I've heard people say prime RJJ was one of the best fighters ever, and nearly unbeatable. But, did he have any weaknesses?
Printable View
I've heard people say prime RJJ was one of the best fighters ever, and nearly unbeatable. But, did he have any weaknesses?
He was like a prime Ali, technically not a perfect boxer who relied on his speed and reflex, but unbeatable boxer, courage, conditioning and skill.
Roy struggled with lanky boxers who worked effectively behind the jab. Watch his fights against Eric Harding and Antonio Tarver to see what I'm talking about. BHop gave Roy a tough fight by exposing some his weaknesses during their first fight, but was too green to capitalize and get the win. Roy was a great fighter who was likely the most gifted in history. He also fought the worst comp ever for an elite fighter between the Toney n Tarver fights (Ruiz was horrible).
So fit with the best of reflexes allowed him to relax completely and be even faster from looseness which allowed him to break the golden rule of balance and guard. There were no Barrera style warriors to expose him for it (like he did to Naz) up in that higher weight or at the right time within his prime.
His weakness was thinking his body would follow his mind into age. Range and reach with balance and working from behind a perfect jab would have had him rethinking clowning and leaping forwards on the oppositions spaces in timing or other openings. Hard to do when Roy fought on height levels as well as angles and didnt have a slow or bad day off in his prime.
Stubborn pride and borderline stupidity at this point lets be honest. Pretty much trumps the lack of basic defensive essentials early on
You're joking right? Its a testimony to how great he was that losing a round or two means a weakness has been exposed. Hopkins won at best 3 rounds against Roy and the "to green" urban legend that has managed to carry on over these many years needs to be buried. Hopkins turned pro before Roy did and had more fights when they met.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Secondly Roys dominance of his weight classes in his prime years 68/75 was better then anyone's that beat him and stands up to most people at or near that weight in history. He made everyone look pedestrian.....like most atg's do.
I'm sure from a trainers standpoint and based on the fundamentals used for fighters that are not him, he did everything wrong. That is what separates the greats from the all time greats. They do what others cannot. One can only imagine what he could have done late in his career had he used and developed his jab. It cant really be called a weakness though because he never needed it in his prime. That's how good he was. I don't think that can be said about any other ATG and its more likely then not that the others relied on it. The only time Roy ever showed that he really had a good one was against Pazienza.
Roy would have never gotten away with many of the things he did if he fought someone that could read and anticipate on the same level while possessing the same speed and reflexes he did. Nobody did though or has ever. His strengths were others weaknesses.
This Sums it up really. Incredible Speed and reflexes and a bit of spite as well . There are no perfect boxers, but if you have the above , they cover up any cracks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
The problem is that when you lose those qualities with time and age, you're fucked ! and that's why he is like he is now. The body can't do what the Brain wants it to do.
I usually agree with everything you write, but have to disagree with this post. First, Hopkins was no where near the fighter he became in 1999/2000 when he fought Roy in 1993. Even the Hop who fought Segundo Mercado twice was more puncher than the multi-faceted boxer who took Tito apart. Hop had a limited amateur career, and NEVER competed internationally like Roy did as an amateur, so even though Hop was older and a few more pro fights, he had no where near the depth or experience Roy had when they first met.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuitYou're joking right? Its a testimony to how great he was that losing a round or two means a weakness has been exposed. Hopkins won at best 3 rounds against Roy and the "to green" urban legend that has managed to carry on over these many years needs to be buried. Hopkins turned pro before Roy did and had more fights when they met.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Secondly Roys dominance of his weight classes in his prime years 68/75 was better then anyone's that beat him and stands up to most people at or near that weight in history. He made everyone look pedestrian.....like most atg's do.
I'm sure from a trainers standpoint and based on the fundamentals used for fighters that are not him, he did everything wrong. That is what separates the greats from the all time greats. They do what others cannot. One can only imagine what he could have done late in his career had he used and developed his jab. It cant really be called a weakness though because he never needed it in his prime. That's how good he was. I don't think that can be said about any other ATG and its more likely then not that the others relied on it. The only time Roy ever showed that he really had a good one was against Pazienza.
Roy would have never gotten away with many of the things he did if he fought someone that could read and anticipate on the same level while possessing the same speed and reflexes he did. Nobody did though or has ever. His strengths were others weaknesses.
As for their first fight, Hop won 4 rounds in that fight, and made Roy uncomfortable in the later rounds, and really throughout. Roy deserved the win, for sure, but Hop pushed him and kept him tentative, especially once Hop settled down and gained confidence. The only urban legend associated with this fight, is that Hop won three rounds at best and that Roy walked all over him.
