Wacko's Round by Round of Roy Jones jr vs Tito Trinidad! Happy New Year bwoyo's!

I voted with my heart. I'm not crazy about this matchup, for all the reasons that have already been mentioned ad nauseaum. Tito never handled 160 really well (except for William Joppy, of course).... he's had a 2-year layoff..... Roy Jones Jr. fought at heavyweight once and will be the bigger man at 170.... blah, blah, blah.

I'm not involved in Tito's match-making, so I have no say-so in the matter.

Hopefully, it will be a wild and entertaining affair. I know Tito will give his all, and I figure he's got that "puncher's chance" to nail RJJ with a good shot. Some have said that Roy would shake it off, but I don't know. Two devastating KO's can soften the chin of any man. And Tito packs a punch to be sure.

Will I be watching? You betcha. And cheering for Tito like a madman.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snakey

Who ever said jones is not technically sound...WTF? Thats the biggest load of S*** ive ever heard. The guy used to outbox guys so they looked stupid, he used his reflexes...so does every boxer.

---

Uhh no it isn't Jones was never a great technical boxer thats obvious, thats why when his reflexes slowed down and he couldn't use his athletic ability anymore he was KO because he was never a great technical boxer. Jones had amazing talent but he was unorthodox and nothing he did was technically sound or boxing basics. Jones was a great boxer, and one of my favorite boxers of all time. But to say he is technically sound is a bit silly.

---

ICB you gotta be shitting me here.
Mate you alright? Seems to me as of late your posts get more and more irrational.
RJJ not technically sound? Wow!
Argueably the most athletic boxer to step into a ring not technically sound.

---

How is Jones a great technical fighter ?? he does most things wrong, if you want a perfect example of a textbook technical fighter. Look at fighters like Juan Manuel Marquez, Floyd Mayweather Jr Winky Wright. Now they are what i would call text book technical fighters. Jones has amazing athletic ability's and amazing reflexes, but he is not technically sound. He is one of the most unorthodox fighters ever in the history of the sport, certainly not what i would class as a great technical fighter. In fact one of the reason's he lost is because he isn't technically sound he relied purely on his athletic ability, and once that went he got KO x2.

---

ICB, Athletisim & Technicality is something that IMO goes hand in hand.
So what your saying is RJJ was able to go to the Olympics and win a gold medal (I know he lost) then go undefeated for that long, he was able to reign supreme at Ligh Heavy win a title as a Heavy on Athletisim alone? Come on ICB...
Theres different types of technical fighters, B-Hops a techinical fighter cause he breaks you down and takes where he wants knowing he'll get the best of you thru 12. Ricardo Lopez was a technical fighter who could take you the distance but if given the oppourtunity he'll take you out.
RJJ was a technical fighter who threw 3 jabs, then did a faint and threw a right hook to the liver droping You can't get more techincal then that.

Also heres something to think about RJJ was able to beat Toney who at that moment in time was P4P fighter and I know you would agree he was a damn! fine technical fighter on sheer athletisim. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

---

I disagree. Athleticism and technicality do not go hand in hand, and furthermore, a fighter can have a hall-of-fame career without being technically sound. The alternative is to be unorthodox, which is what Roy Jones was. Athleticism will help both a fighter who is technically sound and a fighter who is unorthodox. Larry Holmes is a perfect example of a fighter who is technically sound. Roy is an example of a fighter who is unorthodox. Both are hall of famers.

---

F***! Me...
Then I must have been watching the another RJJ all his career.
Here I thought RJJ was a very good technical fighter turns out he's just a good athlete.
I'll be back tomorrow gonna try and find the right RJJ career on DVD cause apparently I've been watching the wrong one all this time.

Thanks ICB & clean for clearing that up I need to make note of this.

