roy jones P4P king who could have gave him problems?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr140

And yes i have seen Moorer at LHW he was a devasting puncher and beat everyone he had and 26 wins 26 kos he had power in him. Also Spinks had 26 wins and 19 kos so the which is not that bad of a Ko percentage considering roy had 21 fights 9 kos which is way lower and peopel said he had power at the weight. And Roy chin once he got caught did not go so well and Spinks has more power then Taver and Spinks could catch Roy at LHW during any time in his career so that is why i believe he coudl Ko him and if we are going 15 rounds it is even more likly to happen.

---

Moorer beat tomato can's at LHW plus what fights of Moorer's have you seen at LHW ?? and actually Tarver's KO percentage is identical to Spinks LHW KO ratio is it not ?? so there isn't that much difference in there power. And why do you keep bringing up Tarver fight all the time ?? that was Jones past his prime, when we are doing fantasy match ups we look at both fighters best performance's and the Jones that beat Virgil Hill was one of his best performance's at LHW so lets say that version of Jones vs Spinks.

Jones before he fought Ruiz had 15 fights at LHW, only 5 fighters when the distance and they were. Mike McCallum, Lou Del Valle, Reggie Johnson, Julio Cesar Gonzalez, David Telesco. All these fighters had solid chins and none of them have ever been stopped in there whole career except Telesco who was only stopped once by TKO in 8 to Julio Cesar Gonzalez, but other than that none of these guys had been stopped in there whole career so that just shows you how good there chins were.

ok who would have given jones problems?

leonard/jones 160lbs- i dont care who ya are leonard gives ya some problems.
spinks/jones at 175lbs- spinks gives jones too many problems and probably wins.
hagler/jones at 160lbs- jones gives hagler a fast paced 5 round workout before getting knocked out.
tommy hearns/jones at 160- jones gets sparked 5 out of 10 (hearns gets sparked the other 5 times) whata fight though.
and there are alot of others but i aint the time or mental capacity at the moment to really get into them all.
but i will end with this. someone who destroys roy ten out of ten at 175 is holyfield.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cjm2681

ok who would have given jones problems?

leonard/jones 160lbs- i dont care who ya are leonard gives ya some problems.
spinks/jones at 175lbs- spinks gives jones too many problems and probably wins.
hagler/jones at 160lbs- jones gives hagler a fast paced 5 round workout before getting knocked out.
tommy hearns/jones at 160- jones gets sparked 5 out of 10 (hearns gets sparked the other 5 times) whata fight though.
and there are alot of others but i aint the time or mental capacity at the moment to really get into them all.
but i will end with this. someone who destroys roy ten out of ten at 175 is holyfield.

---

SC. You even know who Roy Jones Jr. is?
Have you seen any of his fights besides his losses to Tarver and Johnson late in his career?
Gimme a break, Hagler knocks Roy fukin Jones Jr. OUT?! Yeah, right.

ive probably seen every roy jones fight starting with his fight against hopkins. i saw a guy who beat everyone he fought (BUT AT THE TIME HE WAS KING HE DID NOT HAVE HALF THE COMPETITION THAT CHAMPS LIKE HAGLER HAD) i dont blame roy for this but i dont think you can really even compare him to those guys. the competition just was not there. the middleweights of the eighties where on a totally different level then the nineties middles. so yeah i watched roys fights have you watched hagler fights? i suggest the hearns, mugabi,roldan,or hamsho fights.
these where tough cookies. and hagler broke down and destroyed them all. jones never really took it on the chin until the tarver fight (and sorry but he wasnt shot in the tarver fights because he never had a tough fight before them, he finally fought someone who wasnt totally intimidated bye his speed enough to try and land his own punches). hagler would be all over jones from round one and i dont think roy had the chin to survive hagler's pressure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cjm2681

ive probably seen every roy jones fight starting with his fight against hopkins. i saw a guy who beat everyone he fought (BUT AT THE TIME HE WAS KING HE DID NOT HAVE HALF THE COMPETITION THAT CHAMPS LIKE HAGLER HAD) i dont blame roy for this but i dont think you can really even compare him to those guys. the competition just was not there. the middleweights of the eighties where on a totally different level then the nineties middles. so yeah i watched roys fights have you watched hagler fights? i suggest the hearns, mugabi,roldan,or hamsho fights.
these where tough cookies. and hagler broke down and destroyed them all. jones never really took it on the chin until the tarver fight (and sorry but he wasnt shot in the tarver fights because he never had a tough fight before them, he finally fought someone who wasnt totally intimidated bye his speed enough to try and land his own punches). hagler would be all over jones from round one and i dont think roy had the chin to survive hagler's pressure.