As for Roy barely losing rounds: look who he fought!!!! Horrible competition, maybe the worst ever by a guy with his potential. Vinny Paz????!!!!! There is a reason Roy avoided guys like Nunn and Lile, and struggled with Harding/Tarver when he fought them. Roy had great talent for sure, but he definitely had holes in his game, even during his prime.
Prime B Hop would not win more than 4 rounds against prime Roy.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI usually agree with everything you write, but have to disagree with this post. First, Hopkins was no where near the fighter he became in 1999/2000 when he fought Roy in 1993. Even the Hop who fought Segundo Mercado twice was more puncher than the multi-faceted boxer who took Tito apart. Hop had a limited amateur career, and NEVER competed internationally like Roy did as an amateur, so even though Hop was older and a few more pro fights, he had no where near the depth or experience Roy had when they first met.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuitYou're joking right? Its a testimony to how great he was that losing a round or two means a weakness has been exposed. Hopkins won at best 3 rounds against Roy and the "to green" urban legend that has managed to carry on over these many years needs to be buried. Hopkins turned pro before Roy did and had more fights when they met.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Secondly Roys dominance of his weight classes in his prime years 68/75 was better then anyone's that beat him and stands up to most people at or near that weight in history. He made everyone look pedestrian.....like most atg's do.
I'm sure from a trainers standpoint and based on the fundamentals used for fighters that are not him, he did everything wrong. That is what separates the greats from the all time greats. They do what others cannot. One can only imagine what he could have done late in his career had he used and developed his jab. It cant really be called a weakness though because he never needed it in his prime. That's how good he was. I don't think that can be said about any other ATG and its more likely then not that the others relied on it. The only time Roy ever showed that he really had a good one was against Pazienza.
Roy would have never gotten away with many of the things he did if he fought someone that could read and anticipate on the same level while possessing the same speed and reflexes he did. Nobody did though or has ever. His strengths were others weaknesses.
As for their first fight, Hop won 4 rounds in that fight, and made Roy uncomfortable in the later rounds, and really throughout. Roy deserved the win, for sure, but Hop pushed him and kept him tentative, especially once Hop settled down and gained confidence. The only urban legend associated with this fight, is that Hop won three rounds at best and that Roy walked all over him.
As for Roy barely losing rounds: look who he fought!!!! Horrible competition, maybe the worst ever by a guy with his potential. Vinny Paz????!!!!! There is a reason Roy avoided guys like Nunn and Lile, and struggled with Harding/Tarver when he fought them. Roy had great talent for sure, but he definitely had holes in his game, even during his prime.
Trust me if Roy wanted or had to move up gears he would have done against B Hop and even Toney.
when roy would throw a jab he would only throw it to the space in front of the head. it doesnt pass through slip space that way and that means that you cant counter it. you would have had to try to come forward to try force it to pass through your slip space to counter it and when you came roy would zap you on the way in with a right hand. that right hand had nothing on it. but it was quick. you had to think about it. roy would throw that right hand and come back with a clean up left hook a lot. now you have to treat every right hand coming at you like a right hand and a left hook and not just a right hand. now you're really thinking.
roy threw just about every counter in boxing. and he was good at it. you would have to know how to counter a counter. not many do. you have to use your punches to read the way a guy is moving and reacting against every part of your punch from the chest to the shoulder to the extension to the retraction. thats because when you punch you turn on different counters with the different parts of your punching motion. to create a counter to counter you have a show a guy the part of your punching motion that is turning on that counter and then counter it.
heres bennie briscoe throwing a jab at carlos monzon and creating a counter right uppercut and countering the counter that he just created with a right hand.
http://i.imgbox.com/wXCR0siF.gif
when you throw an uppercut your head stays center and it cant naturally preform a slipping motion. is there any way to counter a jab that wont cause you to run into a right hand when you throw it?
this is hard to do against roy. but there is one way that roy used to get hit a lot. when roy fought southpaws he would throw a check hook over a right jab. thats a punch that southpaws and guys that fight southpaws use a lot.
http://i.imgbox.com/qTwP8xY5.gift
the thing is when you try to throw a check hook over a right jab you can get your check hook countered by a left hand. thats how roy got knocked down by lou del valle.
http://i.imgbox.com/uLkCuM8N.gif
and that was how roy got knocked out by denis lebedev. theres not too many ways to hit roy. but thats one of them.
His weakness was that his style would only be effective for as long as his body could accommodate the athleticism that he relied almost exclusively upon.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
Once he started to slow down, we saw that Roy was extremely vulnerable & was not able to adapt to his declining skills, in the way that Muhammad Ali, for example did.
At light heavy fighters like Foster and Spinks could beat him but below that weight can not see anyone.