Note Pad

• A gallon of Milk
• A bag of Tortillas
• RJJ is NOT a technical fighter
• RJJ is unorthodox fighter
• RJJ doesn't do anything technical
• RJJ did all of his accomplishments on athletisim alone
  

---

I said that Jones relied on his athletisim, Jones had amazing speed, great reflexes, good variety of punches, unorthodox fighting. If Jones was technically sound he wouldn't of lost to Tarver, Johnson. The reason why he lost is because he isn't technically sound and once his reflexes slowed down and he couldn't rely on his athletisim and he lost. You see guys like Hopkins who are 40+ can still win fights, you know why ?? because of his great technical fighting, fighters like Mayweather, Hopkins, etc would still be able to win most of there fights based on there technical ability alone. Take away the speed from Mayweather and he will still be able to win most fights based on his great technical ability, but if you took away Jones speed, see how many fights Jones could win based on *Technical* ability as you put it.

Anyways i don't want to argue with you, your one of my favorite posters here. We have different opinion's on the matter so i'll leave it at that have a CC on me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snakey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snakey

Who ever said jones is not technically sound...WTF? Thats the biggest load of S*** ive ever heard. The guy used to outbox guys so they looked stupid, he used his reflexes...so does every boxer.

---

Uhh no it isn't Jones was never a great technical boxer thats obvious, thats why when his reflexes slowed down and he couldn't use his athletic ability anymore he was KO because he was never a great technical boxer. Jones had amazing talent but he was unorthodox and nothing he did was technically sound or boxing basics. Jones was a great boxer, and one of my favorite boxers of all time. But to say he is technically sound is a bit silly.

---

Mate ever heard of slick boxers, i guarentee you guys like zab judah and floyd mayweather would be in trouble if they lost their speed. Floyd would be, jones started slowing down a bit. Guys like hopkins and wright arent known for their speed, yes they are technical boxers but they are a different kind to roy jones. Would you call ali not technically sound just coz he didnt hold his hands like the book says they should or didnt evade like the book said he should. It worked and he could outbox any man he wanted to. Face it man, jones is a technical fighter. He didnt beat hopkins and toney with just pure reflexes mate ;)

---

Mate ever heard of slick boxers, i guarentee you guys like zab judah and floyd mayweather would be in trouble if they lost their speed.


Mayweather would still be able to win a lot of his fights based on his great technical abilities. The difference is once Jones lost his reflexes he lost because he relied on his athletic ability, and one of the reason's he did lose was because he wasn't a great technical fighter. Thats why you see guys like Hopkins even though he is 40+ and has lost his speed etc, he can still win fights based on his great technical fighting. Mayweather is a perfect textbook technical fighter, Jones and Mayweather aren't even comparable. Mayweather's defense, etc is all by the book. Thats a perfect example of a textbook technical fighter. Jones is an unorthodox athletically gifted fighter there is a difference.

. Guys like hopkins and wright arent known for their speed, yes they are technical boxers but they are a different kind to roy jones.

What different kind ?? your telling me holding your hands at your waist, throwing leaping left hooks, putting your hands behind your back etc, that is technical brilliance ?? no it isn't how many times do i have to say it. Thats amazing athletic ability mixed in with unorthodox fighting plus great talent.

It worked and he could outbox any man he wanted to. Face it man, jones is a technical fighter. He didnt beat hopkins and toney with just pure reflexes mate

Face what ?? he didn't beat Toney or Hopkins with great technical fighting. He beat them with unbelievable speed, unorthodox fighting, great reflexes etc.

Would you call ali not technically sound just coz he didnt hold his hands like the book says they should or didnt evade like the book said he should.

Ali is not what i would consider a great textbook technical fighter either. More like intelligent fighter, with great foot speed, amazing reflexes, etc. I believe Bert Sugar once said Ali actually does most things in the ring. And in boxing terms he does.

I'll say it for the last time that Jones is one of my favorite fighters of all time, but i disagree that Jones is a great technical fighter. He IMO is a amazingly talented fighter, with amazing athletisism, unorthodox fighting style.

---

Wacko took the words right out of my mouth, you are correct...jones is not a textbook fighter like hopkins and wright. BUT he is technically sound, i never claimed him to be a text book fighter.