---

Fair enough. I still think you're wrong though bro. SC me back, I deserve it man. And I still think Roy makes the great , warrior, Marvin Hagler look foolish.

Jones would definitely beat Leonard while in his prime P4P and let's not forget that the Leonard that beat Hagler beat a fighter past his prime and Ray was nothing more than a blown up lightweight that left his best fight behind when he beat Hearns. Hearns had not matured as a fighter until he lost to Leonard and if he fought Jones who was a natural middle weight two things will materialize, Jones speed and the fact that his punches were so accurate. Let's not forget that Roy had trouble with lefties as far as Hagler is concerned, many people on this panel don't remember his Philadelphia wars. Jones never had one until Tarver. Someone mentioned the mongoose Archie Moore and I know Jones would have to be in super condition to meet a guy that had the knockout percentage Archie had as a lightheavy. It was over eighty percent even while he was defeated by some of his era's best heavyweight champs and fought Way into his forties. He was tough. Micheal Moorer was devastating yes but his opponents were not like the others just listed.

prime roy easily beats anybody in history..by either lopsided points, UD, or tko..the closest fight he had was a UD over bhop and that wasn't prime roy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cjm2681

ive probably seen every roy jones fight starting with his fight against hopkins. i saw a guy who beat everyone he fought (BUT AT THE TIME HE WAS KING HE DID NOT HAVE HALF THE COMPETITION THAT CHAMPS LIKE HAGLER HAD) i dont blame roy for this but i dont think you can really even compare him to those guys. the competition just was not there. the middleweights of the eighties where on a totally different level then the nineties middles. so yeah i watched roys fights have you watched hagler fights? i suggest the hearns, mugabi,roldan,or hamsho fights.
these where tough cookies. and hagler broke down and destroyed them all. jones never really took it on the chin until the tarver fight (and sorry but he wasnt shot in the tarver fights because he never had a tough fight before them, he finally fought someone who wasnt totally intimidated bye his speed enough to try and land his own punches). hagler would be all over jones from round one and i dont think roy had the chin to survive hagler's pressure.

---

What do you mean Jones didn't have competition ??

Mike McCallum
Virgil Hill
Bernard Hopkins
Reggie Johnson
Julio Cesar Gonzalez
Eric Harding
Montell Griffin
James Toney
Vinny Pazienza
Thomas Tate

Lets not forget that Leonard was far from prime and had a lay off and still beat Hagler and Hagler was not prime but closer then SRL was. And have you seen Roy at middle weight not the best fighter in the world SMW and LH were his better division i pick SRL that beat Hagler to beat the RJJ that beat Bernard but that just a thought. And no i do not think Roy beats every one pound for pound but he does beat a good amount of them. Besides SRL prime was at welterweight were he just as domainate as anyone else was who ever stepped into the boxing ring.

ok lets break down you list of jones "compitition"

mccallum- was 40 yrs old and about 10 years past his prime.
hill- was 34 and his prime was the late eighties.
hopkins- didnt hit his prime yet.
johnson- the biggest names on his record where all his losses. he did beat collins though so maybe he does have a little credibility.(but every fighter has one good fight in them)
gonzalez- beat letterlough but thats it before the jones fight. he was still green.
harding - ok harding was a good fighter but he had no punch and jones was quicker.
griffin- the only guy he beat was a sluggish james toney.
toney- lost like 12 pounds to make weight and came in with nothing.
pazienza!!!!!!!!!!!!- im shocked you would even include him on you list since he was a washed up lightweight!
tate- well tate beat noone of any real significance ever. lost to ottke twice.


start comparing them to hagler's opponents and let me know what you think.

put them in matchups against hagler's opponents and tell me who would win.

