the game for five years between '82 and '87 (that one fight against Howard aside) we might have seen him trying his hand at 160 and could have got a proper gauge of how good he could have been at that weight. Even past his best he was able to compete with an admittedly sliding Hagler at Middle, and stands to reason that an unbelievable, natural Welter and still very good Light-Middle (I've always been more impressed with his performance against Kalule than others) should still be at least a fairly good Middleweight, but I agree with the general consensus that there's too much going in Jones' favour for him to lose to Leonard at 160, even if it was a 26, 27-year-old version of Ray.

Jones basically said the same about how he'd have fared against Robinson. Said that he considered Robinson the greatest pound for pounder of all, but that he'd just have been too big and too hard-hitting for Robinson to have handled him at Middle given that Robinson was a natural Welter. He got some stick for it but I'd agree with him, and Robinson's patchy record at Middleweight (in relative terms to his Welterweight ledger) pretty much bears that out.