I disagree on prime Hop vs prime Roy. Would be a very difficult fight for both, and very close, but Hop morphed his style specifically to beat Roy in a rematch. Roy may have eked the win out, but I think prime Hop does enough mauling and dirty boxing to win.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterPrime B Hop would not win more than 4 rounds against prime Roy.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI usually agree with everything you write, but have to disagree with this post. First, Hopkins was no where near the fighter he became in 1999/2000 when he fought Roy in 1993. Even the Hop who fought Segundo Mercado twice was more puncher than the multi-faceted boxer who took Tito apart. Hop had a limited amateur career, and NEVER competed internationally like Roy did as an amateur, so even though Hop was older and a few more pro fights, he had no where near the depth or experience Roy had when they first met.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuitYou're joking right? Its a testimony to how great he was that losing a round or two means a weakness has been exposed. Hopkins won at best 3 rounds against Roy and the "to green" urban legend that has managed to carry on over these many years needs to be buried. Hopkins turned pro before Roy did and had more fights when they met.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Secondly Roys dominance of his weight classes in his prime years 68/75 was better then anyone's that beat him and stands up to most people at or near that weight in history. He made everyone look pedestrian.....like most atg's do.
I'm sure from a trainers standpoint and based on the fundamentals used for fighters that are not him, he did everything wrong. That is what separates the greats from the all time greats. They do what others cannot. One can only imagine what he could have done late in his career had he used and developed his jab. It cant really be called a weakness though because he never needed it in his prime. That's how good he was. I don't think that can be said about any other ATG and its more likely then not that the others relied on it. The only time Roy ever showed that he really had a good one was against Pazienza.
Roy would have never gotten away with many of the things he did if he fought someone that could read and anticipate on the same level while possessing the same speed and reflexes he did. Nobody did though or has ever. His strengths were others weaknesses.
As for their first fight, Hop won 4 rounds in that fight, and made Roy uncomfortable in the later rounds, and really throughout. Roy deserved the win, for sure, but Hop pushed him and kept him tentative, especially once Hop settled down and gained confidence. The only urban legend associated with this fight, is that Hop won three rounds at best and that Roy walked all over him.
As for Roy barely losing rounds: look who he fought!!!! Horrible competition, maybe the worst ever by a guy with his potential. Vinny Paz????!!!!! There is a reason Roy avoided guys like Nunn and Lile, and struggled with Harding/Tarver when he fought them. Roy had great talent for sure, but he definitely had holes in his game, even during his prime.
Trust me if Roy wanted or had to move up gears he would have done against B Hop and even Toney.
Roy would and will always beat Toney. Horrible style match up for James. Roy had much faster feet and hands and would move enough, create enough angles, and stay busy enough to decision James every time. I don't see a chance for Roy to stop, or seriously hurt James, but he is an almost guarantee to decision Toney every time they meet.
I don't think Jones Jr. had the convenience or absolute control vs Hopkins that would lead you to believe he could have done more than what he did. It wasn't out of his nature to coast or carry others, even to the sound of some boos, but Hopkins that early on gave him a fight. I think his later style and discipline would see him do much better.
theres this boxing myth that roy did everything wrong. if roy did everything wrong then jimmy mclarnin did everything wrong. benny leonard did everything wrong. charley burley did everything wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
this narrative that roy breaks the rules of boxing or that he does things that have never been done before and only gets away with it because of athleticism is just flat out wrong.
Theres a big difference between doing everything wrong and breaking all the basic rules cause you can. Its just another level.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuzotheres this boxing myth that roy did everything wrong. if roy did everything wrong then jimmy mclarnin did everything wrong. benny leonard did everything wrong. charley burley did everything wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
this narrative that roy breaks the rules of boxing or that he does things that have never been done before and only gets away with it because of athleticism is just flat out wrong.
what rules did roy jones breakQuote:
Originally Posted by Andre
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuzotheres this boxing myth that roy did everything wrong. if roy did everything wrong then jimmy mclarnin did everything wrong. benny leonard did everything wrong. charley burley did everything wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
this narrative that roy breaks the rules of boxing or that he does things that have never been done before and only gets away with it because of athleticism is just flat out wrong.
There is no myth. Trainers since Roy was in the amateurs said he was fundamentally flawed. They said that cause they read to many textbooks. The non celebrity trainers knew from the start how special he was. Nobody ever saw a guy like Roy before. Like I said even if his style was completely unorthodox which it was its not a weakness because nobody was around the could exploit it.Its only a weakness if he was at the same skill level as everyone else. He wasn't. He was light years ahead. Like I said there has never been a fighter ever that vacated the uses of the jab like Roy did, let alone have the success he did while barely using one.