lets see i would of loved to see how montell griffin did against john mugabi or
how tate would have have done against roldan lol


get real jones was the best of the nineties BUT THATS IT!

noone could have jones problems in his prim he was the best

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cjm2681

ok lets break down you list of jones "compitition"

mccallum- was 40 yrs old and about 10 years past his prime.
hill- was 34 and his prime was the late eighties.
hopkins- didnt hit his prime yet.
johnson- the biggest names on his record where all his losses. he did beat collins though so maybe he does have a little credibility.(but every fighter has one good fight in them)
gonzalez- beat letterlough but thats it before the jones fight. he was still green.
harding - ok harding was a good fighter but he had no punch and jones was quicker.
griffin- the only guy he beat was a sluggish james toney.
toney- lost like 12 pounds to make weight and came in with nothing.
pazienza!!!!!!!!!!!!- im shocked you would even include him on you list since he was a washed up lightweight!
tate- well tate beat noone of any real significance ever. lost to ottke twice.


start comparing them to hagler's opponents and let me know what you think.

put them in matchups against hagler's opponents and tell me who would win.

lets see i would of loved to see how montell griffin did against john mugabi or
how tate would have have done against roldan lol


get real jones was the best of the nineties BUT THATS IT!

---

I think your find except for Hearns and Duran Hagler's opposition wasn't any better than Hagler's.

mccallum- was 40 yrs old and about 10 years past his prime.
hill- was 34 and his prime was the late eighties.
hopkins- didnt hit his prime yet.
johnson- the biggest names on his record where all his losses. he did beat collins though so maybe he does have a little credibility.(but every fighter has one good fight in them)
gonzalez- beat letterlough but thats it before the jones fight. he was still green.
harding - ok harding was a good fighter but he had no punch and jones was quicker.
griffin- the only guy he beat was a sluggish james toney.
toney- lost like 12 pounds to make weight and came in with nothing.
pazienza!!!!!!!!!!!!- im shocked you would even include him on you list since he was a washed up lightweight!
tate- well tate beat noone of any real significance ever. lost to ottke twice.


McCallum was 40 years old, but he was still very formidable, shortly before Jones he won Lightheavyweight title and lost it to Fabrice Tiozzo the same man who destroyed Dariusz Michalczewski, plus after the Jones fight he had his 3rd fight with Toney, and gave Toney a very good argument.

Hill went 12 rounds with Hearns in 1991 and lost razor thin close decision he went on, 13 winning streak before losing 12 UD Dariusz Michalczewski, Jones is the only man to ever KO Hill so he deserves a lot more credit that what your giving him.

Jones had less experience than Hopkins so whats your point ??

I think your find a lot of people thought Reggie Johnson beat James Toney, and all of his losses were razor thin close decisions, Jones is the only man that ever dominate him like that, so that deserves major props.

27-0 is green ?? Gonzalez is very good fighter and went on to give Dariusz Michalczewski his first defeat, Dariusz Michalczewski was 48-0 at the time. Yet again the only boxer who ever dominated Gonzalez was Jones.

You agree on Harding.

Even if you think Toney was sluggish, beating Toney x2 is a great achievement.

James Toney always had weight problem's you still can't take away Jones dominating Toney who was top 3 P4P fighter at that time.

You say Pazienza was natural Lightweight, but wasn't Duran also a natural Lightweight ?? and you consider that one of Hagler's best wins.

The reason i included Tate was because it was very impressive the way Jones destroyed Tate in 2 rounds, this was the same Tate who previously went 12 rounds with one of the hardest hitting Middleweights of all time Julian Jackson.


lets see i would of loved to see how montell griffin did against john mugabi or
how tate would have have done against roldan

John Mugabi was a hard hitter but thats about it, he was destroyed in 1 round by Terry Norris, Mugabi had actually had beaten no one before fighting Hagler, in fact he never beat one good name in his entire career.