Bump.

Just trying to keep us up near the front prior to the bout materializing.

I'm surprised at the level in this fight actually.
Tito's fans have always been amazing and it appears they have remained loyal.
However, I think a true teller of the situation is the silence. Can you recall another Trinidad fight where his fanbase have been so silent?
Sure, they're there. When asked, they confirm their support for their guy, but they don't shout about it. I think silently they know Tito's best days were left way back when at 147 and I think they wish they could just cherish those great memories without this fight interfering.

Jones too is faded but his last couple of fights have displayed him altering his style to attempt to be succesful using the remainder of his natural physical abilities. Jones by UD.

This is a fight that is of no benefit to anyone in any way other than financially

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cuchulain

I'm surprised at the level in this fight actually.
Tito's fans have always been amazing and it appears they have remained loyal.
However, I think a true teller of the situation is the silence. Can you recall another Trinidad fight where his fanbase have been so silent?
Sure, they're there. When asked, they confirm their support for their guy, but they don't shout about it. I think silently they know Tito's best days were left way back when at 147 and I think they wish they could just cherish those great memories without this fight interfering.

Jones too is faded but his last couple of fights have displayed him altering his style to attempt to be succesful using the remainder of his natural physical abilities. Jones by UD.

This is a fight that is of no benefit to anyone in any way other than financially

---

CC Cuchulian. I'm a big Tito fan and you hit the nail in the head with your opening coments. Many of us fans of Tito and here in PR have mixed emotions on this fight. We are excited that our man is going back in the ring and we all have our hopes that he will be his old self. But deep down we all know it is all just wishful thinking. No matter what happends we know very little will come out of this come back.

I am one of the few here that thinks he should've never retired so young and in his prime after his loss to Hopkins. But after he did retire than it woul've been best if he stayed there. The shit he gets for the Wright fight is just unberable for us fans.

It does bother me though that he is put down so much lately. Wacko's opening statements talking about how Tito has never beat a good boxer with a good fight plan is just silly. What the heck was he doing throughout his career and his 15 title defenses as a welterweight? Fighting stiffs who just stood there and said come on and hit me?

I find most people that put him down have only seen him fight sinse he fought DLH. Which means they hardley ever really saw him at his very best.

Tito is a great fighter. And like any great fighter he has a good chance of winning any fight. It is not like Jones is in his 20s, heck, Jones is older than Tito. This will not be a mismatch. It will be a competitive fight and I expect it to be more entertaining than expected.

For all these guys have given us. I think they more than deserve us chuging out another $50. I will gladly pay and watch the fight and cheer my man Tito to the end.

Well CC returned Rookie fan.
The fact is Puerto Rican fans are amongst the most loyal in the world and I applaud them for that.
Tito is a legend and deserves to be remembered for his services as a welter and junior middleweight.

Good to see your nearly at 1000 posts too Rookie fan!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cuchulain

Good to see your nearly at 1000 posts too Rookie fan!!!

---

Oh yeah, Maybe I'm not such a rookie anymore :)

Nah, I don't reckon you are :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan

Wacko's opening statements talking about how Tito has never beat a good boxer with a good fight plan is just silly. What the heck was he doing throughout his career and his 15 title defenses as a welterweight? Fighting stiffs who just stood there and said come on and hit me?

I find most people that put him down have only seen him fight sinse he fought DLH. Which means they hardley ever really saw him at his very best.

---

You think that statements silly huh?

Throughout Tito’s career he beat a lot of decent fighters…but not boxers. I’ve seen almost every Trinidad fight out there & I saw Tito when he was at his best…but his best weren’t shat when he faces boxers with a defense & game plan backed by a boxing mind.

Whitaker, Carr, & Campos were Trinidad’s most impressive wins to me…but beating Pernell was just cracking the shell of what he once was…so it’s hard to rate that one.

I never said that Tito sucked or that he didn’t beat good fighters in his rise…but there is a huge difference between beating a good fighter & a good boxer.