Pretty much every rule in the book as far as boxing fundamentals go. If you slowed him down to super slo mo and broke it down he should have never gotten away with what he did. Andre is not talking about the rules of the sport but the boxing 101 handbook. Roy's incredible gifts allowed him to throw the HOW TO book into the trash can.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuzowhat rules did roy jones breakQuote:
Originally Posted by Andre
this boxing myth that if you fight with your hands low you are breaking the boxing rules is ridiculous and really counterproductive. roy was not the first guy to fight with his hands low or throw a lead right hand or a lead left hook. a lot of the stuff roy does is straight out of the old school no matter how much he gets painted, for reasons still unknown to me, as otherwise. go back and look at all the old jimmy mclarnin or willie pep fights. thats as textbook as it gets.
I think Roy was past it by the Harmon fight. Compare that version of him to the one that fought McCallum and you can see he's noticeably slower.
You mean Target fight?Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
I don't think Roy was any slower in the Harmn fight, he just wasn't fighting an ancient fighter. McAllum should've never been at 175 in the first place, and when Roy fought him he was a decade past his prime. This point further illustrates my point that Roy fought pathetic opposition during his prime, n that was what allowed him to seem so "great" for so long.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
Roy could have fought better opposition but having B Hop and Toney on his record is better than having Benn, Eubank and G Man on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodI don't think Roy was any slower in the Harmn fight, he just wasn't fighting an ancient fighter. McAllum should've never been at 175 in the first place, and when Roy fought him he was a decade past his prime. This point further illustrates my point that Roy fought pathetic opposition during his prime, n that was what allowed him to seem so "great" for so long.Quote:
Originally Posted by VG_Addict
Some of the punches roy threw....how would you describe them?..were they legal?..lol
Flying uppercuts?
Triple or quad jabs?
Running round behind fighters and countering?
Double uppercuts?
Have problems with guys who fought awkwardly and had big punch and length so most likely i see Spinks owning that fight. Not to mention Spinks was undefeated at the weight and was not even put down in a lhw fight Roy is up there though only Foster and Spinks are ahead of him. Also he would never have the best longevity because his style pretty much all had to do with his reflex and speed which is the first to go with a fighter. I mean all you have to do is look how he aged when he lost his speed he was ok fighter so he went from great to goodish faster then those fighters that learned the craft.
Which makes Ali's achievement even greater because after his reflexes eroded he had to rely on his chin, courage and wit. Roy just collapsed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
Ali developed an amazing blocking technique during the 2nd half of his career (early 70s in particular) after his head movement diminished. He practically shelled his entire upper body.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterWhich makes Ali's achievement even greater because after his reflexes eroded he had to rely on his chin, courage and wit. Roy just collapsed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
It was a joy to watch Roy fight so frequently and dominate on HBO all those years. In retrospect, his fights were an event and more anticipated by me even moreso than Floyd.....without the overpriced PPV rates.
Your not wrong mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleepwalker
(No need to watch the fight - just watch from the very start!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBJHGziNZYg
Tough for me to see a reasonable argument for ranking Roy ahead of Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore. I would rank the light heavy ATGs like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Archie Moore
3. Michael Spinks
4. Roy Jones jr.
5. Bob Foster
I can see a case for swapping 4 & 5, as well as cases for ranking Tunney and Billy Conn above my 4 & 5. I don't really see an argument for Joey Maxim, Virgil Hill, or Michael Moorer over any of the previously mentioned fighters, but I've heard knowledgable fans make those arguments, so maybe I'm wrong.
Brilliant post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimanuel BoogustusYour not wrong mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleepwalker
(No need to watch the fight - just watch from the very start!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBJHGziNZYg
Never saw all the stuff before this fight before!
Method man is roys twin.
Whitney can sing..shame
I have Spinks at the top spot he had 10 title defenses was only lhw to near be beaten at that weight. Not to mention beat great comp with really good champs also while he was there. Spinks was strait up Dominate i men no one ever put him down at lhw and he looked the most unbeatable at the weight i have ever seen. I mean there a reason why Hagler fought guys that who were coming up in weight because no way in hell he ever get in the ring with Spinks because Spinks would own to hard.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeeodTough for me to see a reasonable argument for ranking Roy ahead of Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore. I would rank the light heavy ATGs like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Archie Moore
3. Michael Spinks
4. Roy Jones jr.
5. Bob Foster
I can see a case for swapping 4 & 5, as well as cases for ranking Tunney and Billy Conn above my 4 & 5. I don't really see an argument for Joey Maxim, Virgil Hill, or Michael Moorer over any of the previously mentioned fighters, but I've heard knowledgable fans make those arguments, so maybe I'm wrong.
The big weakness as was stated early was that his lack of craft was a big issue as he began to slow down looking at Hopkins,Ali and Holyfeild that becomes even more clear. Roy was great but his big names were wide and far apart and a lot of kinda eh guys in between.