Roldan's best win in his entire career was the goodish James "The Heat" Kinchen. You talk up these fighters but these two fighters achieved a lot less than most of Jones opponent's yet you discredit Jones opposition i can't understand that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ricardo "Finito" Lopez

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cjm2681

ok lets break down you list of jones "compitition"

mccallum- was 40 yrs old and about 10 years past his prime.
hill- was 34 and his prime was the late eighties.
hopkins- didnt hit his prime yet.
johnson- the biggest names on his record where all his losses. he did beat collins though so maybe he does have a little credibility.(but every fighter has one good fight in them)
gonzalez- beat letterlough but thats it before the jones fight. he was still green.
harding - ok harding was a good fighter but he had no punch and jones was quicker.
griffin- the only guy he beat was a sluggish james toney.
toney- lost like 12 pounds to make weight and came in with nothing.
pazienza!!!!!!!!!!!!- im shocked you would even include him on you list since he was a washed up lightweight!
tate- well tate beat noone of any real significance ever. lost to ottke twice.


start comparing them to hagler's opponents and let me know what you think.

put them in matchups against hagler's opponents and tell me who would win.

lets see i would of loved to see how montell griffin did against john mugabi or
how tate would have have done against roldan lol


get real jones was the best of the nineties BUT THATS IT!

---

I think your find except for Hearns and Duran Hagler's opposition wasn't any better than Hagler's.

mccallum- was 40 yrs old and about 10 years past his prime.
hill- was 34 and his prime was the late eighties.
hopkins- didnt hit his prime yet.
johnson- the biggest names on his record where all his losses. he did beat collins though so maybe he does have a little credibility.(but every fighter has one good fight in them)
gonzalez- beat letterlough but thats it before the jones fight. he was still green.
harding - ok harding was a good fighter but he had no punch and jones was quicker.
griffin- the only guy he beat was a sluggish james toney.
toney- lost like 12 pounds to make weight and came in with nothing.
pazienza!!!!!!!!!!!!- im shocked you would even include him on you list since he was a washed up lightweight!
tate- well tate beat noone of any real significance ever. lost to ottke twice.


McCallum was 40 years old, but he was still very formidable, shortly before Jones he won Lightheavyweight title and lost it to Fabrice Tiozzo the same man who destroyed Dariusz Michalczewski, plus after the Jones fight he had his 3rd fight with Toney, and gave Toney a very good argument.

Hill went 12 rounds with Hearns in 1991 and lost razor thin close decision he went on, 13 winning streak before losing 12 UD Dariusz Michalczewski, Jones is the only man to ever KO Hill so he deserves a lot more credit that what your giving him.

Jones had less experience than Hopkins so whats your point ??

I think your find a lot of people thought Reggie Johnson beat James Toney, and all of his losses were razor thin close decisions, Jones is the only man that ever dominate him like that, so that deserves major props.

27-0 is green ?? Gonzalez is very good fighter and went on to give Dariusz Michalczewski his first defeat, Dariusz Michalczewski was 48-0 at the time. Yet again the only boxer who ever dominated Gonzalez was Jones.

You agree on Harding.

Even if you think Toney was sluggish, beating Toney x2 is a great achievement.

James Toney always had weight problem's you still can't take away Jones dominating Toney who was top 3 P4P fighter at that time.

You say Pazienza was natural Lightweight, but wasn't Duran also a natural Lightweight ?? and you consider that one of Hagler's best wins.

The reason i included Tate was because it was very impressive the way Jones destroyed Tate in 2 rounds, this was the same Tate who previously went 12 rounds with one of the hardest hitting Middleweights of all time Julian Jackson.


lets see i would of loved to see how montell griffin did against john mugabi or
how tate would have have done against roldan

John Mugabi was a hard hitter but thats about it, he was destroyed in 1 round by Terry Norris, Mugabi had actually had beaten no one before fighting Hagler, in fact he never beat one good name in his entire career.

Roldan's best win in his entire career was the goodish James "The Heat" Kinchen. You talk up these fighters but these two fighters achieved a lot less than most of Jones opponent's yet you discredit Jones opposition i can't understand that.