Rookie Fan or not…you know that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wacko3205

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan

Wacko's opening statements talking about how Tito has never beat a good boxer with a good fight plan is just silly. What the heck was he doing throughout his career and his 15 title defenses as a welterweight? Fighting stiffs who just stood there and said come on and hit me?

I find most people that put him down have only seen him fight sinse he fought DLH. Which means they hardley ever really saw him at his very best.

---

You think that statements silly huh?

Throughout Tito’s career he beat a lot of decent fighters…but not boxers. I’ve seen almost every Trinidad fight out there & I saw Tito when he was at his best…but his best weren’t shat when he faces boxers with a defense & game plan backed by a boxing mind.

Whitaker, Carr, & Campos were Trinidad’s most impressive wins to me…but beating Pernell was just cracking the shell of what he once was…so it’s hard to rate that one.

I never said that Tito sucked or that he didn’t beat good fighters in his rise…but there is a huge difference between beating a good fighter & a good boxer.

Rookie Fan or not…you know that.

---

Hector Camacho was a good boxer and Tito beat him comfortably and also ODLH. Even if you don't consider it a victory its still on the record books and it was a close fight that could of gone either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wacko3205

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan

Wacko's opening statements talking about how Tito has never beat a good boxer with a good fight plan is just silly. What the heck was he doing throughout his career and his 15 title defenses as a welterweight? Fighting stiffs who just stood there and said come on and hit me?

I find most people that put him down have only seen him fight sinse he fought DLH. Which means they hardley ever really saw him at his very best.

---

You think that statements silly huh?

Throughout Tito’s career he beat a lot of decent fighters…but not boxers. I’ve seen almost every Trinidad fight out there & I saw Tito when he was at his best…but his best weren’t shat when he faces boxers with a defense & game plan backed by a boxing mind.

Whitaker, Carr, & Campos were Trinidad’s most impressive wins to me…but beating Pernell was just cracking the shell of what he once was…so it’s hard to rate that one.

I never said that Tito sucked or that he didn’t beat good fighters in his rise…but there is a huge difference between beating a good fighter & a good boxer.

Rookie Fan or not…you know that.

---

Hector Camacho was a good boxer and Tito beat him comfortably and also ODLH. Even if you don't consider it a victory its still on the record books and it was a close fight that could of gone either way.

---

Camacho was a decent boxer...yes...& there are a few on Tito's list worth mentioning. Joppy is one that I like to credit Tito for utterly destroying...but I still don't buy into that Oscar win...not matter who tries to convince me of it.

That being said...bringing Camacho into it is all well & good...but once again...let me clarify...beating good fighters & a good boxer is different...or atleast in my eyes it is.

I just can;t believe that people try to over look the Hopkins, Wright, & even Oscar fights as Trinidad losing to overly accomplished boxers.

You feel me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wacko3205

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wacko3205

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan

Wacko's opening statements talking about how Tito has never beat a good boxer with a good fight plan is just silly. What the heck was he doing throughout his career and his 15 title defenses as a welterweight? Fighting stiffs who just stood there and said come on and hit me?

I find most people that put him down have only seen him fight sinse he fought DLH. Which means they hardley ever really saw him at his very best.

---

You think that statements silly huh?

Throughout Tito’s career he beat a lot of decent fighters…but not boxers. I’ve seen almost every Trinidad fight out there & I saw Tito when he was at his best…but his best weren’t shat when he faces boxers with a defense & game plan backed by a boxing mind.

Whitaker, Carr, & Campos were Trinidad’s most impressive wins to me…but beating Pernell was just cracking the shell of what he once was…so it’s hard to rate that one.

I never said that Tito sucked or that he didn’t beat good fighters in his rise…but there is a huge difference between beating a good fighter & a good boxer.

Rookie Fan or not…you know that.

---

Hector Camacho was a good boxer and Tito beat him comfortably and also ODLH. Even if you don't consider it a victory its still on the record books and it was a close fight that could of gone either way.