---

CC. Well said. I'd add Merqui Sosa to that list and Sugar Boy Malinga.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hulk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ricardo "Finito" Lopez

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cjm2681

ok lets break down you list of jones "compitition"

mccallum- was 40 yrs old and about 10 years past his prime.
hill- was 34 and his prime was the late eighties.
hopkins- didnt hit his prime yet.
johnson- the biggest names on his record where all his losses. he did beat collins though so maybe he does have a little credibility.(but every fighter has one good fight in them)
gonzalez- beat letterlough but thats it before the jones fight. he was still green.
harding - ok harding was a good fighter but he had no punch and jones was quicker.
griffin- the only guy he beat was a sluggish james toney.
toney- lost like 12 pounds to make weight and came in with nothing.
pazienza!!!!!!!!!!!!- im shocked you would even include him on you list since he was a washed up lightweight!
tate- well tate beat noone of any real significance ever. lost to ottke twice.


start comparing them to hagler's opponents and let me know what you think.

put them in matchups against hagler's opponents and tell me who would win.

lets see i would of loved to see how montell griffin did against john mugabi or
how tate would have have done against roldan lol


get real jones was the best of the nineties BUT THATS IT!

---

I think your find except for Hearns and Duran Hagler's opposition wasn't any better than Hagler's.

mccallum- was 40 yrs old and about 10 years past his prime.
hill- was 34 and his prime was the late eighties.
hopkins- didnt hit his prime yet.
johnson- the biggest names on his record where all his losses. he did beat collins though so maybe he does have a little credibility.(but every fighter has one good fight in them)
gonzalez- beat letterlough but thats it before the jones fight. he was still green.
harding - ok harding was a good fighter but he had no punch and jones was quicker.
griffin- the only guy he beat was a sluggish james toney.
toney- lost like 12 pounds to make weight and came in with nothing.
pazienza!!!!!!!!!!!!- im shocked you would even include him on you list since he was a washed up lightweight!
tate- well tate beat noone of any real significance ever. lost to ottke twice.


McCallum was 40 years old, but he was still very formidable, shortly before Jones he won Lightheavyweight title and lost it to Fabrice Tiozzo the same man who destroyed Dariusz Michalczewski, plus after the Jones fight he had his 3rd fight with Toney, and gave Toney a very good argument.

Hill went 12 rounds with Hearns in 1991 and lost razor thin close decision he went on, 13 winning streak before losing 12 UD Dariusz Michalczewski, Jones is the only man to ever KO Hill so he deserves a lot more credit that what your giving him.

Jones had less experience than Hopkins so whats your point ??

I think your find a lot of people thought Reggie Johnson beat James Toney, and all of his losses were razor thin close decisions, Jones is the only man that ever dominate him like that, so that deserves major props.

27-0 is green ?? Gonzalez is very good fighter and went on to give Dariusz Michalczewski his first defeat, Dariusz Michalczewski was 48-0 at the time. Yet again the only boxer who ever dominated Gonzalez was Jones.

You agree on Harding.

Even if you think Toney was sluggish, beating Toney x2 is a great achievement.

James Toney always had weight problem's you still can't take away Jones dominating Toney who was top 3 P4P fighter at that time.

You say Pazienza was natural Lightweight, but wasn't Duran also a natural Lightweight ?? and you consider that one of Hagler's best wins.

The reason i included Tate was because it was very impressive the way Jones destroyed Tate in 2 rounds, this was the same Tate who previously went 12 rounds with one of the hardest hitting Middleweights of all time Julian Jackson.


lets see i would of loved to see how montell griffin did against john mugabi or
how tate would have have done against roldan

John Mugabi was a hard hitter but thats about it, he was destroyed in 1 round by Terry Norris, Mugabi had actually had beaten no one before fighting Hagler, in fact he never beat one good name in his entire career.

Roldan's best win in his entire career was the goodish James "The Heat" Kinchen. You talk up these fighters but these two fighters achieved a lot less than most of Jones opponent's yet you discredit Jones opposition i can't understand that.

---

CC. Well said. I'd add Merqui Sosa to that list and Sugar Boy Malinga.

---

Thanks bro CC back and as for Sosa. I agree he had never been stopped when Jones fought him, and he had never been knocked down. Jones stopped a lot of iron chinned fighters.

No doubt, Sosa was a good fighter, big puncher, built weird too. Long, bow legged sucker. You see the stoppage loss to Jones? Sosa went ballistic, threw the ref off of him, pulled his hand back cocked, ready, to hit the ref for darin to stop it so early.

And Malinga got KTFO to the body by Roy, and Malinga beat Nigel Benn.