---

Camacho was a decent boxer...yes...& there are a few on Tito's list worth mentioning. Joppy is one that I like to credit Tito for utterly destroying...but I still don't buy into that Oscar win...not matter who tries to convince me of it.

That being said...bringing Camacho into it is all well & good...but once again...let me clarify...beating good fighters & a good boxer is different...or atleast in my eyes it is.

I just can;t believe that people try to over look the Hopkins, Wright, & even Oscar fights as Trinidad losing to overly accomplished boxers.

You feel me?

---

Camacho NOT a good boxer? Yeah, right wacko. Camacho was an AWESOME boxer. Is what you should be sayin is that he was old as hell by the time Tito fought him, which is the truth. But in his prime and even after it for a while, Hector "Macho" Camacho could box extremely well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hulk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wacko3205

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice Cold Boxing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wacko3205

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan

Wacko's opening statements talking about how Tito has never beat a good boxer with a good fight plan is just silly. What the heck was he doing throughout his career and his 15 title defenses as a welterweight? Fighting stiffs who just stood there and said come on and hit me?

I find most people that put him down have only seen him fight sinse he fought DLH. Which means they hardley ever really saw him at his very best.

---

You think that statements silly huh?

Throughout Tito’s career he beat a lot of decent fighters…but not boxers. I’ve seen almost every Trinidad fight out there & I saw Tito when he was at his best…but his best weren’t shat when he faces boxers with a defense & game plan backed by a boxing mind.

Whitaker, Carr, & Campos were Trinidad’s most impressive wins to me…but beating Pernell was just cracking the shell of what he once was…so it’s hard to rate that one.

I never said that Tito sucked or that he didn’t beat good fighters in his rise…but there is a huge difference between beating a good fighter & a good boxer.

Rookie Fan or not…you know that.

---

Hector Camacho was a good boxer and Tito beat him comfortably and also ODLH. Even if you don't consider it a victory its still on the record books and it was a close fight that could of gone either way.

---

Camacho was a decent boxer...yes...& there are a few on Tito's list worth mentioning. Joppy is one that I like to credit Tito for utterly destroying...but I still don't buy into that Oscar win...not matter who tries to convince me of it.

That being said...bringing Camacho into it is all well & good...but once again...let me clarify...beating good fighters & a good boxer is different...or atleast in my eyes it is.

I just can;t believe that people try to over look the Hopkins, Wright, & even Oscar fights as Trinidad losing to overly accomplished boxers.

You feel me?

---

Camacho NOT a good boxer? Yeah, right wacko. Camacho was an AWESOME boxer. Is what you should be sayin is that he was old as hell by the time Tito fought him, which is the truth. But in his prime and even after it for a while, Hector "Macho" Camacho could box extremely well.

---

Yes Camacho was a pretty good boxer. He was passed his best but I wouldn't say he was very old at the time. He did win some 20+ fights after that. He was over his best weight though. But there are others, Carr boxed pretty good, Roger Turner was pretty slick, Reid was boxing good till he got cought. And than there is DLH against whom Tito still held his own even though he was loosing, he still kept it close enough.

Look Wack all I'm saying is that it didn't just take any good boxer to beat him, it took an exceptionally great boxer to do it. Heck, Tito never went in there to try and outbox anybody. He went in there to beat you up. The only question was what could you do about it. Up till now, only three have been able to do something about it. One of which could not do it for the full 12 rounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cuchulain

Good to see your nearly at 1000 posts too Rookie fan!!!

---

Oh yeah, Maybe I'm not such a rookie anymore :)

---

Your rookie card has gone up in value significantly! ;)

Tito Trinidad was undersized at 160 in his first stint there, I also thought he was undersized at 160 in his second stint, so I know for a fact his will be undersized at 170, but he will still bring brutal punching power and that soft chin of RJJ, can't wait to see Tito's ring entrance, he has the best ring entrances ever.